One of the recurring themes confronting women of transsexual history has been the attempts of gay men to own us. Politically-minded gay men want to use our tenative legal status in marriage for their own purposes, forcing us into the GLBT against our will. TG activists have done their best to sell us into GLBT bondage as well, and have gone on to do such things as using our our status in the pre-op stage to force their way into women’s bathrooms. And in the psychiatric trade, gay men want to erase our existence and replace us with their preferred groups of homosexual and transvestite men.
One of the most egregious examples of this comes from psychiatrist “Alice Novic”, the gay crossdresser of Alice in Genderland fame who thinks he has it all figured out. He speaks for us without a second thought, imperiously declaring that all “MtF” people are the same, and completely ruling out the possibility that actual transsexual people are born that way. “Alice” has a page of seven “myths” about his MtF group that he gleefully attempts to destroy on his website, Alice in Genderland. Let’s look at a few.
Myth #2: Crossdressers and transsexuals are two whole different types of people
This notion is extremely prevalent, as is reflected by the very fact that we use the words crossdresser and transsexual, as opposed to part-time MTFs and full-time MTFs—or something like that. This myth seems to be supported by the fact that some transsexuals, especially very effeminate, early-transitioning ones appear cut from a completely different cloth than crossdressers—and indeed they are (see my article on the two types of trans women). On top of that, drawing a hard line between CD and TS can be extremely useful for CDs who strive to stay accepted as men and TSs fighting for acceptance as women.
Myth #3: Transsexuals are simply women born into the wrong body
Though it’s important for transsexuals to be treated as women. This born-into-the-wrong-body notion does not ring true in my experience as psychiatrist or trans person. Just the kind of conversation a person makes is often enough to distinguish a trans woman from genetic woman—especially for started-out-straight trans women.
Myth #7: After surgery I can get involved with regular straight men
Certainly if you pass, then after genital surgery you may be free to date mainstream straight men and even have sex without any differences detected. But, alas, as many friends have reported, once you tell them you’ve had a sex change, it’s like telling them you still have a penis. They can’t say goodbye quick enough.
Once again, we have a male crossdresser who takes his own experiments with “gender” and broadly applies it to all people he sees fit for inclusion in his fantasy. The fact that his construct is entirely derogatory to women like me is not important; what is important is for the crossdresser to maintain the fantasy. I believe that the insulting, dismissive nature is intentional.
First, it’s highly unlikely that this psychiatrist has ever even met a “transsexual” in his practice. Most “transsexuals” are well aware of crossdressers and their issues and steer as far clear of them as possible. In fact, most women in general find transvestites rather creepy, but this isn’t something you’ll learn as a crossdresser is it? When Alice refers to “MtF’s”, he is likely talking about “transgender” types who merely think they are transsexual, and find a willing accomplice in this misguided therapist. Secondly is his out and out denial that we are women. This is typical among the rather abusive crowd you will encounter at gender groups. They tell us they can feel us out with some kind of tinkered gaydar in an attempt to establish control over us. And, as always, this is followed directly by the ever-present mantra that we can never escape their grasp. They own us now and forever.
This is bad enough, though rather typical of the crossdresser mindset, but reading further I found some very interesting things. In the not-to-distant past I warned people away from “Jack Molay” and his blog. I felt it was another transparent attempt to establish the “two type” theory of Blanchard’s transsexual tripe. It is a collection of just-so accounts and carefully regurgitated theory from a supposed layperson who just happens to be totally into the “scientist” Blanchard. (Isn’t it funny how that whole crowd gives themselves away by that “scientist” business? If you ever see repeated references to Blanchard as a “serious scientist” you know it’s that bunch of goobers) Well lo and behold, “Molay” and “Alice” have got together for an interview. Just like that, out of the blue, what a lucky coincidence! Here’s the interesting part.
Jack: You write and talk about the two types of transwomen: “love to be femmes”, who include crossdressers and late transitioners, and “act femmes”, who include early transitioners and drag queens. I can hear more than an echo of Ray Blanchard’s “autogynephiliacs” vs. “homosexual transsexuals” here, so this is a controversial point of view. Could you say a little about how you ended up with this model, and to what extent it differs from the one of Blanchard’s?
Alice: Sure. Quite simply I read Blanchard—and Bailey, especially his Man Who Would Be Queen. I was blown away by what they had learned about MTF transpeople; it totally explained all the disparate things I had seen and heard over the years. Our landscape is not divided north-south between crossdressers and transsexuals; it’s split east-west between those who start out straight and those who start out gay. What a brilliant idea! I was kicking myself for not having seen it myself, but as a transperson I was still too attached to our own propaganda to realize anything that ran counter to it.
The rest of the “interview” (aka propaganda) can be read at the link just above. It reads as a carefully constructed narrative about how Alice, as a fully fledged transperson who can speak on behalf of transsexuals, accepts that all the things “we tell ourselves” are simply lies, and that the truth is found in Blanchard’s estimation of transsexual women as deluded men. This is a common pattern for the Blanchardians; find a representative among the population you want to label and control, have them speak on behalf of that population. Then close the deal and declare ownership. They did it with Anne Lawrence, finding an “autogynephilic transsexual” to speak for us. They conducted an internet campaign to discourage real transsexuals from getting together and speaking using a group of fakes known as “Transkids“, who went around proselytizing and shouting down opposition wherever they could. They even seem to deploy thugs when necessary.
More recently they enticed Cloudy/Kaye Brown into the fold to preach the word, along with starting a blog by an alleged “autogynephilic”, Jack Molay,and another by the wife of an “autogynephilic” to play counterpoint. And if you dig a little, I’m sure you’ll find Willow Arune, Bailey’s and Dreger’s old buddy Kiira Treia (also see here), Lissane Anderson and all the other usual suspects. (Andrea James has a detailed account of the shenanigans this crew has been up to, which you can read here) I believe even James Cantor makes a cameo, being a bit player who supposedly greases the wheels. “Alice” says this :
After reading my August interview with Jack Molay, a kind Canadian psychologist offered to put me in touch with Ray Blanchard.
Now who could that be? Why if it isn’t our old friend James, I’ll eat a bug.
This whole thing just reeks of collusion and machination. This has been an ongoing project of these people for years. Why do they do it? I think that there is a little niche market for these psychs to exploit, and they don’t want to lose that opportunity. The attempts over the years to sow discord and shoo transsexual women from the internet scene were done with careful consideration. Silencing dissent among those you wish to control is the first step. Replacing their voices with your own carefully chosen schills is the next. Then the all-to-convenient blogs showing up is an attempt to plant a seed in the declining TG discourse, one that will offer false hope to those who have been led astray by gender theory. What do you suppose is next?
When you establish an official sort of replacement narrative for the standard transsexual or transgender one that has been in existence, those words play out in the back of people’s minds. It’s an attempt to spread a new standard story to entrap a captive audience. The existence of transsexual women is an impediment to their goal of owning “gender confused” people. The biology behind our condition is explained away as a source of paraphilia, or worse. In a strange twist of fate, transsexual women are all that stand between the trans* crowd and permanent assignation as sick perverts.
Maybe they should have been a little nicer to us.
One of the most insidious attempts to silence and erase us has been the effort by the “BBL” crowd to sweep away the biological evidence that stands in our favor. The consistent effort has been to characterize our neurological variance from men as a pathology.
The female-typical BSTc volume and neuron number observed in the MtF transsexuals are markers for nonhomosexual or autogynephilic MtF transsexualism, not for MtF transsexualism generally.
(Note to gay men, Anne is trying to size you up for inclusion in their little scheme, because they need a way to pathologize their “HSTS” category properly)
Another problem with the BNSTc finding is that the BNSTc is also smaller in pedophiles. So the BNSTc could be related to atypical sexuality generally rather than to gender identity specifically.
(We know he is talking about a different area of the brain than the famous Zhou study examines. I doubt James is so dull he would make that kind of mistake)
Blanchard is the source for all these thoughts including as the supposed link to BIID (which has been since taken up by Lawrence) and the rest, but recently has tried to assign the ongoing concern this cottage industry represents to his deputies like Cantor and Lawrence who carry on the campaign. Blanchard is a “serious scientist” you know and cannot be seen as having a hand in something so tawdry as gender bending.
Cantor, “Alice”, Lawrence, and the rest (especially Blanchard, who won’t discuss is sexuality), are all “self-identified” males who are sexually oriented towards men. They represent a conspiracy of gay men to stigmatize and abuse women; transsexual woman, specifically. This is not acceptable for a profession that claims to be about helping people.
Which brings us to the heart of the problem transsexual men and women have with the transgender. The forced association cooperates with this nefarious agenda and opens a clear line of attack to both transsexuals and those who seek to live in a different gender role than the one they were assigned. Our association is toxic, not just for us but for them. On their way to getting to us, the BBL clique must necessarily destroy the TG and label them all horrible perverts. That’s why I have been so critical of the TG construct. It weakens both of our defenses against this concerted attack. The TG defense against the BBL crowd, using freedom of choice and social theory, has been especially awful in repelling this assault. I would go so far as to say that it has benefited our enemy. And make no mistake, those who set out to do this to all of us are a clear and present enemy.
If you want to follow the transsexual path, that is what you do. Don’t make appeals to social theory to explain yourself. Keep your mouth shut, don’t “come out” like you were gay. Get your business done and move on. That’s the way to succeed if you want to transition. Then when you are solid in your life and settled, you can decide if you want to come out to every stranger you meet.
Better yet, decide if you want to be part of the fight to banish these would-be masters to the career oblivion that they so richly deserve.