The Choice

January 11, 2011

The failed character assassination of Ashley Love by Autumn Sandeen is a watershed moment in the trans-world.  Never has it been more clear that the people who contend for positions within Gay Inc, our transgender ward bosses, have our worst interests at heart.  The transgender and transsexual agendas are not compatible, and the notion that what is good for TG is also good for TS is coming into sharp focus for what it really is.  A boldfaced lie.

There was a long string of victories for transsexual people which began back in the 50’s and 60’s before there was ever a gay movement, and long before the creation of “transgender” as a political movement in the 1990’s.  We owe our ability to transition and live happy lives to those people who went to government officials with the backing of their doctors, not to any latter-day shenanigans of the patently non-transsexual transgender movement.

The rise of TG dogma put an end to progress for transsexual people, and their brief moment of fame and fortune has come at great cost to those they co-opt.  At this point with a dead ENDA and the GLBT descending into civil war, it is clear that the transgender activists have not only tried to negate any gains made for transsexuals, but also contributed quite a lot toward the demise of a once vibrant cause.

There can be no doubt at this point that what is good for the transgender activists, by their own admission, is bad for transsexual people who simply want to cure their ailment and move on in life.  And yet at the same time the reverse is not true:  What is good for transsexuals will also benefit those who call themselves transgender.  After all, it was the existence of our birth defect and the medical world’s tentative support that gave them everything that they have.

In essence, it is we who gave to them and now they spit in our faces and declare themselves lord and master while trying to take everything from us.

Enough is enough.  It will not hurt the transgender one bit to let us have our rights, and yet they rail against them night and day.  They tell us we don’t exist except as a flavor of transgender.  We are not men and women, merely pretenders.  And then the leaders of the vile movement that transgender has become add insult to injury- they claim to speak for us and any of us who speak for ourselves are labeled hateful and bigoted, shifting the blame from their shoulders onto the targets of their aggression, in true propagandist fashion worthy of any fascist.

If we attain our rights, it can only benefit everyone.  Holding us hostage to their agenda is not a legitimate position.  Anyone who supports this tactic is not only an enemy of transsexual people everywhere, they are an enemy of freedom and civil rights themselves.

It is time to choose.  I support Ashley Love one hundred percent, she has every right to speak the truth to our assailants.  But she cannot serve two causes.  The cause of transsexual people could have been a doorway for others, but the way the transgender played things out has made them a destructive enemy rather than an ally.  That was their choice.

The choice for Ashley and those who will follow in her footsteps is whether they will stand up for transsexual rights, or if they will continue to try to represent everyone else.  You can’t do both, and it’s a shame it has come to this.  But the fight has been created by the transgender, and the only choice left to us is whether we surrender to their wants, or we pursue our own needs regardless of what the interlopers try to do to us.

What is it going to be?


The Trouble with Harry

December 16, 2010

A pre-postscript:

Some people I respect felt I was too harsh on Harry Benjamin, and I thought about it a little more and in some aspects they are right.  I am rather upset that Harry’s scale was constructed the way it was, and I do believe he could have done a lot more to speak on his belief that transsexuals are a distinct group, if he did believe that.  It’s difficult to tease it out of the text itself but if others see it I am not going to contradict them.

I still believe it was a grave disservice to us when he decided to put it all together the way he did, and this is the main point of my post.  The results of his book are the real issue.  My effort here was directed at  pointing out the spots where people commonly try to misuse the work to blur and obfuscate.

In light of all that, one thing stands out about Harry.  Despite whatever he may have personally thought about the condition, it didn’t matter when it came to helping people.  He was professional enough, and compassionate enough, to do what was right.  It’s a rare individual who can put misgivings aside and do what is proper in the face of overwhelming opposition from ones’ peers and the public.  He may have not been the perfect humanitarian, but he was a caring human.  That’s far more than can be said by the vast majority of the people who attempt to own the transsexual area with their academic credentials and committee-driven “medicine”.

I don’t believe in a devil.  I do believe in human avarice, moral weakness, and greed.  Those who torment us, who attempt to shame us and control us do so because it benefits them.  I can think of no better definition of evil than humans who attempt to raise themselves up and profit at others’ expense.  And these are the sorts of people we face when we attempt to avoid the chains of bondage they would lay on us.  The effort they make with their endless faux internet personalities is nothing to them.  They create tools to hurt and torture and then throw them away when done.  The cost to we who fight them is great, both in terms of thought and emotion.  That is why so few make the attempt.

There is such a thing as right and wrong.  It is measured by how we treat others.  And these people who attack us relentlessly are very much in the wrong.  It’s ok to recognize that, to speak accordingly and with great conviction.  That is the first step to ending this farce.  No matter how arrogant or condescending they may seem, always consider the source.  These people have no right to cast any stones and they only do so as a tactic to cow anyone who stands up to them.  Laugh in their face, do not be intimidated.

We are in need of a new paradigm.  It’s time to build on the work of Harry Benjamin and the few others who have spoken on this issue with any degree of wisdom… and go beyond.  That is progress, something sorely lacking in many areas lately.  One of the reasons I use transsexualism right now instead of terms like HBS or others I’ve heard is because I think we need to do some custodial work clean up the mess made over the word “transsexual” before we can move on.  Nothing is ever perfect, and not all damage can be undone so easily.  But it doesn’t have to be, does it?  Sometimes there is such a thing as good enough.  Simple lines have to be drawn, and people must be free to choose, finally given good information.

I am content to let others choose the new name and build whatever must be built in the years to come.  That is the work of the future.  The work for people like me, and any others who choose to take up the task,  is now.  We must handle the nasty garbage thrown our way in these dying days of the transgender and sexologist religion.  And then the work of building anew can begin.

I’ll post on this New Years Day.  That’s always a good time for new beginnings.


The first thing in any discussion about TS should be an analysis of where our ideas about the condition originate.  Much of our current thinking still comes from Harry Benjamin, despite the fact that modern science has completely discredited his scale.  It’s an unfortunate fact that Harry got a lot wrong in his musings, and Harry’s mistakes continue to bedevil the area today.  Blowhards and fakes continue to hold up this scale to puff up their own egos and lord their “superior” condition over others who are in the process of correcting nature’s mistake.  This is often done to enact some ridiculous agenda, and in some cases to salve a deeply wounded ego.

Harry was enamored of the idea of “inversion”, a 19th Century conceptualization of homosexuality.  It was originally thought that being gay was a form of being trapped in the wrong body.  This seems funny to us today because we have a very different idea about what is essential to the sexes, but at the time it was a plausible “theory”.

At some point it was realized that “inversion” was false, and that men who were attracted to other men… were still men.  It is not necessary to be a woman in order to experience that particular orientation.  And vice versa for women.  So in many ways this degradation of today’s sexology into “psycho sexual inversion” is a return to the ignorant 19th century. (Thank you for pointing this out Hipparkhia)

Benjamin tried to take all behaviors of people born with penises and force them together on a scale demarcated by this inversion concept.  Even at the time it was a clumsy, atavistic attempt to merge quite different phenomena together.  To a “sexologist”, having a penis is the equivalent of the patient in question stipulating that they have a “male brain”.  It doesn’t rise to that level of consciousness in these people who are utterly fascinated by the sex act.  They simply assume the sexual organs are the source of all personality and anything that runs counter to their expectations is “deviant” and in need of study and correction.

As a friend recently told me after reading The Transsexual Phenomenon, Harry was no humanitarian.  He had uncharitable thoughts about homosexuality and viewed transvestites and transsexuals as similarly disordered people.  (The expansion of the “disorder” term to intersex is in large part thanks to modern sexologists)  This is what Harry had to say about all these conditions he blended together:

The transvestite has a social problem.
The transsexual has a gender problem.
The homosexual has a sex problem.

Now, few people would argue that homosexuality and transvestism are related at this point.  So why is it so difficult to separate transvestites from transsexuals?  Thanks to sexologists we have gone back in time, and if you read through their recent papers in such places as the Archives of Sexual Behavior you’ll see they are even trying to rope gay men and lesbian women back into this scheme through studies of left handedness and other phrenology.  This is their “unified field theory” of queerness.  And it was Harry himself who conceptualized TS as a gender delusion.

The figure below is Harry’s infamous scale, the source of all the trouble.

There are a few things to note about this proposed categorization.  One, we must always remember that Harry was a sexologist and saw the world through the lens of the sex act.  Anything that deviated from his idea of procreative sex trended towards uselessness and constituted some kind of error, whether psychological or biological. (current problem-children sexologists maintain this view)  Next you’ll see that the Kinsey scale is also applied on the chart in an attempt to link this concept to Harry’s own work.  This is one of the more common observations made about Harry’s scale, but its still important to note.

Next, you can see the connection to today’s problems with the BBL clique by its blurring of the symptoms between the transvestite and the transsexual.  A type 3 transvestite may have dual personalities, for instance, and this was thought to “trend towards transsexualism”.  Today, we know they are completely separate things only sharing a few symptoms at times.  Overreliance on the therapist’s opinions about the meaning of symptoms changes the nature of the condition being diagnosed.  This isn’t a diagnosis; it’s quackery.

This has lead to much confusion, and if you look at the entire chart with a modern eye the whole thing is a mess.  Sex is mixed with gender is mixed with sexuality.  It’s all based on how often the person in question crossdresses.  So this is, in effect a scale of crossdressery and therefore flawed from the inception.  It surely doesn’t help that so much of his book on transsexualism concerns transvestites (for some reason) and the contributions of one Virginia Prince.

On one hand Harry could see that there was some biology involved (read that chapter in the book), but as a sexologist Harry preferred to regard the transsexual dilemma as a “gender problem”.  This fact cooperated with the later “gender revolution” to produce the silly mess we have today.  In a later paper he wrote:

Perhaps the chain starts with the hippie movement (with its long haired boys and trousered girls) and continues with the effeminate, but otherwise normal man, and its parallel, the masculine woman.  A further manifestation may only be concerned with the direction of the sex urge.  Perhaps then it could result in one of several forms of homosexual behavior.

Next on the scale may be the transvestite.  First the one who merely wants to wear the clothes of the opposite sex, then the one who -in addition- likes to acquire some of the other’s physical characteristics through hormone therapy.  Finally, there is the true transsexual whose craving aims to bring the entire body into harmony with the mind, by every means medical science can provide, including surgery.

You can see the extremely speculative nature of the Benjamin theory, later disproven, right there.  It’s merely a variety of “if it ain’t straight, it’s queer”.  The unified field theory continued to elude him.

One of the best parts of the chart though is the third row down, right side.  This one is for all the effeminate gay men who think they own the “type VI” category.  If you’ll look at the type V and type VI categories, Harry observed that either may have been married with children prior to transition.  And despite the changes to society over the years, this is still true.  Due to the misrepresentation of the transsexual condition as some kind of crossdressing perversion, or an option for certain gay men and lesbian women to play at being the opposite sex, many young transsexual people will not seek treatment.  This is a tragedy created and compounded by the BBL clique and their insistence on lumping “TG” and “TS” together, as well as a transgender movement that has cooperated completely with the BBL agenda.

This is where a lot of modern “somatically compliant gay men” who attempt partial transition have been confused.  And therapists comply with this confusion.  To these young gay men, the chief aspect of womanhood is making oneself ready for sex with men; they project their own desires onto women and seek the costume without wanting to actually take up the burdens and joys of actually being a woman.  And why should they?  They are men.

Being a woman to these (usually young) gay men  is being a sex object, and given their fixation on this one has to assume it is a very large component of the gay male personality for the “effeminate” types.   There is little else to being a woman in their eyes, because they are outsiders to that state of being and care nothing about it.  They do not understand the difference between being feminine, and inborn trait, and being effeminate, an act of mimicry.  In much the same way, the whole transsexual process is merely an act of mimicry for anyone not born transsexual.

Harry’s mistake in the term “complete psycho-sexual inversion” was that he regarded women who were attracted to other women as “less woman” than heterosexuals.  This reflects the sexism of the day.  Further, in order to be completely inverted, you had to be a “homosexual transsexual”.  From this sprang the stories about loving boys and never conceiving of marriage with a woman, and all the rest.  While the idea of marriage as the wrong sex is abhorrent to the TS person, life becomes complex and twisted.  It’s wrong to dismiss someone’s biological state due to a one bad choice, and I dislike this trend in certain quarters.  It’s unprofessional and unscientific. And under Harry’s scheme, it’s all too easy to diagnose a young gay male as transsexual based on these kinds of urban myths.

Today these exigencies of life are used against people born transsexual to shame them, and make them feel like a “lesser transsexual” by those with a more typically gay background.  But according to Harry himself, his “type VI” included a variety of people and traits.  His chief differential, as a sexologist of course, is who you slept with.  And we know how much that has to do with what kind of person you are; nothing.

The take home from this chart which encapsulates Harry’s philosophy is that Harry got it wrong, as another friend remarked recently.  He did state that:

“These speculations in symptomology are not meant to indicate a common etiology”

What a weak “apology” after the definitive argument made in his book!  Harry tried to leave himself a lot of wiggle room, but his conclusions come across in the end as anything but equivocal.

Today we know that gay men are not “related” to women.  Male effeminacy is a gender performance by gay men which attempts to mimic the neurologically-based “femininity” of women.  The brains of gay men are, if anything, “over androgenized” with respect to other men.  They are not “under androgenized” relative to men as would be the case with women, or MtF transsexuals.  The brain work slowly proceeds, coming ever closer to squeezing out the sexologists entirely.

The chief danger to science at this point is the continued reliance of the scientists on assembling their findings into a gender theory.  Men do this, women do this.  This is nonsense.  This mixes their social performance aspect of “gender” with their biologically-based ideas about “gender”, producing nothing of value.  Some still seek “gender” in the brain rather than stepping back and looking at the totality of the situation that would give them the perspective to understand the whole.  We are not just the sum of our parts as defined by people in lab coats.


I wanted to end on a note about why I write on these topics.  I know that many people worry over these things in their transition, and sometimes even after surgery.  This is due to the confusion sown by people who try to profit at our expense.  I don’t write things to justify myself; my life is all the justification I need.  I write to give people the information they need to fight back against the vultures and ghouls who have been preying on us for all these years.

A critic recently wrote of my quoting brain differences between us and gay men and said, “What does that have to do with being a type VI transsexual?”  The answer is; absolutely nothing.

But it has everything to do with being a woman.

We are different from the modern version of the gay type VI in the same way we are different from men.  Our minds are female at the elemental level, and we are women in that aspect our whole lives.  It never changes, and we never have to “perform gender”.  Those who fail to understand this are not transsexual.

We must stop allowing people to grade us and rank us according to their whim.  It is not their place to do so.  This fight against the sexologists is gradually drawing to a close.

This is a war we can win!

The first step is to reject those who place themselves in the role of master by simply acting as though it is theirs by right and seeing if everyone lets them get away with it.  They can only do this with our consent.  So don’t give it, and don’t be fooled.  Hucksters often set themselves up as indispensable authorities. Don’t let others control how you feel about yourself.

Always consider the motives of the strangers who show up on the internet with sterling tranny credentials and an agenda.  Don’t believe everything you are told.  Question everything.

And above all, be well. 🙂

-Sexologists- ruining lives, and other things

November 22, 2010

So we’ve established beyond a reasonable doubt that there is only one type of  “transsexual”, and that is a person who suffers from a specific birth defect.  Transsexualism, then,  describes a particular set of symptoms experienced by a real, true transsexual.  And further, there is a treatment with a very good outcome, and most former transsexuals go on to lead happy lives.  There are no “other types” of transsexuals, just the one.  So who are all these pseudo-transsexuals created by the psychs?

In the United States we have a serious problem with the idea of variant sexualities.  This creates all sorts of problems for people whose experiences lie outside the norms.  There are two types of pseudo-transsexuals who emerge out of this situation.

The first is a gay or lesbian person who has trouble coming to terms with their sexuality.  This one came in two stages; the first stage happened when the effeminacy was forcibly ejected as an acceptable way to be from the gay scene.  Soon, nelly gays were not only rejected from mainstream society, but also found themselves scorned by their own community.  After a number of years this situation became the norm and a new generation of gay and lesbian youth were born into a world where they truly had no place.

Some of these rejected people found escape in the emerging “trans” identity.  Many people have difficulty dealing with a homosexual orientation, and the “trans” option gave them an escape route.  But this turned out to be a terrible mistake, leading to wrecked lives and a dialogue more confused than ever within the GLBT.  Eventually, the trans confusion reached a point where some women, who had previously been lesbian, started experimenting with hormones and finding they enjoyed a limited “male” existence.  Further, some other “heterosexual” women who simply had personal issues with relationships did the same, becoming “gay FtM’s”.  While there are such things as straight and gay TS men, there is a vast difference between TS men and transgender females.

We ended up with lesbian and gay “transmen” who didn’t want to abandon their female roots and maintained those connections, but who used their newfound status to access “male privilege” when they wanted.  These are the “FtM spectrum” types, or “female transgenders”.  And they make TS men just as livid as the transvestites and nelly gays make us TS women.  Just ask one if you can find him.  If you ever do meet a real TS man, there is no doubt that this is a man.  As in all dude, all the time, totally legit.

There is simply no comparison when you stand a TS man next to a female transgender, it’s pretty obvious.  One is not better than the other, but they are VERY different.  This is an ongoing problem for the men, but it all started with the confusion over TS women much earlier.

Although a young, effeminate boy may seem to be the “perfect transsexual”, it is now clear that there is no relationship between their homosexuality and the transsexual birth defect.  You can’t simply take a man, no matter how gay, and turn him into a woman.  It doesn’t work that way no matter what some people would have you believe.  Young effeminate males are simply young effeminate males; they do not have a birth defect, because this is a normal human variation and requires no medical attention or treatment whatsoever.

While there was some confusion among the less “effeminate” types about the “trans” thing,  the main outcome of driving effeminacy underground was to create a class of “non op transsexuals”.  Basically full time drag queens who thought they were transsexual despite not having any of the characteristics of transsexuals.

The fallout from this standard practice of enabling this escape, telling these people they are justified in transitioning to avoid their sexuality, has yet to reach its full effect.  It is hard to imagine how such a thing came to be these days in our increasingly litigious society.  You’d think that at least a few of the people involved would have a fear of lawsuit, as the age of permissiveness comes to a close.

The other pseudo-transsexual subtype is the transvestite who has been encouraged by the therapist that “transition” is possible, and that they are indeed a type of transsexual, though they do not desire surgery.  When a non-transsexual person says they are going to “transition”, what are they really talking about?  How?  Transition to what?

If you speak to the wives of the “afflicted” crossdressing husbands, many of them talk about how the problem started small and then grew out of control.  Fetish overtakes their lives, to the detriment of the wife and children.  This isn’t something to be encouraged by a permanent fetish state!  This is a tragedy that needs to be avoided.  Instead, we have certain people in the industry throwing “transition” gas on a transvestic addiction fire.  How irresponsible can they be?

I believe this practice of enabling of the fetish addiction is just as reprehensible as encouraging gay and lesbian people to transition.  In the case of the transvestic pseudo-transsexual, the mental health professional who encourages “transition” is actively participating in the progression of this addictive behavior, which is extremely troubling.  And to suggest that such people are good candidates for surgery is beyond the pale.

Such an approval from psychs for any of these non-transsexual people to access transsexual treatment seems practically designed to ensure a rash of regrettors suing the few surgeons who treat transsexuals, perhaps finishing the campaign against us that McHugh started.

Given that the psychs themselves will have the cover of the APA Bible, those who have been overseeing the transitions will probably escape all scrutiny and blame.  It will, however, result in the destruction of the careers of the very few medical doctors who treat us.  There can be no other result of allowing so many non-transsexual people to access the transsexual treatment regimen.

And in other news…

There are times when some of this stuff stretches the belief of even the most jaded watcher of the GLBT.  Take, for example, the case of the “non op” who feels that those who get surgery or dislike their parts are “immature”.

If you  go on to this most controversial of all body parts in transsexual MtF circles, the (wait for it, lifting my hand in front of my mouth and looking through the corner of my right eye at you whispering…) penis.  To me it had very good utility over my life time so far.  It is probably the best construction for pointed peeing (you know writing in the snow), it delivers sperm exactly where it should go if you do it right, and it contains so many nerve endings that it can deliver interesting sensations and resulting emotions including what we call relief.  Do I love it? Not really, it just is there.  And yes I am grateful it was and is there, part of what I was outfitted with.  Do I hate it then?  It is like asking the same question about a rock on a beach.  It is in short a stupid question.  And anyone who hates their genitals, or loves them is, I am sorry to say lacking some fundamental judgment.  It is incredibly immature, similar to naming your body parts.

What kind of “transition” will this person have?  And if that’s not enough to get you scratching your head, how about a little advice on how to get it up for men when you’ve taken too many hormones?

If you advertise for men looking for trans women, rather than tucking and hoping not to have an issue, then you’re going to be expected to use that something extra. And if you’re on hormone replacement therapy, this will be further complicated by the fact that Spironolactone or (worse) Androcur will reduce or even end all ability to do so. Not good. Some girls will use Viagra — I found that to be only marginally helpful, and certainly didn’t help with the mental squick.

Nothing is more womanly than taking viagra for some hot gay man sex.  And on another note, I was just thinking to myself it was about time we had another article like the aforementioned that brought the tranny hooker “meme” back into the spotlight.  Can you feel the progress?

With all the fakes, frauds, and just plain confused, how is anyone to sort out all the bs?  The only people who stand a chance are the born-transsexual, because we always eventually hit that wall and the solution becomes obvious.  In a lot of ways then, the sexologist clique is merely using knowledge of us to prey on the gay community.  Rather than helping people accept themselves, there are those who encourage the “pseudo-transsexual” people into the transsexual treatment program.  This is nothing but malpractice.

But we aren’t quite out of the fire yet.  TS men and woman are largely beyond the reach of the sexologists thanks to laws and regulations fought and won by courageous TS people long before any of this nonsense came about.  While the current DSM proposal contains the carrot of dismissal from disordered status from the psychs once surgery is complete, this is predicated on the notion that you approach them for approval in the first place, something that isn’t necessary at the present time.  This is an inroad to a transsexual population that currently doesn’t need them at all.

If this carrot is dangled before people who would otherwise avoid the psychs, and there are a lot, then you go on record as a transsexual.  Whether it is in private or government records, there is a paper trail of you being “disordered” in one way or another.  Right now, that may or may not be a very bad thing depending on your situation.  But who is to say it won’t get worse down the road?

The current trend is to try to pathologize more and more people.  Why would a significant exception be made for curing transsexualism?  It’s just a way to drum up more business, and it’s something none of us really need.  Keep the psychs irrelevant; they have nothing to offer most of us.  We simply don’t need them.

So please do carry on, and enjoy the Day of Forgettance!

If you aren’t transsexual, don’t transition

November 2, 2010

SA ET has a great post at her blog Enough Nonsense.  It’s really about time that someone pointed out that the world does not, and will not, change to accommodate the wishes of those of us who transition- lots of people seem to think that saying you have a medical diagnosis of being a transsexual means that people must treat you a certain way.  And when it doesn’t they think something is wrong with the world.  That’s one of the key problems with the transgender approach.

Half transition is not a cure for a “partial gender identity”.  That is patent nonsense.  Transition is for transsexuals and there are no half measures involved.  You either do it and accept the consequences or you leave it be.  People who think they can live between genders are fooling themselves and wrecking their lives.  And those who push this gender identity garbage have done major damage through their advocacy for a false construct both to themselves and their families, as well as to the overall state of transsexual medical treatment and public acceptance.

As a friend says, if your life isn’t better after transition than before, then what are you doing it for?  To live “authentically”, comes the refrain.  But that doesn’t really mean anything does it?  A life can be measured with objective criteria of happiness and fulfillment, and the transgender lifestyle fails at these tasks not because society simply doesn’t understand them (as it is with gays and lesbians to an extent), but because the transgender lifestyle itself creates misery.  It is not a legitimate way to live.  And you know why?  It’s axiomatic, and it’s what I just said.  TG produces a misery index every time it is injected into someone’s life and it causes demonstrable harm.  It misdirects a person’s time and energy away from handling their issues with false hope and false promises of a better life.

And once you tell everyone you are TG with the obligatory coming out routine that is prescribed for all trans* people, you can’t take it back.  It’s forever.  Unless of course you disappear and resurface.  But your ties with your family and other loved ones can never be untainted.  Trans carries a high price, a price that is denied by those who try to sell that snake oil.  If you try to transition and are not a transsexual you will quickly find that life becomes all but unlivable over time.  Visit any TG “community” and look around.  A bastion of hope and change it is not.

Do I say these things to harm people?  No, exactly the opposite.  I have seen first hand what trans does to people’s lives and it never turns out well.  By being straightforward, and even angry, I hope to impart an urgency and a truth to the dialog that doesn’t exist now.  The world is not a place where we can all just join hands and play let’s pretend and have everything magically appear the way we want it.  But neither is it the cold, cruel world the TG imagine must await them outside the ghetto walls.  You just have to be honest with yourself, and take that first step towards your future.

For some being truthful with yourself is the hardest thing you can do, as another friend just pointed out to me. (Hey Lisa! :))  But that’s where your life begins.

If you aren’t transsexual, don’t transition.  Sooner or later you will regret it.



The Argument of the Beard

October 26, 2010

“How many hairs does a man have to grow before he has a beard? Since there is no specific number at which an unsightly clump of hairs becomes a beard, the argument is that no useful distinction can be made between a clean-shaven man and Santa Claus.”

One of the most cherished fictions of the transgender mythos is that of the spectrum which joins all humans together on a glorious rainbow based on how often you crossdress.  The occasional trip into the wife’s closet on one end, the completely deranged mutilated post op on the other.  There are two major problems with this view.

The first has to do with “The Continuum Fallacy”, also know as “The Argument of the Beard”. Basically this is what happens when the mental construct of a scale which joins different things for convenience is taken to an extreme, and you end up looking at both ends as essentially the same.  Let’s see what that bastion of knowledge, Wikipedia, has to say on the topic.

The fallacy appears to demonstrate that two states or conditions cannot be considered distinct (or do not exist at all) because between them there exists a continuum of states.

Narrowly speaking, the sorites paradox refers to situations where there are many discrete states (classically between 1 and 1,000,000 grains of sand, hence 1,000,000 possible states), while the continuum fallacy refers to situations where there is (or appears to be) a continuum of states, such as temperature – is a room hot or cold? Whether any continua exist in the physical world is the classic question of atomism, and while Newtonian physics models the world as continuous, in modern quantum physics, notions of continuous length break down at the Planck length, and thus what appear to be continua may, at base, simply be very many discrete states.

Fred can never be called bald. Fred isn’t bald now, however if he loses one hair, that won’t make him go from not bald to bald either. If he loses one more hair after that, then this one loss, also does not make him go from not bald to bald. Therefore, no matter how much hair he loses, he can never be called bald.

You can see how patently false the gender continuum is on its face.  Even accepting that there is some as-yet-undefined ethereal string binding all “gender variant” behavior together, there is no credible way to conclude that every point on the “gender continuum” is essentially the same.  The TG politicians gloss over this fact in their attempts to sell us on the idea that we are the same in a de facto fashion, due to prejudice.

Further, there is nothing except the casual observer’s opinion to suggest there is any real connection between the born transsexual and the crossdresser.  Absent other evidence, it’s easy to see why people might think this at first.  But evidence is now coming in and will continue to do so.  On every level, the TG paradigm is false.

The really disturbing part of gender politics is how the wants of the retired and well to do crossdressers have taken precedence over the needs of those who are born with the transsexual birth defect.  TG has been a movement largely driven by the 50-60 somethings who have retired from long successful careers as men.  After retirement these older individuals had the free time to pursue their crossdressing hobby as much as they wanted.  And like any addiction it quickly got out of control to the point where they convinced themselves they had special rights relating to their crossdressing.

In contrast, the life of the transsexual is one of quiet desperation and abject want until they complete treatment.  Only then can the (post) transsexual person truly begin to live.  It is extremely unlikely that a person who has untreated transsexualism will go very far before hitting the wall.  Only the strongest individuals, and those with a bit of luck on their side, will make it into the beginning of a real career in this increasingly two-tiered society of ours.  And that is done usually to enable transition; once the ability to transition is obtained, things rush forward to completion.  This certainly casts doubt on the rash of sudden “transsexuals” who discovered that they needed to transition (without surgery) after a 30 or 40 year marriage, producing many offspring and grandchildren in the bargain.

At issue, as always, is the definition of the term “transsexual”.  The TG/trans camp says that anyone can be transsexual just by saying so.  There are even support groups for “non transitioning transsexuals”.  People are using this term to hide from their own issues and damaging the status of transsexuals in the process.  This is a birth condition, not a security blanket for people to comfort themselves with.

Any time someone attempts to assert the truth about the transsexual birth defect, crowds of angry naysayers spring up to rip the blanket back from the big meanie.  Transsexuals are supposed to put up with their abuse and misuse of the treatment protocols designed for the few of us who were born with this problem.  In short, because this is largely a fight between transsexual women and crossdressing men, we are supposed to allow men their fantasies because facing their issues will be too painful for the poor dears.  And therefore we must put up with any amount of misogyny from them because we have stepped out of our place and forgotten that they outrank us somehow.  I saw a shameful example of this recently when Catkisser was recently attacked by a misogynist in a comment on another blog.  It’s par for the course though, and she’s used to it.  It happens time and again, and never is there a price to pay when trannies attack us using the most hateful language they can dream up.

And that’s always the way, too.  You try to keep the argument on topic, and invariably one of the trannies (or a horde of them when they can organize themselves) tries to make it nasty and personal.  They can’t win an argument because the truth is not on their side, so they pound the table and paint scarlet letters on witches.  To them, all of this is a joke and they have no real stake in the outcome.  It’s a game to them and they think its all quite entertaining to attack women like me.

This is not a game.  This is deadly serious.  People like me don’t have some closet to run back into if things go wrong the way trannies do.  This is my life, and the lives of the 50-100 thousand other post ops here in the US.  It even affects people in other countries around the world.  So when you attack the truth of our birth condition and laugh about the little personal wars you conduct, you expose yourselves for the misogynistic asses that you are.  You seriously want TG rights?  Go stuff yourself.  Crossdressers get the same rights as anyone else, what the hell could they possibly want?

You are going to get zero sympathy from people that you use and abuse.  And I’m not doing you any favors by humoring your delusions that you are transsexual.  That’s one big reason the APA is revising the standards right now in this area; I’m sure the fear of coming lawsuits from “transsexual” regretters that they have enabled looms large.  They had also better be aware that when more science is available they may find themselves in court with transsexuals fed up with the APA joining us to the fetishists.

Yes, transgender is and always will be gay

October 25, 2010

In a recent post on Pam’s House Blend, ZoeB quotes one Dr. Brown.

Two quick notes, both for you and for Pam’s readers:

1) Of course I distinguish between gay and trans people, although when speaking of all the call to compassion and of apologies offered, I speak to both in generic terms. The reason I often group them together in my talks and writings is because they ARE grouped together in gay activism — as in LGBT, or included within the NGLTF, even without the “T” letter. So, with great consistency, gay activists fighting for gay curricula and protection in schools also fight for trans curricula and protection in schools, etc., and where you open the door to one, you open the door to the other. So, with understanding and knowledge, I put them both under the heading of gay activism.

2) Pam misses the issue about trans kids being in bathrooms and locker rooms with kids of the opposite biological sex. The last thought in my mind was that the trans kids were predators; rather, it was that many girls are uncomfortable (rightly so) in the presence of a biological boy in their bathroom or locker room (as are many boys with girls, especially at younger ages). Rules are made in society (and in school) based on the most commonly experienced living situations (as in, the vast majority of kids are not trans), and therefore, while caring about those who are exceptions to the rules, we cannot and should not change the rules.

Is there any doubt that transgender is gay?  Once again:

“The reason I often group them together in my talks and writings is because they ARE grouped together in gay activism — as in LGBT, or included within the NGLTF, even without the “T” letter.”

This is never going to change, no matter how much “education” by TG activists is attempted.  And half the “activists” are happy to be thought of as gay, so what does that tell you people in the other half that are fighting the gay image?  You aren’t ever going to be able to talk over them.  People don’t buy the gender identity argument to begin with, and when a substantial number of TG are happily in the gay community representing you, your cause is lost.

And given this situation, is there any doubt that the conflation of transgender/trans* and the medical condition of transsexual is bad for transsexuals?  Why then do people like Autumn Sandeen continue to stir the pot and miss every opportunity to explain the difference?  Not that I’d want someone like Sandeen to try to explain transsexualism (lol), but this highlights the true goal of the Sandeens; to erase reality, to erase the knowledge of a transsexual birth condition from the public mind and replace it with nonsense about gay activism.  It’s an entirely selfish act by the transgender, and entirely despicable that they would do this to people who are in their terminology an even smaller minority.

Anyone who tries to lie us into oblivion is just a monster.

Transgender is a gay issue.  Transgender is caused by an inability to accept one’s own sexuality or one’s sexual fetish for what it is.  It’s an overreaction to a problem that wouldn’t occur in a society where being gay was more accepted.    On that, the transgender do have common cause with the gay and lesbian groups, albeit somewhat orthogonally for the “heterosexual crossdressers”.  Transsexuals, however, have nothing in common with gays and lesbians and share no legislative goals whatsoever.  The association of gay with transgender is natural.  The association of gay with transsexual is unnatural, and harms us both.  The only people who stand to gain by this unwelcome advance from the TG are the TG themselves, who would not exist if it were not for the discovery of the transsexual phenomenon.

Why do gays and lesbians continue to kowtow to the trannys?  Their rights, and their whole movement is at stake.  They are about to watch it all go down the drain because they waited to long to move.  They were held back by the transgender inclusion and insistence that ENDA be written for crossdressers.  If that doesn’t teach them to ditch the “gender identity” garbage, nothing will.  And the people, if not the sclerotic, stupid corporate activist organizations, will learn a lesson out of all this.  Sooner or later the TG are going to be thrown overboard by the angry masses demanding change in Gay, Inc.

The course of LGBT activism

June 20, 2010

There are some very disturbing trends here in the States lately.  As our economy continues to go downhill and our government seems increasingly incompetent, people grow more fearful.  The longer we continue to view our institutions as ineffective the stress and worry among us will increase.  So will distrust.

In the past this has led to greater acceptance of authoritarian measures than people were willing to accept in times of plenty.  Compare Depression-era Germany with the Germany of the 90’s, for example.  When we get desperate we countenance a much stronger hand for civil authority.  Here, too we have our own examples such as the Civil War and more recently 9/11 in 2001, when people were fine with suspending individual rights because of perceived security needs.  The more desperate the situation, the more people are willing to give away.

We are not in good shape right now.  There is a looming financial crises for the government which will of course translate into financial disaster for the public due to the government’s efforts to handle its problem.  They have already started the first round of “quantitative easing” (printing money) and all signs point to more of the same.  Much more.   Add to this the pending debt wall, and there is a hard limit approaching fast.

I don’t think we appreciate just how much of our social fabric rests on perception.  We live our lives against a backdrop of assumptions.  The lights will come on when I flip the switch, water will flow when I turn the faucet.  Driving down the road, most people will obey traffic laws.  My neighbors will respect my property and strangers will respect my boundaries.

The underpinning to all of this is our great national contract with each other as represented by our mutual faith in our government to handle problems.  Most of this is a convenient illusion, a sort of mass delusion that we all share.  The system works because it works, not because there is a great force overseeing us all and making sure that we behave.  If but a few people out of our 300 some million were to be naughty, police forces would not be able to handle them.  The illusion would be shattered and the true nature of our fragile civilization would be revealed.

This is what will happen should the US Government decide to destroy the dollar.  Even if they stop short of full devaluation (something I am not sure is possible given that most of the problem is already out of their hands- they suffer from their own delusions of control) the resulting cascade would still accomplish the same effect.  Public confidence will be destroyed and we’ll have financial chaos- followed shortly by civil chaos.

Even before we get to nightmare scenarios like that one, we can all sense the rising paranoia and worry among ourselves.  While overall crime rates, especially against property, are said to be down random outbursts of violence occur more frequently.  Police response is growing more brutal, just scan the headlines around the net.   Relationships and trust are breaking down.

So why did I title this LGBT activism?  I see some of this anger manifesting among activists and the rank and file in the blogosphere just as it is with everyone else.  As the coalition disintegrates, people are struggling to establish a new paradigm and as part of that process various factions and strategies will jostle for position.  No one knows for certain the course they will choose to take.  There have even been angry calls for some kind of armed militancy, though I am sure it was mainly frustration.  Still, can you imagine lesbians and gays talking like that just a couple years ago?

I’m getting worried at the kind of activism being proposed.  There are some rousing calls for the activism of old; marches, sit ins, disrupting meetings and harassing officials.  General civil disobedience. But there is a time and place for everything; that kind of activism was appropriate in the 50’s and 60’s, when we had a different sort of government and atmosphere.  Right now these things still sound reasonable, if not particularly effective in this day and age, due to our knowledge of their use by Dr. King and the activists of the 60’s fighting for social causes.  What will these sorts of strategies sound like as we careen further down this rabbit hole and our government grows ever more menacing in its efforts to enforce order?

Ghandi, speaking about nonviolence as means of change, remarked that it rests on the assumption of having a principled opponent.  I’m not so sure they will be up against that kind of adversary as things unfold.  It can happen here.