Full SFGN Interview: ‘I am not a bigot’ Says Gender Identity Watch’s Cathy Brennan

Putin in drag: what transmisogyny looks like?
February 11, 2014
[UPDATED] Ryan Broems Goes on transmisogynistic live tweet rant while attempting to make a joke out of dating a trans woman
February 13, 2014

Full SFGN Interview: ‘I am not a bigot’ Says Gender Identity Watch’s Cathy Brennan

Recently the South Florida Gay News interviewed me for an article on the TERFs, Cathy Brennan and her group, Gender Identity Watch:

The Web is where this feud appears to have escalated with Brennan trading barbs between journalists and advocates from the transgender community who claim Brennan and her blog are insensitive.

“I believe the petition served to clearly demonstrate that many thousands of feminists view the GIW team to be a hate group,” said Cristan Williams, editor of Transadvocate.com. “I think that it also offered a chance for Brennan’s victims to connect with many others and understand that they were not alone.”

Brennan discounted Williams’ accusations as “nuts” and said “Cristan has an axe to grind and let her grind it.”

Meanwhile at the Southern Poverty Law Center, where the Intelligence Project has been heralded by the National Review as “one of the most respected anti-terror organizations in the world,” Beirich acknowledged there have been some issues with Gender Identity Watch, but refused to deem it a hate group.

“It’s not that we don’t consider some of the things that have happened there to be really ugly,” Beirich said. “It doesn’t qualify as a hate group under our definition because a hate group has to have some membership, like a group.”

Some have claimed that the article failed to adequately describe the issues. The piece is short an only briefly quotes the interview questions I answered. Missing from the SFGN piece is any historical context. For the sake of clarity, here are my complete answers to the SDGN’s interview questions:

South Florida Gay News: What is your prior experience with Cathy Brennan and Gender Identity Watch?

Cristan Williams: The historical TERF movement was directly involved in stripping access to psychological and medical care from the trans community in the 1980s. The term TERF (Trans Exclusionary Radical Feminists) was popularized in 2008 by the non-transgender feminist community because these women felt as if their discourse was being colonized by an extremist faction. Feminist women began using this term as a way to distinguish the TERF rhetoric from larger feminist discourse.

I encountered Brennan as being an opinion leader in the modern iteration of the TERF movement. I became aware of Brennan a few years ago as the power behind an effort to have trans people stripped of UN protections. The ideology promoted by Brennan’s group is featured in TERF conferences, meetings, lectures and direct actions across the globe.

GIW calls itself a team, not a group. The GIW team promotes a world view in which trans people and protections are not only watched, but correlated with the suffering of cisgender women. Racist groups employ similar tactics by tracking improvements in racial equality while correlating gains in equality with perceived wrongs committed by groups they exist to oppress.

For instance, here are a few posts from today’s GIW social media stream:

image (1)

In Brennan’s reality, this isn’t bigotry

image

Promoting propaganda from an ex-gay group

Note that GIW features the talking points of a known ex-gay group and proudly attacks known trans activists.

Brennan’s group asserts that the term TERF is a pejorative and rejects the idea that people are born with a subjective awareness of the body’s physical sex. Brennan’s brand of “feminism” promotes the notion that women can and probably should choose to become lesbians (the so-called political lesbian) and that people – like myself – who disagree with her are men’s rights activists (MRAs).

SFGN: What are your thoughts about the petition to ask SPLC to declare GIW a Hate group?

CW: The petition was created by a feminist group called, Secular Women. I believe the petition served to clearly demonstrate that many 1000s of feminists view the GIW team to be a hate group. I think that it also offered a chance for Brennan’s victims to connect with many others and understand that they were not alone.

SFGN: What is your role with The TransAdvocate.com?

CW: I am the editor.

[column size=”one-half”]

Tip this TransAdvocate!

Writers for the TransAdvocate work hard to bring you news and commentary. If you found this article meaningful, let the author know that you appreciate the work they do with a tip!
[/column] [column size=”one-half” last=”true”] TipJar


[/column]
Cristan Williams
Cristan Williams
Cristan Williams is a trans historian and pioneer in addressing the practical needs of the transgender community. She started the first trans homeless shelter in the South and co-founded the first federally funded trans-only homeless program, pioneered affordable healthcare for trans people in the Houston area, won the right for trans people to change their gender on Texas ID prior to surgery, started numerous trans social service programs and founded the Transgender Center as well as the Transgender Archives. Cristan is the editor at the social justice sites TransAdvocate.com and TheTERFs.com, is a long-term member and previous chair of the City of Houston HIV Prevention Planning Group.

180 Comments

  1. DarlieB says:

    And Hitler loved Jews ! Cathy Brennan is the bigot/hate monger of the first order. She dresses like a man while screaming about how manly transwomen are. She abuses the word rape, using it to victimize people while desensitizing the world to true rape! And she did all this intentionally. She has found her victims and now every ill of the world can be heaped on them . Like any fascist radical she and her horde repeats the same lies over and over hoping for it to some day become true. To disagree with Brennan does not make you a mens rights activist, it makes you sane.

    • Justin Allen Norwood says:

      “Like any fascist radical she and her horde repeats the same lies over and over hoping for it to some day become true.”
      Hahaha right because knowing males with penises are not lesbians is a “lie”.

      • Sinopaa says:

        Really lame trolling effort. I give it a 2/10.

        • Justin Allen Norwood says:

          Knowing male and female isn’t trolling. Also males are not lesbian and females are not gay men. sorry.

          • Cristan says:

            Ugh… you’re a sock account for GIW. Why don’t you have the courage of your convictions and fly under your true colors? You only just set up this fake account and you’ve only used it to obsessively defend Brennan’s ideology.

            You’ve just asserted that transwomen are cismen. They are not. You’ve also chosen to assert that lesbians – both trans and cis – must only ever agree with you or they are fooling themselves.

            Gender orientation, identity and expression is not a function of a penis or a vagina. When you choose to equivocate and speak of gender as it if it were, you’re equivocating. Gender is real whether you accept it or not and whether you believe it to be the root of all evil or not. Equivocation doesn’t prove you right; it only makes you an obtuse asshole (but then even Brennan herself said that she knows she’s an asshole, so yeah…).

            I get that you believe that sex is very simple concept that only relates to genitals and chromosomes. I also get that you’re quite happy to smugly assert that gender may only ever be defined as mere cultural rules.

            I get it. You have a dogma you believe in and are convinced that the world would be much better off if everyone could just believe as you do. You think that the “Truth” you’ve discovered should be shared and you are called to spread that Truth. Your Truth gives you license to fight for the greater good and if you have to insult, bait and attack, you’ll do it because you’re one of the righteous and people like me… well, we’re just nuts and have an ax to grind, amirite?

          • Justin Allen Norwood says:

            “Ugh… you’re a sock account for GIW. Why don’t you have the courage of your convictions and fly under your true colors? You only just set up this fake account and you’ve only used it to obsessively defend Brennan’s ideology.”
            No, I’m a real person, not a “sock”. Facebook me.

            “You’ve just asserted that transwomen are cismen. They are not. You’ve also chosen to assert that lesbians – both trans and cis – must only ever agree with you or they are fooling themselves.”

            I’ve asserted that Trans women are male, they actually are.

            “Gender orientation, identity and expression is not a function of a penis or a vagina. ”

            We agree. Gender is actually not biological.

            “I get that you believe that sex is very simple concept that only relates to genitals and chromosomes. I also get that you’re quite happy to smugly assert that gender may only ever be defined as mere cultural rules.”

            Gender is an oppressive and repressive social construct.

            “our Truth gives you license to fight for the greater good and if you have to insult, bait and attack, you’ll do it because you’re one of the righteous and people like me… well, we’re just nuts and have an ax to grind, amirite?”

            Please, you’re just as “righeteous” as I am.

          • marti386 says:

            “Gender is an oppressive and repressive social construct”

            So what exactly are YOU doing to end it, Justin? Other than whining about trans people, I mean?

            If I had a nickel for every raving radfem asshole who told me I was a menace to all women for “upholding gender stereotypes”, I could retire a rich woman.

            The thing that always GETS me, however, is the fact that you all can never seem to get anywhere PAST that. I mean, after 30+ years of this “gender critical” bullshit, I’ve never heard a radfem who ACTUALLY has an endgame.

            So please, Justin. Enlighten us all with your sage wisdom. HOW do we destroy these gender stereotypes? You must have a plan, right? So lay it on us.

            I mean, I HOPE you’ve thought further ahead than just bashing on trans people. That would be pretty short-sided. AND ignorant of the actual problem. See, trans women are NOT the ones who really “uphold damaging gender stereotypes”. That would be cis women. Cis women GREATLY outnumber trans women. We don’t have the power to cause damage to women by our “gender stereotypes”. Hell, we can’t even use the bathroom of our gender in a lot of places. Explain how we, as a small, maligned group, actually have the power to hurt cis women by our gender.

            Also, maybe you can shed some light on why I never seem to see you radfems lecturing CIS women on how they “uphold gender stereotypes”. Cuz seriously, I NEVER hear you guys do that. EVER. Even though they are actually the ones in a position to influence women, unlike trans women.
            Attacking trans people ISN’T “challenging gender”. What kills me is that for all the lecturing on gender you guys do, you never seem to understand that gender identity, gender expression, and gender roles are 3 totally DIFFERNT things. Gender roles are what you want to attack. NOT my gender identity or expression. Those things cause no harm to you at all.

          • Justin Allen Norwood says:

            Well I’m not changing my body because I don’t identify as a ‘man’ in terms of gender for starters. That’s kinda..y’know NOT reinforcing the binary.

          • marti386 says:

            Seriously, that’s the best you can come up with? Changing my body “reinforced the binary”?

            Thanks for proving my point. You have NO endgame. None of you do. You guys went from being “gender critical” (which actually has some valid points) to being “trans critical” (which just want’s to heap all the blame on trans people). The only plan you seem to have is that you want trans people to just go away. But that’s NOT happening. We’re here to stay.

            Actually, trans women don’t enforce the binary. The problem isn’t gender identity. It’s the gender roles doled out by the patriarchy. What you forget is that the patriarchy PUNISHES people not for their gender, but for failing to follow the rules it has for each gender. That’s why lesbians are punished. Women are supposed to be straight. That’s why butch women are punished. Women are supposed to be feminine. And that’s why trans women are punished. Because there is NO greater violation to the patriarchy then leaving the male privileged class to accept a position in the oppressed women’s class.

            That’s why transphobia exists. That’s why trans women are beaten for being trans. That’s why trans women are murdered for being trans. That’s why we get fired from our jobs for being trans. Not just for being women. For being TRANS. We are punished for being trans, and for commiting that most unforgivable violation to the patriarchy.

            We are, in fact, the biggest attackers of the patriarchy’s gender rules, NOT enforcers of it.

            As I pointed out, trans women are not powerful enough to enforce the gender binary on cis women. cis women were upholding the gender binary LONG before trans women came along. If you REALLY want to smash the binary, you need to be having this conversation with THEM, and not me.

            Personally, I don’t “uphold the gender binary” any more than you do. I’m kind of a tomboy. I wear mostly jeans and t-shirts, I don’t like high heels, and I don’t wear a lot of makeup. Unlike the cis male drag queens who you technically support, since they’re gay men.

            The gender binary existed LONG before trans people came along. It’s biggest reinforcers are cis women. So if you’re REALLY serious about smashing the gender norms, how about you get the cis women to smash them FIRST, before lecturing trans women?

          • Justin Allen Norwood says:

            Because all I hear is a man telling women what to do. That’s honesty.

          • marti386 says:

            Except trans women aren’t men. There’s nothing honest about calling us “men”. I’m about a MILLION miles away from a cis man. If I was, then I wouldn’t be punished by the patriarchy for being a woman. The problem begins when radfems think that trans women are cis men, and try to treat us as such.

            Honestly, it’s NOT that hard to grasp.

            Also, WHO exactly is telling cis women “what to do”? Certainly not trans women. We don’t have the power to tell cis women what to do. It’s cis women like Brennan and her buddies that seem hell-bent on telling trans women what to do, not the other way around.

            Are trans women telling cis women what they can wear?

            Are trans women telling cis women they aren’t real women?

            Are trans women telling cis women they aren’t welcome in the women’s restrooms?

            Are trans women telling cis women they aren’t welcome at rape crisis shelters?

            Are trans women working with anti-gay marriage supporters like the Pacific Justice Institute to take away laws that protect cis girl students? No?

            Because cis women are doing EVERY single one of those to trans women. So please explain how we’re “telling women what to do”.

          • Justin Allen Norwood says:

            You’re not punished for being a woman, you’re punished for being trans. That’s not hard to grasp either.

          • Cristan says:

            You’re asserting that – in addition to anti-trans bigotry – transwomen do not experience the misogyny ciswomen face?

            I’m curious, what are your thoughts about intersectionality? When I was denied employment because I was trans, that was anti-trans bigotry, right? So, when a man raped me (ya know, stuck his junk into my vagina without my consent), that was also anti-trans bigotry and not an violent act of misogyny?

          • Justin Allen Norwood says:

            First, let me say I’m sorry that happened to you, it’s horrible. I’ve been raped by a man as well, I feel you here.
            Yes, being denied employment is anti-trans discrimination and bigotry.
            I honestly don’t know why people rape, so I can’t say.

          • marti386 says:

            “You’re not punished for being a woman, you’re punished for being trans”.

            No, I’m punished for being BOTH. I pass perfectly as a cis woman. No one knows I’m trans unless I tell them, or they knew me before transition. I get hit on all the time by cis het males who assume I’m a cis woman. I have strangers hold the door open for me because they assume I’m a cis woman, I’ve had cis males talk over me, interrupt me, or dismiss my thoughts because they assume I’m a cis woman. I’ve been expected to do the same job for less pay than a man, because they assume I’m a cis woman. I have to worry about the same threat of sexual assault because I’m assumed to be a cis woman.

            So yes, I DO get punished for being a woman. And thinking you have the right to come in here an dismiss things that I’ve LIVED and know for a fact are true, just because it conflicts with your “gender-critical” super happy fun time is insulting.

          • That’s nor true. I don’t tend to get clocked as trans. People punish me for how they perceive me, and I’ve been punished for being a woman plenty more than I’ve been punished for being trans, regardless of what you think I am.

          • Justin Allen Norwood says:

            Yes, I know the women who made that actually. I needed to be called out and was.

          • marti386 says:

            Dude, tuck your underwear in your pants. 🙂

          • Friesjones says:

            “Because all I hear is a man telling women what to do. That’s honesty.”

            No, coming from a boy, that’s irony.

          • I’d really appreciate if you could actually make substantive response to the points she’s made, rather than this cheap rhetorical jab. It strikes me as a cop out, and I’m disappointed. I’d really like to know how you reconcile wanting to dismantle patriarchy with oppressing people whose very existence challenges it. Let’s see an actual rebuttal here, or even better yet, a good and proper fisking.

            Thanks.

          • Justin Allen Norwood says:

            If I’m short, it’s because I’m one person and I’ve had many people attempt to speak with me on this. I’d love to have a dialogue where I have time to articulate and don’t have 10 notifications a minute. It makes it hard to get back to or really coherently address anything. I’ve kept it short for this reason alone, trying to condense what I’m saying into a few sentences.

          • > If I’m short, it’s because I’m one person and I’ve had many people attempt to speak with me on this.

            I understand. I often feel the same way when in a forum full of cis people trying to explain trans stuff. I’m purposefully being as patient with you as I can at this point, in light of that.

          • Justin Allen Norwood says:

            thank you for that. You can Facebook me a message if you wouldn’t mind something a bit more one on one? I think it would make the conversation a lot more productive. If not, we can do our best here. : )

          • I will, but I’ve got a couple of things going on at the moment. I work in a couple of hours and I’m literally trying to herd one of my cats at the moment.

          • Justin Allen Norwood says:

            whenever you can. Good look with the kitties.

          • Justin Allen Norwood says:

            “The gender binary existed LONG before trans people came along. It’s biggest reinforcers are cis women. So if you’re REALLY serious about smashing the gender norms, how about you get the cis women to smash them FIRST, before lecturing trans women?”

            This was what really bothered me about that response. Blaming women for upholding a construct that oppresses them. Women are not to blame for gender.

          • I’d agree with that. Largely it’s been cis men that are responsible for patriarchy, but I think it’s fair to say that cis women have too often been willing participants in that.

            Either way, blaming trans people seems sort of ridiculous, considering they’re beset upon by cis people in general because of their trans status.

          • Justin Allen Norwood says:

            I would agree that it’s been men who are responsible for both policing and indoctrinating gender onto women, and really all people. Women are the class I consider the most oppressed by gender, and I agree that many seem complacent with it, I still see them as suffering from male patriarchal brainwashing, and do not fault them in anyway for it.

          • marti386 says:

            “I still see them as suffering from male patriarchal brainwashing, and do not fault them in anyway for it”

            Then WHY aren’t radical feminists reaching out to us, instead of acting like we’re the root of their problems?

          • Kathy11 says:

            I’m more interested in what makes something a social construct. How can their be so many sex variations to so many degrees – but only two ideal platonic categories?

            Is any other characteristic treat so rigidly? Eye color? Skin color? Blood type? Folks with autism spectrum biology speak of neural diversity – and one never knows which of those traits confers which benefits in different environments. One copy of the sickle cell gene provides some protection against malaria. If there is a gay and or trans genes the benefits provided in traditional societies to extended families via care giving have been written about (they are after all – the same genes being passed along). What others are there that we don’t yet know?

            With so many sex variations – Why is sex not a social construct? What that is human isn’t a social construct outside of say, some math? And there are certainly those who question that assumption.

            Ah – it would call sexual orientation into question as a social construct.

            Gotcha. Worrisome. Circle the wagons!!!!

          • marti386 says:

            “I’m more interested in what makes something a social construct.”

            What kills me is how they say that gender is a social construct, but cling to “biology”, as if physical sex wasn’t ALSO a social construct. 😀

            EVERYTHING is a social construct. “Biology” is just a set of guidelines set down by…..wait for it……society! And that those guidelines are open to change at ANY time. So I’m sure if Brennan got up tomorrow, and found out the new edition of biology books now said that women have penises, she’d TOTALLY accept that. You know, because “biology doesn’t lie”. 🙂

            Science (which is ALSO a set of guidelines for attempting to understand the world around us) once said dinosaurs came from reptiles. Then it said dinosaurs came from birds. Science and biology CHANGE as we learn new information about the world and the things in it. And biology is starting to realize that there’s more to gender and physical sex than just “penis goes on the boy”. 🙂

          • marti386 says:

            “This was what really bothered me about that response. Blaming women for upholding a construct that oppresses them. Women are not to blame for gender.”

            I never said I blamed them, Justin. I never said they were responsible for it. I just said that you can’t blame ME (and other trans women) for “upholding a gender stereotype” without holding them responsible also. Otherwise your whole argument is baloney.

            Here’s the thing. Getting rid of trans women WON’T make gender go away. NOT unless you get all the cis women in on it as well. At least be honest. If my wearing high heels is a “damaging stereotype”, then it’s just as bad when cis women wear them. And BELIEVE me, I have a lot of cis women friends who are gonna get real violent on you if you try to take away their shoe collections.

            The fact is, if trans women vanished tomorrow, cis women would STILL be under the yoke of gender role oppression, because trans women were NEVER the ones enforcing it. I’m not sure exactly when you radfems types decided getting rid of trans women would solve all your gender problems, but it’s ludicrous.

          • Justin Allen Norwood says:

            I’m not for getting rid of trans women or trans men. I’m for attempting to get rid of defining gender by sex, which, yes, in the end I think will influence less people to transition. I don’t hold trans people responsible for gender.

          • marti386 says:

            “I don’t hold trans people responsible for gender.”

            But if you believe radfem rhetoric, then you DO hold us responsible for gender.

            If radfems didn’t blame us, they couldn’t claim we “oppress them”, could they? They couldn’t claim we “uphold hurtful gender stereotypes”, could they? They wouldn’t be CONSTANTLY lecturing us on how OUR expression of woman is bad, while ignoring the cis women who do it too, could they?

            If radfems didn’t, then WHY is 95% of their “gender criticism” focused SOLEY on trans women? Even though we’re a TINY portion of the group women?

            Yes, you DO blame us Justin. Or you wouldn’t BE here, at a trans friendly website, lecturing trans women on how their lived experience is just a lie. No display of cis privilege THERE, huh?

          • Kathy11 says:

            It’s really just rhetoric to hide their true eliminationist intent. Let’s remove the fig leaf and rename “gender identity” “sexual identity”.

            That will make clear there’s no conflation with the sancroscect , trademarked term gender – which can have no other associations, qualifiers or related expanded definitions.

            He wants to end transitioning – and eliminate trans people. He can’t do that without (at least while petending to some moral ground while advocating a pogrom) without denying we exist as valid human beings and displacing the moral opprobrium attendant on eliminating a people back on those being eliminated. Hence – the fundamentalist language reduction and control. Like a Bryan Fischer saying “I’m not homophobic – gay people don’t really exist. They’re really straight people who have been deluded.”

            I guess there’s little that scares him more than something that brings in the slightest hint of a possibility of calling into question the categorical stability of “gay” and “man” – as he mention earlier – it’s worrisome – he probably loses much sleep over it.

            It’s all rather Freudian, don’t you think? An attraction and terrifying possibility for a gay man that requires a subconscious .exertion of power and control of these feeling by externalization and control of others. Or as wiki describes it:”Essentially, castration anxiety can lead to a fear of death, and a feeling of loss of control over one’s life.
            To feel so powerless can be detrimental to an individual’s mental
            health. One of the most concerning problems with all of this is the idea
            that the individual does not recognize that their sexual desires are
            the cause of the emotional distress.”

            If only they had resolved this conflict and didn’t need to share this distress with others.

            This of course is all about repression and internalized transphobia – but you already knew that. We’ve both seen this movie before. With a better plot and more prettier actors.

            But – back to dresses. We should both probably go high femme more often. It seems to piss them off.

            That’s worth a thousand words. And penii.

          • marti386 says:

            “He wants to end transitioning – and eliminate trans people”

            Exactly. I always laugh when radfems supporters say things like “we don’t want to eliminate you”. Of course not. That would be transphobic, wouldn’t it?

            INSTEAD, they don’t want us looking like women, or acting like women. They don’t want us calling ourselves women, or having cis women support us as women. They don’t want us using female pronouns. They don’t want us being feminists, or lesbians. They don’t want us having access to women’s spaces, or using women’s rape crisis or homeless shelters. They don’t want us having any specific rights, or access to medical care. They want us using the men’s room, where it’s highly likely that we may get beaten or assaulted. And IF that happens, that’s not THEIR fault, that’s the fault of “male violence”, even though THEY were the ones who forced us to use it.

            But they don’t want to “eliminate” us. HONEST. 🙂

            “It’s all rather Freudian, don’t you think? An attraction and terrifying possibility for a gay man that requires a subconscious .exertion of power and control of these feeling by externalization and control of others.”

            Yeah, I think some gay men (and some butch radical lesbian feminists) get REALLY twisted out of shape at the thought that maybe, just maybe they might be trans. Of course, it’s NOT trans people suggesting they are, but it eats at the back of their minds. That’s why they’re so petrified we’re going to “erase” their identities, even though the only thing we want is OUR identity.

            “But – back to dresses. We should both probably go high femme more often. It seems to piss them off.

            You’re right. Cuz I look DAMN fine in a dress. I know radfems want to believe we all look like Ernest Borgnine in lipstick, but the fact is most of us couldn’t be spotted if they tried. 😀

          • Kathy11 says:

            Riddle me this.

            What’s the difference between a Chuck type and Justin type?

            Ans: Better language skills, an appreciation of PR concerns and a 5 year implementation time line. The end game is the same for us. Nonexistence.

            To be fair, Justin is probably much better looking also.

          • Guest says:

            You and Kathy11 are hitting them out of the park! Yep, when we enter their “open for comments” web domains the microsecond we so much as offer a contra point in the face of a barrage of trans rants we quickly find ourselves seeing this: (pic). Isn’t it interesting though that we hold the high moral ground and allow them to stick around beyond say two microseconds?

          • Kathy11 says:

            I’m not allowed to converse on this website with people you couldn’t pay me to associate with?

            This does not fill me with an abundance of interest or concern.

            Wait – just how much money is involved, anyway?

          • marti386 says:

            “You and Kathy11 are hitting them out of the park! Yep, when we enter their “open for comments” web domains the microsecond we so much as offer a contra point in the face of a barrage of trans rants we quickly find ourselves seeing this: (pic).

            Thanks! Yeah, what get’s me is that they’ll block you not just if you get insulting, but just if you prove them wrong. I was at Gendertrender once (shudder), and they were attacking trans women, as usual. One of the commenters made a reply to the effect of “If trans women want us to stand up for them, why don’t they stand up for cis women? She then made the claim that trans women aren’t interested in fighting for things like right to choice, and that all we do is demand our rights. She wanted to know why we weren’t complaining about the conservative attack on women. And of course, about 10 other commenters jumped on that, saying “YEAH, trans women suck cuz they don’t stand up for us”.

            So I wrote a polite, non-abusive comment to her, linking to no less than TEN trans websites (and these were just the ones I had in my “favorites” bookmark folder), doing EXACTLY that. I then gently suggested that maybe, just maybe, she should actually try listening to a few trans people BEFORE she just makes things up about us.

            Needless to say, that comment was blocked and never saw the light of day.

            It’s ONE thing to block someone because they’re insulting, or even if you don’t agree with their viewpoints. But when someone PROVES you to be flat-out WRONG?

            That’s just being intellectually dishonest. And it proves how far radfems need to go in order to keep up their ridiculous attacks.

            THIS story is the newest one to be making the rounds at all the radfem sites:

            http://www.torontosun.com/2014/02/15/a-sex-predators-sick-deception

            And of course, they’re ALL using this as an example of why trans women shouldn’t
            be allowed in the women’s room. You know, because of this ONE dude.

            EVEN though the article is VERY clear that the predator is NOT a transgender person in any way, shape or form. The title is “a sex predator’s sick DECEPTION”, for crying out loud. That SHOULD be the tip off. He never lived as a woman, never was diagnosed as having GID, never identified as female. He just lied to get into a women’s shelter because he’s a pervert.

            But because of that, ALL trans women should be barred. For the “safety” of the cis women. Even though trans women will SURELY be assaulted if they’re forced to use the men’s shelter. But hey, if it happens, remember it’s not the radfem’s fault. It’s “male violence”.

            I’ve encountered this warped thinking before. It’s the same one they used for the “Paula Witherspoon” argument. Even though Paula wasn’t living as a woman at the time the assaults took place. And even though it never happened anywhere NEAR a woman’s restroom. And even though she severed her time and got out. And even though she hasn’t bothered anyone since.

            I’ve commented on several radfem sites when they use Paula, or their other sad handful of “examples” of “trans women violence”, that what they REALLY are arguing for is NOT blocking trans women from using women’s spaces, but for blocking PERVERTS with a past history of sex predator crimes. And that they could easily BLOCK these people from shelters by performing a criminal record check BEFORE admitting them. And that would make shelters safe for everyone, cis AND trans.

            Once again, that comment was blocked by every site I posted it on.

            Why? Why would women who feign concern for “female safety” not acknowledge a sensible solution to the problem? Why would they not support that solution, rather than support one that blocks tons of innocent, vulnerable trans women?

            Maybe because it was NEVER about “women’s safety”? Maybe because it was just a convenient excuse to keep trans women out? Maybe because such a solution would have the side effect of blocking cis women who are sexual predators? Because you just CAN’T block the cissies, now can you? That would be “unfair”.

          • Kathy11 says:

            Yawn.

            And you’ll be the last you’ll ever be described as hung?

            Alienate? I’m beloved in my city. I bet you can’t get a date with a platinum card.

            Seriously – thanks – I need to share that at work – best joke of the week. Worlds’ lamest threat.

            What else you got?

          • Kathy11 says:

            I guess that really was the best you had.

            Sad commentary. I remember when people knew how to make a threat – and how to execute upon it.

            What a world. No standards.

          • Kathy11 says:

            Riight – scamper off from your words, little girl. Mustn’t get mummy angry.

            If I’m so insignificant – how insignificant must the one responding to me be? How little self respect must they have?

            Seriously – when is the last time you actually had a date or got out of the house. Try it sometime. You might find you like it.

          • Kathy11 says:

            Oh – but thanks for jumping to the bait like a trout & immediately proving my point!

            Will you roll over for me next? Give me your paw?

          • Kathy11 says:

            Hey – where did wang chuckles go? We need some comic relief.

          • Kathy11 says:

            Isn’t it odd how some say that they dislike how women are being told what to think regarding trans women when they refer to the small minority of cis women who they agree with – but they’re quite comfortable doing so themselves to the cis women who accept trans women as women?

            They get to choose which women get to speak. At least trans women say they are women and have some right to the discussion as it effects their lives. The men who do so are implicitly silencing a group they don’t belong to or speaking for one they don’t belong to no matter how you view it – trans inclusive cis women, non inclusive cis women or trans women. In this particular case two out of the three groups are being spoken for by someone other. Men – as is the custom.

            And the usual unsupported assertions – stated as if they had never possibly been examined by someone who transitioned – that one might never look at gender options before transitioning? The assumption that all transitioned people are stereotypically gendered post transition – there are no butch trans women or fem trans guys or people with ambiguous genders – or even people who had surgery but never transitioned. That exploring options isn’t the most basic step in every trans person journey and every therapy plan?

            This type of limited understanding is usually the result of a doctrinaire attitude that leads to the projection of one’s own values on others. Perhaps it can come from a lack of experience or a rigid belief system akin to religiosity – like so many of the non accepting types being mildly surprised in finding themselves in agreement with conservative religious types about trans people – and the very strong history of anti trans feminism with roots in Catholicism and leadership being ex-nuns.

            It’s almost as if say – someone were to assert that drag queens would never transition. Coming as they do from traditions and communities that support gender variance and acceptance of gay men as men only. Where both are highly valued and transition is extremely highly dis-valued. That at the very least – if the pressure was felt to not do drag – the incentive is still their to be a man – that all the social incentives and gender values are against transition. It would never happen.

            One would be disappointed.

            Just as in every other community every social incentive argues against transition. Yet somehow – people think trans people are so stupid to have not perceived this or considered that they may have the option of living as fem men or masculine women. And may never have done so – that their therapists may never have suggested such an oh so brilliant and obscure idea that no one had ever considered before this very moment they brought it to light.

            Thank God we have the revealed truth of other existences to live by (however brief they may be) instead of our own hard fought truths and greater experience. This is the way towards living an authentic and happy life – don’t follow your truth and your heart – look into someone else’s soul. If he feels there is no such thing as gender identity or bisexuality or homosexuality – conform. It works just fine for him. And it oppresses him if you’re different.

            Hmm…it all sounds so familiar………..

          • marti386 says:

            “Isn’t it odd how some say that they dislike how women are being told what to think regarding trans women when they refer to the small minority of cis women who they agree with – but they’re quite comfortable doing so themselves to the cis women who accept trans women as women?”

            Tell me about it. If I had a nickel for everytime I saw a TERF call a cis feminist a “handmaiden of the patriarchy”, just because she agreed that trans women ARE women, I could buy an island. 🙂

            “They get to choose which women get to speak.”

            I know. The funny thing is that they claim they’re all about “debate”, until they actually get challenged. I don’t know how many times I’ve been blocked and banned at radfem sites, simply because I debated their ideas. In fact, here’s one of the ground rules for Cathy Brennan’s lecture on transgenderism:

            “IF YOU DISAGREE WITH ANY OF THESE STATEMENTS, YOU CAN STAY AND REMAIN QUIET OR YOU CAN LEAVE.”

            WOW. That’s some “debate”, huh? 🙂

            The fact is, radfems don’t WANT a “debate”. Because they’re not good at it. What they WANT is a “safe space” to fling any transphobic bullshit they want, without fear of repercussion. I can’t even begin to count how many times I’ve head them claim that holding them accountable for their rhetoric is “silencing women”. It’s interesting how the words “women’s space” to them is just a code word for “space to attack trans women from without any blowback”.

            “The assumption that all transitioned people are stereotypically gendered post transition – there are no butch trans women or fem trans guys or people with ambiguous genders”

            Exactly. I’m actually sorta tomboy/light butch. I don’t wear dresses much, I prefer sneakers to high heels, and I usually wear jeans and t-shirts. I do have long hair and wear makeup, but not too much. So I hardly uphold the uber femme stereotype. I was more femme when I first transitioned (like most trans women), but as I discovered I passed well, I learned to relax and find MY expression as a woman.

            What radfems don’t seem to understand when they blame trans women for “gender stereotype” is that when we first transition, we have to try EXTRA hard to fit in. And that sometimes results in overuse of make-up or feminine things. We are expected by the patriarchy to prove we are really serious about being women. So in fact, “gender stereotypes” are being forced down OUR throats, not the other way around.

            The sad thing is that if they’d actually sit and LISTEN to trans women, instead of shouting over us all the time, they’d realize that their trans theories are SERIOUSLY flawed. But they don’t. Every time a trans women tries to explain why, radfems stick their fingers in their ears and go “LA LA LA, I can’t HEAR you, sorry about your dick”. Not exactly the best way to have a debate.

            “The men who do so are implicitly silencing a group they don’t belong to or speaking for one they don’t belong to no matter how you view it.”

            The funny thing is that Justin, as a cis privileged male, has no dogs in this race, and should show his solidarity by shutting up. So I’m gonna leave him with radical feminist Ann Tagonist’s tips for how he can be a good male ally to radical feminists:

            “Just shut the fuck up. That’s it. That’s all you have to do. Shut the fuck up. Keep your dick to yourself. And shut the fuck up. The End.”

            How about respecting what radical feminists say, Justin?

          • Kathy11 says:

            “Exactly. I’m actually sorta tomboy/light butch. I don’t wear dresses
            much, I prefer sneakers to high heels, and I usually wear jeans and
            t-shirts. I do have long hair and wear makeup, but not too much. So I
            hardly uphold the uber femme stereotype. I was more femme when I first
            transitioned (like most trans women), but as I discovered I passed well,
            I learned to relax and find MY expression as a woman.”

            :nods: I wore a dress Sat evening & got fully made up for the first time in something like five years. It was a special event. Most days, work or home – it jeans or slacks and some lipstick. Somewhat less femme than my sisters. I purposely avoided dresses at community and political events or even suits with skirts many years ago when I may have been more inclined earlier in transition as there was always the just that stereotype to work against to have any credibility.

            Of course then one risked being called too masculine because whatever you do is wrong and indicative of not being a woman; but you do what you’re most comfortable with and what works best for most women professionally. Not what caters to a tiny subsets prejudices. Most who had those attitudes locally eventually (after a few years of knowing me and my work for the community) told me – you know – you weren’t what I expected you to be.

            You can’t waste too much time on people who will never be accepting or open to viewing you as a whole person. Focus on those who will. It’s just more effective and better for you personally.
            That’s why I just don’t visit those sites – why would I need to waste my time? I don’t need or desire their company, they’re not personally attractive human beings (referring to their personalities) – they don’t seem like fun at all, there’s no human warmth.

            What’s to recommend the effort? Unless one is seeking dysfunctional friendships? In that case – seek therapy instead. Much more useful in the long run. Hell – a bowling league would be better – and I hate those.

          • christian_transgender says:

            I no longer even peruse those sites either. They have zero credibility, except in self-delusion to themselves, in that the proverbial cart is before the horse, the tail is wagging the dog, the innocent are guilty based not on evidence but on association. That is so patently Un-American that of course it doesn’t merely border on hate speech, it *is* hate speech!

            Their sole purpose, demonstrated here, is to set up a web, “invite” trans commentary, then cut/paste prt screen images of “men acting like women”, “threats”, etc, all out of context after overt provocation of course. It really eludes understanding how if they really and truly wish to do more than merely harass and hit & run trans persons–they do so from a zero credibility vantage.

          • christian_transgender says:

            My goody goodness? Have you been reading my mind? Wow…….yes like teenagers discovering ourselves we jump with joy for finally being free to express our repressed femininity! Then, once we realize we pass, we tone it down! I have always told others “I would much rather be acknowledged for the female I am WITHOUT makeup, than for being female WITH makeup”, because even drag queens can do that. Is it just me wondering where Justin has gone……hmmmmmmmmmm or who might be the person behind the “WangmyChuck in your face” moniker. Just a fleeting thought. After all, despite identifying as a cis gay male with a soft demeanor, his sentiments were not far from that of “WangMyChuck in your face” coward.

            As you say, the Radfeminists want no discussion but a rant and want full participation, so long as trans persons are excluded, neither to be seen nor heard. Perhaps they have really been victims of horrible rape. Using their own standard though, all women are presumed to be guilty of drowning their offspring, because haven’t “some” women perpetrated such a horrific crime?

          • marti386 says:

            “Then, once we realize we pass, we tone it down! I have always told others “I would much rather be acknowledged for the female I am WITHOUT makeup, than for being female WITH makeup”, because even drag queens can do that.”

            Yeah, once I realized I passed fine without the extras, I was free to be me: a woman. 🙂

            Of course the joke was I had been passing for years before I even transitioned. I never really passed as male, even when I was still presenting as one. I always got strange looks in the men’s rooms. 😀

            Which is the point radfems always miss. I was NEVER a “man who is passing as a woman”. I was a woman who could never pass for a man. 😀

          • christian_transgender says:

            You don’t say……like many other men I see in different places who also barely pass as men. The differences between males and females exist and are very real, however said differences can on an individual basis be chasms apart or but inches for both men and women. For example I am 5″ 10″ and with a husky built but no Adam’s Apple and no need for Facial Fem, at least what I have been told. I have no problem accepting if I am wrong though. Since 2008, though I’ve never been questioned using my now-gender appropriate facility, unlike others I have talked to so must be some truth to it.

          • marti386 says:

            “For example I am 5″ 10″ and with a husky built but no Adam’s Apple and no need for Facial Fem, at least what I have been told”

            Yeah, me too. I’m 5’2″, with a small frame and slender wrists. No adam’s apple. I had a gender neutral face to begin with, which really responded well to the hormones. I’m blond and didn’t have much body hair to begin with. I was really lucky to have passing privilege. I know many trans women have problems in that area.

            I think that with the advent of the internet, and current medical thinking, trans women who don’t pass will eventually become a thing of the past. Children are transitioning as early as 5 or 6. They’re getting testosterone blockers before puberty. I think trans girls like Coy Mathis and the Nicole Maines and Jazz Jennings are the future of trans women.

            Which makes me wonder what will the new excuse be that radfems try to claim to exclude trans women. When they can’t claim trans girls don’t have “shared girlhood”. When they can’t claim trans women get “male privilege”. It should be interesting. 😀

          • christian_transgender says:

            home run on all points……..yes……this is why no matter how do or do not pass I know that had all of us transitioned before or during puberty as you say we wouldn’t pose the phantom threat that we are told we are based only on an eye candy subjective test. Absolutely we will become the exception and not the norm. I don’t look back but instead make my transition count by doing absolutely all I can for the trans children motivated by the joy that they will enter adulthood already in their proper identified gender, unlike we who had to transition as adults. This is the only way our late transition can count toward the greater good. Radfems are truly spooked probably for the reasons we have discussed however under no circumstances do I consider it permissible to target any human or group in a malevolent and destructive matter. No way. Conduct unbecoming a civilized human being is without any excuse, whoever the perp is.

          • christian_transgender says:

            Wow! Extremely well said! To paraphrase you, in our midst are gay and lesbian “wolves” who claim that a drag queen is a drag queen no matter what we call ourselves. Rage aside, and given the vast verifiable differences between body fix-up and body dress-up, how could they expect to be even remotely credible by discarding such facts? The answer is the same since life began: rage is so blinding and so acute that it impedes the ability to rationalize with intellect but like an incorrigible juvenile, seeks to impose its will in a “do-as-I say” because I rule the world cantankerous fit.

          • Justin Allen Norwood says:

            How about the end game is that People, with the exception of Intersex people, are male or female? Game over.

          • marti386 says:

            “How about the end game is that People, with the exception of Intersex people, are male or female?”

            Umm, that’s pretty much what trans people are saying, People are male and female.

            Me? I’m female. Have been as long as I can remember. The fact I was born with boy genitalia doesn’t change that. Because I am SO much more than the sum of my parts.

            Game over.

          • Cristan says:

            >No, I’m a real person, not a “sock”. Facebook me.
            I get that this new Disqus account has assumed this identity. Send me a FB message from the JAN FB account. Either way, you do not deny the fact that this new Disqus account has been used to only engage on this SFGN article.

            >I’ve asserted that Trans women are male
            I know you have. You are mistaken and I also know that you truly believe that you’re right.

            >We agree. Gender is actually not biological.
            The notion that one’s subjective experience of their physical sex, their complex contextualization of that experience and their ability to communicate that experience is divorced from one’s neurology, endocrine expression, genetics and/or epigenetics is laughable. I know that you have faith that the mind exists outside the biological reality of a human body, but it doesn’t. Sorry, I won’t drink the dualism koolaid.

            >Gender is an oppressive and repressive social construct.
            Yeah, you’re talking about the FAAB/MAAB binary. Gender is more than just that and yes, I know that you disagree.

            >Please, you’re just as “righeteous” as I am.
            You don’t dispute my statement. Thanks for the honesty.

          • Justin Allen Norwood says:

            Sent you an FB message, and yes, I admit this is a new account.

          • “I know that you have faith that the mind exists outside the biological reality of a human body, but it doesn’t. Sorry, I won’t drink the dualism koolaid.”

            (applauds)

          • Friesjones says:

            Well I did the Google thing and you DID come up on a site called “WhinyDudes” so I guess it all checks out, you sure seem to fit the description they have of you there from last August:

            http://whineydudes.blogspot.com/2013/08/justin-allen-norwood-self-proclaimed.html

          • christian_transgender says:

            I applaud your passion, however flawed at times. If trans women are male, how then do we get to update our sex from male to female on legal documents? Based on personal opinion or medical fact? The only way this can occur is if trans women [were] male, not [are]. Of course if the perspective is on genitalia, that has no bearing on gender transitions, legally. I do agree with you that gender is an oppressive and repressive social construct, which is why here http://wp.me/1hX86 I toggle my header line with “life beyond gender polarity”. Gender does lend itself to a patriarchal society in that straight males have and continue to oppress females.

            I do remind you though that for those of us with either a strong male or female identity, despite birth sex, it is as innate a sense of identity as being human. No one knows the cause and I think no one ever will, short of isolating one’s personality.

          • Justin Allen Norwood says:

            I followed your blog! Will be interested in reading it.

          • marti386 says:

            “Knowing male and female isn’t trolling”

            Maybe not, but coming to a trans website to spread your bullshit IS trolling. Telling people to “fuck off” IS trolling. Reducing the complexity of trans people’s lives to simplistic binary statements like “male is penis” IS trolling.

            You are, in short, the very definition of a troll.

            Nobody asked you here, Justin. If you don’t agree with the “trans umbrella” then get the hell out from under it.

            And don’t blame US when you get soaked.

          • Justin Allen Norwood says:

            Soaked with what?
            Trans theory is homophobic, and gay men and lesbians are waking up to that.

          • marti386 says:

            Pointing out that the “LGBT” has had history of coming up short on actually helping the “T”, isn’t “homophobic”. Asking you assholes to stop attacking my existence isn’t “homophobic”.

            Try waking up to THAT, and maybe we’ll have something to talk about.

          • Justin Allen Norwood says:

            Maybe you should have your own little movement and leave us orientation folks alone? TQABCWTF. You can have that. Our struggles are not the same, the lumping is bullshit.

          • marti386 says:

            Actually. my troubles are COMPLETELY the same.

            As a trans woman who passes well, I’m abused by the patriarchy the same way a cis woman is. I face the same misogyny, the same lesser pay scale, the same sexual harassment as cis women. My struggle is the same as cis women. And although I may not have a womb, I totally stand by my cis sisters for their right to choice over their own bodies.

            It’s just a shame you can’t extend the same choice to MY body.

            As a trans woman who is lesbian and is currently involved with a cis woman, I’m also abused by the patriarchy for being a lesbian. I get the same looks, the same abuse, the same chance of being discriminated against, or assaulted. So my struggles ARE the same as other lesbians.

            It’s true that as trans, I face even MORE struggles than a cis lesbian woman would. But that’s beside the point. I have MORE than enough common struggles to be included with you.

            Sorry Justin, but the “T” in LGBT is here to stay. You asked for us to join you. Now you’re stuck with us. And being a member of your group means you need think about OUR needs too, not just yours.

          • Justin Allen Norwood says:

            The gay community has had missteps in the past. Nambla comes to mind, We use to support them too.

          • marti386 says:

            Comparing trans women’s lives (which cause no harm to you) to a pedophile advocacy group is really low, dude. Way to prove you’re not a troll.

          • Justin Allen Norwood says:

            I’m just saying- We have made mistakes. Taking on gender identity people under the wing of our movement is one of those mistakes.

          • Kathy11 says:

            It’s true – YOU oppressed kids before and it was pretty vile. Now you’re making another mistake by oppressing trans people and it’s pretty vile.

            plus ca change

          • Max Vincent says:

            OUR MOVEMENT?? OUR MOVEMENT? Enough of this fucking shit. Sit down, little boy. You do not have enough hair on your entire body to call it “our movement.” You would do very fucking well to remember there is a whole lot of history before you began breast-feeding and before you were a gleam in your father’s eye. I am tired and very fucking annoyed with these children who waltz around Facebook and claim that they are tired from all of the movement work they are doing. Coattail riders and wanna-bes. Sit the hell down and learn some history and find out that you are dead last in a struggle that has been going on for hundreds of years. And then come and talk to me about a movement. BAH.

          • Justin Allen Norwood says:

            Yes, gay men and lesbians have a movement that others have attached themselves on to it.You want to talk about riding coattails? And I’m 29, when does one get credit from that shade you’re throwing about supposed aged? 40? 50?

          • MarekT says:

            Actually, your grasp of history is completely backwards. Trans people- trans women in particular- started the gay rights movement. Eventually, lazy bigoted cis people started trying to force us out because we were ‘holding them back’, and they’re still at it today. Being twenty-nine is no excuse for running around spewing fiction as though it’s fact, and I imagine people would be willing to give you some credit if you could show that you actually know what you’re talking about 🙂

          • Kathy11 says:

            I’d wager good money there’s quite a few LGB folks who would be just as happy if you started your own little Norwood Trolling Front.

          • Justin Allen Norwood says:

            Say’s the suspiciously aggressive trolly person.

          • Kathy11 says:

            Aggressive would be my coming to your place and telling a whole group of people who they REALLY ARE. Instead of listening to them and respecting them.

            Perhaps something like – “gay “men” have been shown to have genetics as the basis for being gay – they’re not really normal men. They’re intersex. And according to what Justin says – they’re not men per se at all – they perhaps should be allowed to be considered men or women, depending. It requires consideration. And their history with supporting nambla shows their questionable safety in rest rooms around kids. That kind of distorted thinking may be endemic to the condition.

            But, access to facilities with real men and boys? That requires some thought.

            And as Prof. Bailey states in the news stories today about the gay gene – parents should be given as much information as possible about this condition so they can make abortion decisions.”

            Now – that’s aggressive douchebaggery on a par with your standards.

          • Max Vincent says:

            No; I don’t think so. Maybe you quasi-strugglers will quit fucking around with those off us who are covered in sweat and blood from all of the struggles we HAVE been through so that you can have the privilege you enjoy now. You wouldn’t know what a struggle was if it bit you in your lily-white ass. Sit down while our train is still moving.

          • christian_transgender says:

            As a female person, with a trans history (in my past), within the same timeline I have been overtly offended and disparaged (transphobia) twice: by gay men. How many times by straight men? Zero.

          • Max Vincent says:

            I call bullshit and am telling you this now: you are trolling and just because you do not like the responses to your pithy questions, you do not get to call homophobia like the boy who cried “Wolf!”. Remember well what happened to him, Justin–I am, for one, tired of all the lame crap I seem to get lately from gay men and lesbians who have no freaking clue what it is like to exist in a Trans person’s body and have a Trans mind. Just because you don’t have what it takes to be Trans, well, don’t hate us because we are what you can never be. You are born with it: you either have it or you don’t. Since you don’t, and all of these fine folks on this thread have expended all of this wonderful energy on trying to make you understand something that you are unwilling, or unable to do, well, Justin, that is all on YOU. I, for one, have no more time to waste on trying to make you see that you are hanging out with the wrong folks and they are filling your head with foolishness but you are an adult and will have to realize that on your own. Sitting on this thread and trying to negate all that you are being told, and from the hearts of everyone here, well, it just isn’t getting to you and that is disheartening. You constantly throw up TERF-ish roadblocks designed to thwart each and every attempt to try and make you understand how it is that you are viewing situations from cis-colored glasses and you can’t seem to gain a tenuous grasp no matter what. I’m done. Good luck to you, Justin, for you certainly will need it down the road when your cis-glasses are ripped from your eyes and you will be forced to unlearn everything that is being taught to you now.

          • Kathy11 says:

            Purposely conflating gender identity (or gender orientation as some are referring to it more of late), gender and gender role is trolling. One’s inborn sense of being male or female isn’t equal to either gender or gender role.

            It’s also something becoming more well documented to be correlated to physical determinants. Sex reversed brain structures. Though not just brain structures. Other physical indicators like digit length and of course epigenetic factors.

            Much like sexual orientation has been shown in some studies to be associated with sex revered brain structures – making the etiology of sexual orientation conceptually a subset of trans development.

          • christian_transgender says:

            Your honesty is refreshing and at no time am I targeting you for engagement, because passionate honesty is far better than hypocritical dishonesty. You are absolutely correct that “male lesbian and gay female” are oxymorons. In fact this is such a true statement that it stands alone as a given even if never mentioned.

            Here’s the “big butt”:……since trans females are legally considered female (documents post-transition, and since documents must reflect one of two genders/sex, trans females who sexually prefer females can only be lesbian. Likewise trans males that are post-transition. Your 2nd sentence does reflect not legal fact but ubiquitous opinion outside of trans circles which is hardly a secret. Simply stated, under law and medicine, where experts are housed, and which is where it matters the most, for over 60 years now, it is possible to be an ex-male or ex-female. Sorry but true.

            I am not so deluded however to not acknowledge that in our world there exist those that declare and believe that “once a Smith, always a Smith” even if married and neither will I deny the existence of those who proclaim “once a male, always a male” either. The DNA & biology arguments seem credible except that that is not where gender identity or personality reside. Gender identity is an intricate part of our inner essence—call it soul, spirit, core.

      • Lisa Harney says:

        Yeah, you’re basically full of shit. Like most cisgender people you are worse than ignorant about trans people and have no idea what you’re talking about when you try to engage us.

        It appears to me that you’re simply reflexively spreading hate against trans women, and not engaged in anything that would even pretend to want to resemble rational, logical discussion. I strongly suggest you find something significantly more productive to do with your time, like maybe ripping out your own fingernails with plyers and then eating them.

        • Justin Allen Norwood says:

          Fuck off. I’m not even “Cis” gender. Thanks for the violent rhetoric by the way.

          • Cristan says:

            Do you mean that you’re trans or do you mean *As a non-trans person, I assert that the pop-retronym ‘cisgender’ can’t apply to me since I know I get to term isn’t real*?

          • Justin Allen Norwood says:

            Technically I do actually fall under Trans *. I don’t like the umbrella, but it’s been opened.

          • Cristan says:

            Gotcha. You’re talking about the way some have pointed that out. At the same time, it’s not an identity you actually claim, right? Unless used for a rhetorical point, you’re not going to identify with that term and at the same time, you’re not going to identify with cis, either, yes?

            You feel there are males and females as defined by “sex” which is determined by reproductive potential ad the XX/XY binary,Everyone needs to get on board with identifying with these terms because it’s just reality, yes? Gender isn’t real, but the FAAB/MAAB binary is totally real, right?

          • Justin Allen Norwood says:

            I think Intersex people are real, and a unique category of people, most people who transition are not intersex though.
            I don’t claim an identity, I am who I am, and if that means being non-masculine, make-up wearing, etc. that’s what it means. By default I’m not cis, but I don’t need to be under that umbrella, because it is also offensive. I think most of us can ID who is male or female. This isn’t something that is made up.

          • Cristan says:

            Can a IS person truthfully claim to be male or female?

            >I don’t claim an identity… I think most of us can ID who is male or female.

            You will not claim cis or trans and we need to respect that and yet, one’s identity as male or female is conferred upon them by others (you).

          • Justin Allen Norwood says:

            I’m very willing to have a dialogue, but we have to understand for me to exist as a gay male there has to be a such thing as male. I hope you understand why I find this all very worrisome.

          • Cristan says:

            Is an IS person who identifies as a gay male a gay male?

          • Justin Allen Norwood says:

            I respect whatever IS people choose. But again the majority of transitioners are not intersexed people.

          • Cristan says:

            Interesting. You respect “whatever IS people choose” when they transition, but do not extend the same respect to trans people; if an IS person transitioned to a gay male, that doesn’t threaten your self-identity even if they have a vagina.

          • Justin Allen Norwood says:

            IS people are in a really unique position, that differs from trans people. Trans people like to use that narrative, which I actually would think would be offensive to real IS people. But absolutely. If I knew an IS individual and they wanted to/felt they were actually a gay man I would accept them as that.

          • Cristan says:

            >If I knew an IS individual and they wanted to/felt they were actually a gay man I would accept them as that.

            What about chromosomes and reproductive systems? Aren’t they the single standard you use when you privilege yourself to confer a sex-based identity upon other people?

          • christian_transgender says:

            but Justin, intersexed people are yes, physically very real. The thing is that gender, as evidenced by all of us who suffered gender angst growing up, exists in spite of sex…….this is why it baffles many but clearly there is more going on in our makeup that causes gender angst. The problem is that the cause still remains elusive but our angst does not.

          • Kathy11 says:

            Yes – we must understand that in any discussion that your needs (and identity as a male and a gay male) must be met – and never challenged – all others are …..less worrisome.You’re rather fragile, aren’t you?

            Your identity can’t even be discussed. Worrisome. But – no need to contemplate you others’ identities may be as important to them? And that others feeling entitled to question them and determine them for them might seem equally ….worrisome? Well, typically male entitled is more on target.

            You are the master of everyone’s universe. And they have no right to question yours. Who do they think they are?

          • Max Vincent says:

            It’s all about you, isn’t it, Justin? And yet the world would still be 24 hours long (on this planet anyway) should you perish tomorrow…

          • Justin Allen Norwood says:

            No, but I’m not really keen on homosexual people being erased by your queer theories.

          • christian_transgender says:

            The “umbrella” is problematic…..even I am not sure who among us stands underneath it, but I think its more of a schematic than reality anyway.

          • christian_transgender says:

            Yes most of us can ID others based on perceived gender however the stereotypical perception of females revolves around being small-framed, often petite, below 5″ 8″ and for males it is large-framed, broad shoulders, above 5″ 8″. This however typifies Caucasians. As a Latina (bi-racial, bi-sexual, bi-lingual and yes bi-gendered in history) I am around many female Hispanics who defy the above stereotypes and sadly many are overweight which further disfigures a female figure.

            I am also around female blacks who also don’t fit the stereotype including shoe size. Depending on genetics, many females would appear male if they lost their hair and many males would appear as females if they grew their hair. I do understand though what you are addressing: many trans adults who don’t pass the “gender test.” The reason for this is because many of us, self included, grew up decades before the internet revealed a solution to our gender angst. Trans children of today are proving by their extremely successful results that trans adults are the sex/gender we say we are, as echoed by most here, despite the ravages of a puberty “gone wrong.”

          • Let’s be clear.

            You were assigned male at birth and you identify as male.

          • Wangchuck says:

            Who’s the arbitrator who assigns the genders? Jesus? Buddha?

            Also, if gender is a social construct, how do you know which social construct you were born as?

          • When did I ever say gender was a social construct?

          • christian_transgender says:

            Sad, very very sad, that rage knows no bounds. It sees threats that aren’t there, despite tossing out verbal molotov cocktails; it sees words that aren’t there, despite written in plain English. It feigns ignorance in a last-gasp provocative attempt to incite conflict, while playing the victim. In fact rage is so blinding that it forgets simple things such as “doctors assign sex at birth” and so blinding that it pretends not to read that Justin himself identifies as a gay male; it also pretends not to know the common fact that socially, gender is defined within a culture context and differently depending on historical timeline.

            Not only does such rage create such self-delusion but it is so severe that faceless icons are accompanied by an overtly false monicker such as “Wangchuck.” All that aside though, and given the obvious that at no time is there an attempt at objective dialogue, what drives her to not only reveal who she is by her own words but to actually believe that her incite filled commentary is worthy of any replies beyond that of calling her out? Her only intent, given her porous foundation, is obviously to “hit, run and hide.” hoping that we take the bait and continue to engage her, which is as futile as trying to ascend Jacob’s ladder.

          • Wangchuck says:

            Who (mis)assigns the genders at birth?

          • marti386 says:

            “You were assigned male at birth and you identify as male.”

            I was assigned male at birth once, but I flunked that assignment. 😀

          • LOL, me too. =)

            People on the Internet keep asking me to retake it, and I always wonder why they care more about me passing it than I do.

          • Lisa Harney says:

            But you’ve been dealing violent rhetoric all over this comments page. Calling a trans woman a man or a male is an act of violence, just as focusing on trans women’s genitals completely ignores the realities of being a trans woman.

            Also, the way you’re positioning intersex people as “the good ones” relative to trans people is really gross. And, hey, I am IS and trans.

            Whether or not you are cis, you are – similarly to the majority of cis people – completely ignorant about trans women’s lived realities. Instead – again similarly to the majority of cis people – you substitute your ignorance and assert them as facts about trans women.

            This basically makes you a horrible person.

            Also, rejecting gender doesn’t make you trans, and “trans*” is appropriative and meaningless.

          • MarekT says:

            Wow, that’s like using a (hypothetical) case where a straight couple is denied a marriage license because the woman’s ‘too butch’ to claim that there’s no such thing as heterosexual privilege. Funny how you people are such militant potty-policers until it’s one of yours getting mistaken for one of ours, and then somehow it’s supposed to be ‘different’ all of a sudden… It’s certainly a very unfortunate case, but it’s also exactly the outcome you’re after, so I don’t know why you have an issue with it.

          • Justin Allen Norwood says:

            Actually gender non-conforming people are often treated in similar ways. This isn’t some rare case.

          • MarekT says:

            If you were to read my comment, you’d notice that I never said anything about how often gender-policing happens. Congratulations on completely missing my point, which is that arbitrary discrimination based on physical appearance is exactly what the potty panic crowd wants. You don’t get to use the cis victims of your movement to claim that cis privilege doesn’t exist.

          • Justin Allen Norwood says:

            No, you’re missing my point, you engaged me. What point are you trying to make? Wanting to abolish gender and let people live freely without a second look isn’t something to scoff at. What I’m wanting is an answer to that though. How does she get cis privilege? How do many of us people who do not conform to gender roles get cis privilege?

          • MarekT says:

            In this case, nobody’s demanding that the student’s medical history be made public as part of the story. She doesn’t have to present a convincing narrative of ‘always knowing’ that she was a girl to justify her presence in women’s spaces. Nobody’s advocating that she should be sterilized before she’s allowed in the girls’ room, and the vast majority of people are horrified at the idea of the school administration forcing her in with the guys because she doesn’t look enough like a girl to them. There isn’t a society-wide meme painting her as A) a lying, predatory freak for wanting to use the bathroom that corresponds with her identity, or B) a stalking horse for other predators who want to enter the space she uses.

            I don’t understand why you’re having so much trouble seeing how advocating for gender-policed washrooms leads to… gender-policing in washrooms. How much more simple can I possibly make it for you?

            Since privilege works on a case-by-case basis, your last question is best answered by learning how cis privilege works so that you can see how it applies to your life. Unlike you, I try not to make assumptions about people on the internet. Oh, and while we’re on the subject, I’m very much not a ‘gender-abolitionist’, thanks. It’s a major TERF obsession, though, so why not ask them about it?

          • christian_transgender says:

            Oh just to clarify some of my other posts, I am also not a gender abolitionist. I toggle my blog header with “Life beyond the gender polarity”. Translation: gender is not a two-polar “thing” but is on a spectrum….far different than no gender at all which will exist as long as infants are born M or F.

          • marti386 says:

            “Wanting to abolish gender and let people live freely without a second look isn’t something to scoff at.”

            Except that’s pretty much a pipe dream, isn’t it? You honestly think the rest of the world is going to give up their gender expression, just so you can wear lipstick and still claim the identity of male? Not gonna happen.

            You can’t stop gender expression, Justin. Hell, (as I’ve said earlier), you guys don’t even have a plan on how to get rid of it. It’s here to stay. Even if you did get rid of it, some NEW form would just rush in to fill the void.

            What you CAN do is get rid of gender roles. You know, the role that says women must look feminine? That men must look masculine? That could be done. It won’t happen overnight, but it is slowly happening. And it has NOTHING to do with my gender expression. Claiming the identity of woman has nothing to do with it.

            Destin identifies as female, which is why she should use the women’s restroom, DESPITE what she looks like. I identify as female, which is why I should use the women’s restroom. Simple.

          • marti386 says:

            **SIGH**

            NO, Justin. That is not an “example of cis privilege”. That is an example of homophobia.

            Are you REALLY that ignorant? Or just that dishonest? Oh wait, you hang out with radfems, so I guess that makes you dishonest.

            I’ve noticed how this story is being used by your radfem cohorts as some kind of attack on trans people. So let me put that silly notion to rest.

            Trans people had nothing to do with this. This was done by cis straight people. She is being punished for being gay. She identifies as a woman. She didn’t ask to use the men’s room, she was forced to.

            Kinda like how you cis people always try to force trans women to use the men’s room. It sorta stinks, doesn’t it?

            If ANYTHING, this is an example of how cis privilege EXISTS, though not in the way you meant. Cis people thinking that they have the right to decide for someone else what their identity is, and where they should belong.

            GEE, where have I heard THAT before?

          • To be fair, he has not heard of Janice Raymond. Nor has he heard of Sheila Jeffries’ campaign to get medical transition declared a human rights violation.

            His knowledge of TERF ideology is pretty limited – so I think he’s just caught up in something and being fed selected bits of the whole picture. I’m hoping that the more he finds out about what all this is, the more he’ll begin to wonder what he’s gotten himself involved in.

          • The young woman in question believes that people need to stop gender policing people in restrooms – and she explicitly includes trans people.

            When you subscribe to gender policing for *any* reason, it hurts women.

            Try again.

        • Friesjones says:

          Lisa, the reason this kid is so bamboozled by TERF hate for trans women is because he’s been fed a bunch of poison by Julian Vigo and her type over at this FB Transphobia Promotion Page: https://www.facebook.com/groups/genderdiscusssion/

      • translegalhistorian says:

        Have a nice day!

      • christian_transgender says:

        No one word owns a singular definition—“lesbian” is no different. We don’t hide the common knowledge that many of us are pre-op. They are considered privates for a reason and is a private matter between partners. Most of us would be post-op were it not for surgery remaining elusive due to lack of $ from discriminatory job loss coupled with lack of insurance coverage.

        Females with penises are all around us and so are males with vaginas. Nothing new there. Legally, opinions notwithstanding, sex can and is changed every day. The result is a real medical & legal reality that many females do have penises…another very real definition of lesbian, albeit in a different context. We also know that perspective, like perception is often reality…one persons Parmesan cheese is another person’s rug deodorant.

  2. Max Vincent says:

    It is quite sad, actually, when a lawyer is allowed to blatantly hate like this and isn’t disciplined by the Bar Association or their employers. Why someone like this is allowed to run rampant, unchecked, without repercussion, is a mystery. I often wonder on whose time this lawyer posts these remarks–their own or their employers? Because, after all, we know who is actually behind GIW. It’s no secret. People call out Putin and his iron-handedness over what is going on in Sochi; we have our own Putin right here, folks: who’s looking up THEIR skirt and doing sex checks (that’s right, GIW–gender is between your ears, not your legs: that’s where your sex is)?? Who appointed them keeper of the bathroom gates? I daresay that SPLC would do well to take a second, hard look at this group and reconsider their non-action in naming them a hate group.

  3. christian_transgender says:

    Since we live in a society that is fully clothed, summer time excluded of course ; , I continue to remain baffled by the failed and futile (as demonstrated by repetitive legal trans successes) attempt to discredit transgender issues at thigh level rather than eye level. Our privates in and of themselves are not legally culpable for any crime absent lewd and lascivious intent, even less so for a UCR Part I crime such as forcible rape. This is why this incessant focus on trans* persons at thigh level speaks more about the observer than the observed; there simply is no legal standing or merit behind such arguments that seek to criminalize transgender persons: and there will never be so long as we remain a closed, strike that, clothed society.

    Let us not forget the common definition of insanity: repetitive and duplicate like efforts expended with the expectation of achieving a uniquely different result. Ironically, as we are perennially described as “nuts”, it is they who repetitively and with duplicate efforts labor intensely to seek legal victory against we who are transgender, from blow-job level focus. How they forget that sexual proclivities and gender are as far away from each other as sanity and them. Perhaps they know the futility of arguing what is in our mind—our gender personality as I call it—something another mind can truly never know. It is now time for them to also acknowledge the futility of arguing about what is between our thighs. Of course we know better than to expect a uniquely different result from their repetitive, duplicate efforts. Sticks and stones may not break bones, but sticks and clones (white kerchiefs) will break hearts—TERF hearts.

  4. Wangchuck says:

    Not a hate group. Someone who is entitled to their opinion. I don’t think transsexualism exists except as defined by Dr Ray Blanchard and science, not emotionally charged invective and accusations of hidden agendas on science’s part to deny trans a place or whatever.

    • Kathy11 says:

      It’s darling that you think science is about belief and want to hitch your wagon to a dead star. What are your beliefs regarding phlogiston?

      • Wangchuck says:

        Dead star? Who? You mean the guy who is currently chair of a subcommittee regarding sexual paraphilias on the DSM-IV, Ray Blanchard?

        • MarekT says:

          You mean that guy who thinks that trans people’s genders are paraphilic by default? Sorry, I wouldn’t trust Blanchard to accurately report the colour of his own bellybutton lint.

          • christian_transgender says:

            ha ha funny……if Blanchard is so reputable, why haven’t I heard of him? Is he so deeply insignificant that only a “deep net” search will flush him out?

          • He’s largely responsible for authoring the paraphilias section in the DSM

            His is not the go to opinion on Gender Dysphoria, however. Even the rest of the DSM committee seems to have problems with his theories.

          • christian_transgender says:

            Oh, I see. He feels it his calling to stigmatize a medically necessary issue for millions around the world. I think this fixation on our genitals by non-trans persons needs to be added to said paraphilias. Certainly it is trans-fetish and sex-centric.

            I don’t know about others’ perspective but for me the DSM has a credibility issue, having essentially confessed (grateful though) to two very serious misdiagnoses): that being gay/lesbian and trans were mental disorders that evaporated faster than the ink on their updated DSM bibles. This very fact should bind LGB and T closer than we seem to be. BTW, I admire your tenacity, bravado, civility, and knowledge!

          • Thank you.

            > I think this fixation on our genitals by non-trans persons needs to be added to said paraphilias.

            Hah! Girl, you are so right about that! =)

            As far as the LGBT umbrella, I find it problematic. I prefer GSM, (gender and sex minorities) or GSRM (gender, sex, and romantic minorities) if we’re lumped together at all.

            Mostly though I believe that trans rights aren’t so much a gay issue as they are a feminist issue.

            This is certainly an unpopular position, even here, but it’s one I’ve come to hold pretty firmly.

          • christian_transgender says:

            Hmmmm, I love those acronyms! I am all for dropping the trans prefix as it shares syllables with trans/vestite which incurs lots of confusion. As far as sex, I think that sex is sex and the target of intimate affection is one’s private business. I share the same view that trans rights and gay rights have more in difference than similarities, supported now by history as we look up over and over only to be staring at the underside of a bus. Definitely our issues are a feminist issue, especially since our choice of mate exceeds the ability to be neatly boxed as gay, lesbian or straight.

          • > especially since our choice of mate exceeds the ability to be neatly boxed as gay, lesbian or straight.

            I sort of agree. If you’re including “trans*” identities, including genderqueer then yes.

            Transsexual*** women are women though, and if they are exclusively into men (cis or trans) that makes them straight.

            I certainly feel you as far as people confusing transvestite and transsexual or transgender.

            I read the subtext of your statements about sex as you not caring for the fact that being trans is sexualized and I totally agree.

            ***Personally, for me transsexual is how I self identify. It’s specific, and precise enough to use, even in a clinical setting. I have no use for the transgender label for a number of reasons, but largely because it’s colloquial. To each their own though. I’ll use the transgender term when it’s warranted but I don’t self identify with it, and I tend to avoid using the term when I can. Definitely some people here have a problem with that, but I’m not a TS separatist and I don’t agree with them.

          • christian_transgender says:

            Wholehearted agreement. When I found out that transgender as a label included even my pet poodle in a dress, I too became alarmed. There is such a thing as under extending and over extending. For example, the label Hispanic which includes me really says nothing, perhaps that I speak Spanish which I do fluently and read it also, although never as proficient as a native. Racially though I am Caucasian/Italian and native American (Central Mexico region)…….not sure of tribe…..perhaps Aztec.

            Transgender and Hispanic are over extended labels…..and ya for those of us who have in fact changed our sex (surgery or not), transsexual is the technical accurate label. The reason I tend to use transgender, although problematic, is because it seems that more often than not it is commonly accepted media parlance to describe even transsexuals.

          • My son is Mixtec (the last empire to fall to the Aztecs before the Mexico territory was taken by the Spanish). He’s from the state of Oaxaca in southern Mexico, and does not speak Spanish. He speaks Mixtec and he’s still working on his English.

          • christian_transgender says:

            Wow! Many fail to realize that the Native Americans in that area, despite ruthless in religious worship which was not unusual for civilizations world-wide in that epoch, that they had a far more advanced native population than their Northern counterparts. Even today, as you state, Native American tribes thrive territorially retaining their heritage, culture and above all language.

            To think that Mixtec is still an active language! I hearken (parents) from the state of Jalisco, and my mom states that we are not far removed from being related to Vicente Fernandez (my half brother shares that surname) and in fact both of my parents are from the same geographical area as he. I am not a celebrity hound so means nothing to me. I wish I could trace my roots from my father’s side which include an Italian heritage as well. He had a striking similarity to John Gotti but with a darker complexion. In fact, I just saw John Gotti’s pic in his early youth and it was like I was seeing myself, lol. My other side hails from Spain with blue eyes in my immediate family. In fact I am 1st generation (born here) and at 18 I enlisted in the USAF in gratitude.

          • My boo is one of the few non-native speakers of the language. I’m learning it but it’s difficult.

            I love the language, though. It’s so beautiful.

            One of the ways to say “I love you”, loosely translated, means “it hurts knowing you.”

            That’s so true.

            We have a sizable population of Mixtecs living in our area. We’re trying to get the schools to provide materials for the Mixtec kids to be able to gain native language literacy. We’ve made inroads on that in this past year. We managed to create some books with native Mixtec folk tales and get them placed in the local libraries, which is the first step to getting the schools to adopt them – short of getting an actual publisher, which isn’t going to happen for anything Mixtec, unfortunately.

          • christian_transgender says:

            Wow! I hope the language never dies. I’m gonna read up on Mixtec because the fact that it precedes the Aztec civilization and still lingers is amazing. Thank you for all that you do because for all I know I am maybe descended from Mixtec…..I think that most of my heritage is from Spain and just love my Native American heritage.

          • Wangchuck says:

            “why haven’t I heard of him?”

            Who cares what you think? You’re just a transvestite weirdo who wears woman’s clothes.

          • christian_transgender says:

            First of all, now I see why as a coward you hide behind some indecipherable icon. Second of all, what little credibility you had just self-evaporated because like most trans–haters meaningful dialogue quickly devolves into ad-hominem speech—proving your real and malevolent intent. Lest you think I am not being honest and forthright I direct you to your gutless icon, then take a look at mine. Look closely and despite my features, one thing is missing: fear. How dare you come into a forum where civility, patience and your continued presence reveals that we are a tolerating bunch, unlike your ilk and associated sites that contain meaningful discussion so long as trans persons aren’t included?

            That is me…….the real me…..a military veteran with years dealing with real criminals who despite being on the opposite side of my silver bracelets, possessed courage far beyond what little you might have had. Unlike you, my pic reveals that I fear no one, and never will; I have faced fearful situations, many that have taken the lives of others and almost mine, on CA freeways, highways and byways, LA County “no-mans lands” where violence is the norm not the exception, and countless other venues that shall remain private, over and over so many times that fear and I share no common or personal space. Juxtapose that with losers like you who lack maturity beyond a 5th grader, and finding themselves unable to articulate their point of dialogue begin to get violent…in case you think otherwise, read your last sentence. I am sure that is what you would tell face to face and nose to nose to someone in person and expect to leave unscathed (referred to as combative words).

            Your personal attack on me proves that you are not here to have a
            discussion but to bully trans persons and for that I recommend to the
            moderator that you have earned a ticket to the ———-[EXIT].

          • Wangchuck says:

            1.) Just because I don’t have my face on the internet, doesn’t make me a coward. In fact, given the NSA scandals and dossiers being kept on American citizens, I suspect that makes me smarter than the average sheeple. (P.S: my icon is the album cover for the Washington DC-based neo-lounge group Thievery Corporation, I suggest you to check out their music, but then again given who you are, I don’t expect good taste out of you)

            2.) I don’t have any sympathy for your sob story

            3.) Lol, threatening me with violence? Is that how you think real women act as you meticulously prepared and planned your gender presentation?

          • Sheeple?

            LOL

            I have leftovers with more intellectual wherewithal than you.

          • Kathy11 says:

            Obviously you’ve never met my sister in law who jumped on a 6’4″ guys’ back in a bar fight. Or any woman who takes martial arts – or knows the history of how the Celts went into battle & how much it scared the Romans.

            Wait – you’re against gender, right?

            Very clever boy – the NSA will never guess who you are if you use something else as your avatar.

            So – why is the NSA after you wangchucksteak?

          • christian_transgender says:

            Talk about reinforcing social constructs…….the reason females in civilized society have been domesticated to the point of submission, subservience and to subordinate role is so that men can have their way with us………..historically women have been as tough as men quite often, even braver. In fact the perception that as women we are all vulnerable in “female spaces” is further bolstered by this perception of us as weaklings.

            So far the only constructive comment from “Wang my Chuck” has been that only women belong in female spaces. As females, I and others here wholeheartedly do agree? What then is the point of hostility and contention?

            Signed: still waiting for the message to arrive after the verbal beatdown.

          • You make empty threats to random people on the Internet.

            You’re *definitely* a coward, tiny little man.

          • christian_transgender says:

            and that’s for *real*…….as in *real* cowards as properly and objectively defined…..they taunt, provoke, seek to enrage, then when called out for provocative speech, then when corralled and in a bi-polar way they go from offense to defense, roll over on their back, and lay a “victim” card on their yellow belly.

          • I wasn’t aware that you were “in drag”

            But you certainly did threaten me.

            > …Or else

            LOL

            Everyone can read what you wrote. You know that right?

          • Why are you reifying gender?

            Wearing “women’s clothes” doesn’t even make sense. Whoever buys clothes, they’re their own clothes, whether they’re men, or women.

            You’re sexist and creepy.

        • Kathy11 says:

          Uh – no I don’t.

          There is a guy by that name on a committee for the DSM-V. But they didn’t put Gender Dysphoria under the paraphilias.

          It is funny – closeted gay man can see sex as the only determinant of behavior. And all sexual variations must be considered disordered.

          Even a blind man could see.

          But yes, dead star. He holds sway over one program in one country in a decidedly shrinking world. He doesn’t even see the majority of trans patients in his own city, He had the benefit for years of something other providers couldn’t match – government funding to support his regressive views. But – with that drying up and trans health being funded again around the world – he’s seen more and more like a holdover from a bygone era best forgotten by his peers pretty much worldwide.

          They’re program will shrivel and die a slow painful death – at least as far as services to and research regarding trans people. It’s been happening for years.

    • christian_transgender says:

      Respectfully and void of “emotionally charged invective and accusations…” I offer my input. Our mere existence stands as prima facie proof that transsexualism exists, your opinion notwithstanding. The fact that we are able to legally transition has long ago laid to rest the opinion that we are invisible or merely “men wearing panties.” Science is both accurate and theory-driven…even contradictory and so it shall always remain. Science will forever be locked into the infinite pursuit of the infinitely elusive.

      Without passing judgement, here in the U.S. all are entitled to opinion, although much opinion lacks first-party experience or knowledge that is critical for credibility. For me, this makes it easy to discount 98% of opinions I read, such as yours. We must remember though that when dialogue that is 2 parts opinion + 1 part vitriol + 1 part misrepresentation of said opinion, regardless of group effectively propagates essentially propaganda that results in hatred of [group X]. That this would not constitute hate is an opinion lacking credibility. Denying that transsexualism exists, regardless of whatever a scientific quack says, effectively demotes us to being mere transvestites who undergo neither a medical journey nor a legal process. No damn wonder we are so hated and accused of invading female areas…..guess what? We agree that transvestites shouldn’t enter female areas either! Transvestites get to take their face and panties off at the end of the day. As trans females, we keep our face on 24/7 and our panties off only while engaging in sex.

      • Wangchuck says:

        “Denying that transsexualism exists, regardless of whatever a scientific quack says, effectively demotes us to being mere transvestites who undergo neither a medical journey nor a legal process”

        I don’t think anyone denies the way you feel, but “homosexual transvestites” and “autogynephilia” is the term used in the DSM-IV and I think it’s completely accurate.

        “We agree Transvestites shouldn’t enter female spaces either!”

        …And most of us think that’s just a ploy to dissassociate yourselves from transvestites in order to access women’s only spaces.

        You know, Cotton Ceiling?

        • christian_transgender says:

          I will risk dignifying your now-putrid credibility which you have labored hard to deserve and earn…….name-calling isn’t necessary when it’s earned…your personal attacks now prove that you, like most critters, crawl at eye level with vermin. Your first sentence reveals an ignorance so deep and inextricable that were it not for supporting ad-hominem gutless utterances I would have an inkling of understanding. Taken together though, you are a coward without excuse…..again attacking someone you have no clue about while hiding behind a faceless icon cannot be described in any other parlance.

          Feelings come and feelings go. Sometimes we feel hungry and sometimes we don’t. Sometimes I “feel” like eating a burger and sometimes I don’t. Sometimes I feel cold and sometimes hot. Feelings can never be trusted for even they can betray body and mind. Ask me what its like to be a black person and I have but one answer: “I really don’t know.” Ask me what its like to be in jail and I have the same answer. Ask me what its like to die and I still don’t know.

          Your 1st sentence sums up all of your ignorance, loathing, and above all your relative ease with attacking transgender persons. Gender Identity “is what it is and so it shall be”…….never ever but ever is it as fickle, wavering, hypothetical, or even as betraying as a mere “feeling.” With the DSM now proven to be as fickle as feelings, unable to determine truth from fiction, proven by necessary reversals…….”oops we were wrong” moments, the fact that you hang your gutless hat on it proves all that I have now discovered about you.

          Another clue to your ignorance? Your loathing assumption that courage is owned only be males which in and of itself is schizophrenic…your rage is so blinding that it fails to take into account brave courageous females in public safety, firefighting, the military and countless other jobs. Your “real woman” utterance and “NSA” excuse for hiding behind your keyboard (as if the internet is not IP-based) reveals that you are neither a “real woman” nor straight but tragically a cowardly wolf in the LGBT coop. Your presence here and footprint reveals more about who you really are and serves to fool only yourself.

          This is my last reply to your faceless icon. The [EXIT] door for cowards is that way————————–> You earned your own way out, sorry excuse for female.

        • Yes, the cotton ceiling is a silly conspiracy dreamed up by you wackos in another attempt to distort and twist a situation and try to pretend something sinister was going on.

          It’s really hard to take you all seriously when you adopt the same faux-victimhood, victim-blaming, and conspiracy peddling tactics as the white nationalists and MRA trolls.

          • christian_transgender says:

            My goodness, their rage knows no boundaries? We think….we think..we believe…..all opinions that matter zilch where it matters the most. Ha ha…….my line of work involved constant checking of IDs…….at no time was it an option to question someone’s sex on an ID, no matter what they looked like, much less perform an invasive panty check outside the restrooms. Their “expertise” rings shallow for what it is: blind rage.

            Again, I agree with disagreement but what eludes me is the futile and desperate attempt that is so deluded that sees crimes before they occur, and supplants their personal opinion “ploy” as superseding recognized sex/gender experts (doctors).
            Aside from acting like erect phallic symbols, their opinions are so far off the reality grid that in truth they are but as you say flaccid wimps.

        • Kathy11 says:

          “Most of us” – just how many of you are there inside there Sybil?

        • Kathy11 says:

          And, no – The DSM IV doesn’t use the terms “autogynophilia” or “homosexual transvestites”.

          Nor does it put gender identity under the same classification as transvestism.

          You know, facts,
          http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DSM-IV_codes
          http://behavenet.com/node/21625

          Is this your personality that didn’t graduate junior high speaking?

  5. christian_transgender says:

    Wow, I am extremely impressed by the civility here by both my trans sisters and Justin, minor instances excepted. This contrasts with when I comment in fake “religious” sites (we know which they are) that are snake pits filled with vipers of the cloth and amount to a one-sided rant. I am further impressed by the brilliance of my trans sisters/brothers.

    I am learning lots and have no real background knowledge about Justin or what he may or may not represent. I have long welcomed a “summit” between those who disagree (like Justin) that a gender transition is possible. I couldn’t disagree more with his posit given actual quantifiable medical/physical development that, even without surgery, prove that secondary sexual characteristics in fact manifest, to our delight. If in fact he is trying to say that we are hybrids, none of us deny our birth history and compromised results due to a post-puberty transition. Respectfully, the opinion that a trans sex change isn’t possible clashes with the fact that judges and doctors disagree.

    Nonetheless, I do agree about patriarchal oppression that too often is the norm and not the exception. I don’t offer wear makeup and still pass more often than not so I too experience its negative influence. What is new to me is that a sex/gender change is considered as “upholding” gender polarity. I suppose in consequence it is, but only because of the only two legal options available: M or F. Again, let’s keep up the discussion because despite disagreement, sitting at the table in constructive dialogue can only result in good.

  6. If the world were just, Cathy Brennan would find herself swarmed by mosquitoes, barefoot in a desert of Lego bricks, next to an outdoor Justin Beiber concert.

    Watch her post this on one of her countless throwaway blogs as an example of “male, anti-women violence”

    • Wangchuck says:

      If the world were just, we’d stop putting lipstick on pigs and calling them beautiful pretty women who are every bit as woman as they say they are!

      …Or else

      • Or else what, tiny little man?

        I don’t take you Internet tough guys seriously. You’re just a punk ass wimp.

        • christian_transgender says:

          Wow are they really that stupid to make such direct threats as that? Do they really possess such blind rage? Are they really failing to realize that internet threats are interstate and thus federally prosecutable? Are they here playing good cop and bad cop continuing to provoke us with personal provocations and to claim self-defense as equivalent to their provocations? Yes, yes, yes and yes.

          Their MO is sadly more obvious than a pimple on a teenagers face: seek out prolific transgender advocates. Identify the most vociferous. Provoke them to a verbal confrontation. Accuse them of the very thing they do. Destroy their reputation and credibility. If only they knew that what they mean for ill, will amount to our good.

          I know that like me, you get stronger not weaker from these character assassins. How utterly embarrassing that whilst you and I hide behind no faceless icons, and stand behind what we say, they do the very opposite, leaving no doubt as to who is on the right side of history.

      • Please, you’re not even good at threatening me. This is how it’s done. And yes, I dox stalkers, and I report to the FBI and your local police.

        • Kathy11 says:

          I wasn’t aware they allowed internet access in prison.

          You will use your right of private action if the feds don’t arrest to file charges, I hope. At the very least a civil suit – if posting from work – include the employer.

      • Kathy11 says:

        We shall destroy gender by upholding its standards. Burma Shave!

        • christian_transgender says:

          oh..meanness knows no bounds does it……..I mean talk about more than deserved reciprocation……what positive value do WMD (Words of Mass Disparagement) have? We can defend ourselves here but poor swine are not able……talk about picking on the vulnerable………

    • christian_transgender says:

      Hilarious! Of course if the world were just it would be void of rage-filled haters who loathe, despise, and disparage the vulnerable for a sport and a living! I am baffled by the juvenile behavior such as the comment below…….I get the disagreement, I really do. Heck, even I disagree with myself sometimes but for an apparent mature adult to behave like a public school bully in the middle of what had been a civil and mutually cordial conversation? What is it with the trans fetish and insanely maddening focus on “real” women, especially when “real” women themselves buy fake boobs, fake eyelashes, fake jewelry, fake hair, fake cosmetic surgery, and worst of all a fake attitude that comes off with their fake face when they get home?

      Other than malevolent harassment so publicly displayed by NSA-fearing and trans-hating yellow-bellies, who offer opinion as fake fact, danah, is there any other motive behind such bullying? Then they imply “or else” threats that are intentionally vague to elude culpability. I am not moved beyond initial rebuking him/her so what is the point of seek and destroy tactics? Of course there is no point, except to dispense hostility for no reason other than to try desperately to release the demons within.

  7. Sami Hawkins says:

    138 comments? Really? I’d say ‘don’t feed the trolls’, but at this point we’ve practically laid out a buffet for them.

    • Perhaps ironically, your comment added nothing to the discussion.

    • christian_transgender says:

      if only they were but trolls…..no feeding would have occurred…..the tragedy is that real world consequences occur from targeted motivated persons hell-bent on making life a living hell against an entire group undergoing a medically necessary and legally permitted (except of course Nigeria, Uganda and Russia amongst others) procedure.

  8. christian_transgender says:

    I am a-wondering….am I the only one that has concluded that “Wang my Chuck”, the epitome of courage, bravado, empathy, knowledge and maturity equivalent to a Jr High student having his way with LGBT students on the playground during recess, and not a day over 13…….

    …am I the only one wondering that the only true statement he has made is this: “Only women belong in female-only spaces.” As a female and other females here, wherein lies mutual disagreement?

    Oh………I just had a flash-in-the-pan moment of dazzling brilliance: it’s public display of trans obsession. Katie Couric, Piers Morgan, Ryan Broeams, Wang his little Chuck, all can’t get their eyes from between our thighs. Sexual repression is terrible but when it reaches this height truly it must be so unbearable that it must be vented…..with no human regard for others—testament as proof that brains can exist in a body void of a heart.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *