(more…)

i use statcounter to track traffic on and to my site, and one of the most facinating features is the keyword activity function. it shows what words and phrases people use in google and other search engines that eventually hit my site.

by far, the most popular is some form of “pink guns”, which hit the posts i’ve done on the pink pistols and pink guns. there’s a bit of variety in the keywords people use, with the two most popular coming in as “pink glock” at 11.84% and “pink guns” at 9.21%. runner ups include “pink firearms” at 5.26%, “custom pink guns” at 3.95%, and “pink revolver grips, also at 3.95%. there’s also a few hits for “pink 22 caliber pistol”, “pink pistols”, “pink guns gunshop”, and a few other permutations. more than half the hits i get from the search engines are related to this category.

the second most popular, though not nearly as prevalent, is some form of search based on the term “shemale”. none individually amount to more than 2.63%, at least this week, but include “fit shemales” (of which i am definately not), “post op shemale” (which apparently i am), “alexis shemales” (presumably searching for alexis arquette), “why do men like shemales” (my personal second favorite), “i’m a shemale” (not sure if this refers to the person who is doing the search), “jews shemales” (i guess everyone has their own preferences), “post op shemale article” (are some people actually looking to read stuff about shemales as opposed to just gawking? i’m shocked!), “shemale active sex” (that’s more aligned to the “normal” types of searches), “steps to being a shemale” (i thought that was pretty much common knowledge), and my most favorite “shemale brain”. and here i was thinking that there was only male and female brains. “googleshemales” was a bit confusing, since they used google to do the search, and “drag queen shemale” seemed a bit redundant to me. there was one disturbing “i am shemale need work”, followed by “she male issues”. i wondered if those last two searches were done by the same person.

there’s many more that related to all thing trans, most notable include “men with no gender identity in the bible” (which bring up, ummm, interesting articles such as “sound bible christian teaching pertaining to intersex and gender identity (hermaphrodite*)), “transwoman goes straight” (i wondered if they were looking for former trans women or transwomen who used to date women but now date men), “miss transwoman 2007″ (and of course they found that right here on nexy’s cocoon, though that’s “misses transwoman” to you ), “transgender statistics” (of which there is a serious lack), and one that combines the two most popular topics, “pink pistols trans”. amazing.

i’m not sure what to conclude from all this, but it’s facinating reading, at least to this jewish post op shemale transwoman transsexual pink pistol wielding blogger.

according to az central, anderson’s fifth estate night club has settled the ongoing dispute with scottsdale’s most famous transwoman, michele de lafreniere. i’m glad they were able to come to an agreement.

i remember last year, this dispute resulted in the now infamous cartoon image originally posted in the phoenix new times in penile proportions:

i’ll have to stop by the now infamous nightclub at some point. of course, i’ll be sure to choose the appropriate restroom should the need arise. perhaps i can avoid that whole issue by drinking less than my usual fair.

i particularly enjoyed the comment left by mrmom on the az central piece:

i came across this article in the new york times, entitled “plenty of hair, nary a mustache”. it covers a story about lupe’s place, a beauty parlor and barbershop in the south bronx. what makes it notable, i suppose, is that lupe’s employs 5 trans women.

i suppose i should rejoice that a story in the times covering trans women is not about sex workers or murder. of course, it seems the only other work a trans women is allowed to have, at least in the minds of the stereotypers, is hair styling. and this article follows that.

i can’t help but feel a certain “look at the freaks at the zoo” attitude from this piece. maybe i’m just too sensitive.

i hold on to the hope that these dinosaurs will die off over the next one or two generations, and we will evolve to the next level. then we won’t need legislation like enda, because we wouldn’t think of firing someone simply because they might be different from ourselves.

i came across this post on towleroad, in which the comments perfectly exemplifies the “gay vs trans” argument.

mcnnyc points out:

When the movement first started it was just gay. The only reason lesbians got listed separately was because of feminism and, as Derrick noted, all the work they’ve done.

right mcnnyc, and then the trans people were listed separately because some gays don’t want to be associated with “those people”. because, well, gays are “more equal” than trans.

then ipodius perfectly expresses the issue:

I have listened to this debate until I just can’t stand it anymore. I’m also sorry to be politically incorrect here, but I don’t see what gender identity has to do with being gay. To wit: a male has sex reassignment and becomes female and has a male partner. She is straight. She goes through the process, is now legally a female and can marry her male partner. Now she gets all benefits as someone’s wife.

apparently, ipodius is unfamiliar with the littleton vs. prange case in which a trans woman was judged as “male”, dissolving her marriage. and this is only but one example in which a trans person’s gender was deemed legally invalid. and you know, people still seem to be confused when it comes to trans genders.

sorry, but “gender identity” has everything to do with sexual orientation – you can’t have one without the other. sexual orientation is defined in the context of gender identity, and gender identity is necessary in order to have a sexual orientation.

in many people’s minds, i am merely an effeminate gay man in an illegal marriage with another gay man.

and that’s why we are equal, despite your belief that you are more equal than me.

so joe solmonese emailed me again today, with the above post title as the subject of the email, to say the following:

Dear Nexy,
Today, I witnessed something that just a year ago seemed nearly impossible. The U.S. House of Representatives passed the Employment Non-Discrimination Act (ENDA).

We are one step closer to our ultimate goal of ensuring that all GLBT Americans no longer live in fear of losing their jobs.

well that’s great joe, i’m happy you were able to get your enda thingie passed. i think it’s wonderful that when the president vetos it, you can say you came “this close” to achieving your impossible goals. perhaps one day, i’ll come “this close” to achieving mine.

i really ought to unsubscribe from the hrc campaign list. it’s just pissing me off.