Women Born Transsexual

AKA Fleur Black AKA Violet Gray

I debated putting this post up as I know I will get flamed.

But I do not like bigots or bullies, racists or homophobes.

I especially do not like most of the HBS/”Classic Transsexual” crowd who seem so obsessed with their being the only real transsexuals that they spend much of their lives trashing other post-transsexual women for not meeting their level of “purity of motivations”.

I tend to view this need to trash others who had the same surgery you had because you somehow imagine their motives were less pure than your own to be a form mental illness.  A basic lack of both empathy and an understanding that you are not the only real transsexual on the planet, that we are closer to 1 in 1000 of the people on the planet which means there are a whole lot of us.

This is something that has escaped Rose White’s consciousness.

Something I find odd since Rose White is of a group, that is very easy for members of the group I am part of to throw stones at and question the motivations of.  You see I came out young, which makes me part of the class who earlier on in the trans-wars put on the t-shirt that read “Primary”. While Rose White¹ (who according to a Google search was still a pre-op as late as last year) is what we now call a late emerger.  The sort of person my class, during those aforementioned wars referred to as a “Secondary”.

Some of us have outgrown playing those games of many years ago.  We spent enough time and exercised our empathy enough to listen to and hear the stories of why people come out older.  In the process we grew and gained understanding and sympathy for others beyond ourselves

That said…

No one ever said one could not be both a transsexual and a homophobe, a bigot, or ignorant.

My encounters with Ms. White/Black/Violet have run towards the unpleasant at best.

But I think someone needs say that the following crosses the line of decency in at least the same level of indecency as Autumn’s public trashing of Ashley.

Ban the drag acts, Pride chief urged

From The Halifax Courier UK:  http://www.halifaxcourier.co.uk/news/local/ban_the_drag_acts_pride_chiefs_urged_1_3489298

Friday 17 June 2011 03:31

A WOMAN has said this weekend’s Calderdale Pride celebration should not include performances by drag acts.

Rose White, a transexual, has written to councillors and the organisers of Calder-dale Pride asking them to either ban the turns or publish a disclaimer about them.

She argues their appearance promotes negative stereotypes about transexuals and encourages hatred of those who have changed sex.

She said: “Drag queens – homosexuals dressed as women – and drag kings, women dressed as men, performing as stereotypical crossdressers promote, foster and reinforce the belief among the audience that any bloke in a frock must be a homosexual.”

Rose, 64, from Skircoat Green, said by allowing the acts to take to the stage they were breaching the Gender Equality Duty, which the council is bound to promote.

“The council needs to prevent anything that reinforces out-of-date stereotyping.

“If these people are allowed to perform in the town in the Pride, they must have a prominent sign stating ‘We are homosexual men – not transexuals’.

Continue reading at:  http://www.halifaxcourier.co.uk/news/local/ban_the_drag_acts_pride_chiefs_urged_1_3489298

How about banning Rose white (Fleur Black/Violet Gray) instead because this person creates a negative impression that all transsexuals are ignorant bigots.

I just love it when know-it-all late emergers, who lived most of their lives with heterosexual male privilege, come out and make these “Last Real Woman” pronouncements.

This person is a total embarrassment and I hope people do not assume all transsexuals and post-transsexuals share this sort of bigoted opinion of gay and lesbian people.

What is even more seriously ridiculous is the idea that drag queens should wear signs proclaiming they are “gay men, not transsexuals”.  Are those signs to be in the form of a Pink Triangle.

Perhaps Rose White is ignorant of the centuries long history of “drag” by both gay men and lesbians.  It is a history that pre-dates by centuries our ability to find medical assistance with issues surrounding transsexualism.

But more important Drag at Pride Day Festivals is meant to mock the dominant heterosexual paradigm and is part of a long tradition of costuming for festivals and parties.

I actually remember Fleur Black one of Rose White’s aliases.  she might well be one of the few people I automatically trash can without her postings even making it to the moderation queue.  I remembered associating her with some pretty strange ideas regarding transsexuals and transsexualism.

I just love Google…

I find it interesting that Rose white considers herself such an expert in all things “true transsexual” given the amount of drivel in her e-book.

From SexGenderBody:  http://99.192.136.36/content/harry-benjamin-syndrome-part-1-when-transactivism-becomes-transphobic

Fleur Black tried to get the following paragraphs into the Wikipedia:

“Harry Benjamin Syndrome is not the same as transsexualism or transsexuality but is the medical correct term for the very small group of people who genuinely feel to be trapped in bodies that do not match their brain.

“All who claims to be similar, but refuse to to accept the logic, tests, evidence and accuracy of HBS – Harry Benjamin Syndrome are bigots, fools, transgenders, transvestites, crossdressers or autocunniphilics.”

(I love the word “autocunniphilics”, a great pun on Blanchard’s “autogynephilia”.)

Violet Grey quotes this Wikipedia entry in her introduction to the book HBS Harry Benjamin Syndrome Comes of Age, a book written by Rose White.

 ”Unfortunately,” Grey writes, “the Wiki board (…) allowed HBS to be lumped in with the transexualism label that many non-HBS crossdressing men claim in order to legitimise their autogynism and homosexual urges.”

(And yes Black, Grey and White are probably the same woman).

Harry Benjamin Part 2

Rose White is explicitly considering her book a continuation of Harry Benjamin’s enormously important work The Transsexual Phenomenon. Benjamin had indeed argued that there were biological men who felt themselves trapped in a man’s body.

White goes on explain why there is a natural continuation from his book, to the idea that the HBS syndrome is completely different from what people like me call other types of transgender conditions:

“Harry advanced the study of truly transexed people and codified diagnostic criteria that has still not been improved on despite the protestations of generations of transgenders and it is only fitting that the condition should actually be known as Harry Benjamin Syndrome – or HBS – to separate its sufferers from all the gay, lesbian, bisexual, crossdressers, transvestites, transgenders, genderqueers, autogynes, non-ops and others who claim to be afflicted with exactly the same condition that Harry found when in fact they have nothing but various degrees of mis-nurturing to account for their weird urges.”

Not transsexual

 One major point in the book is the need for a term that does not associate the HBS transwomen with “transgenders”. You may already have met classical transsexual activists that redefine the word “transgender” to mean autogynephiliacs and effeminate gay men only. White takes this line of argument to the next level, by arguing that the word “transsexual” has become tainted as well.

“In practices HBS do not like to have the word ‘transsexual’ applied to them as it has been adopted by a vast number of people who are not but not merely give the impression of being of opposite sex and/or gender to that they really are. Thus crossdressers, transvestites, genderqueers and similar claim the label ‘transsexual’ when in fact they are perfectly happy with their bodies and genitals and would not accept genital surgery if offered to them.”

Read more: http://99.192.136.36/content/harry-benjamin-syndrome-part-1-when-transactivism-becomes-transphobic

Zagria has some interesting information on her blog/website:  http://zagria.blogspot.com/2010_06_01_archive.html

• Rose White  writing as as Violet Grey. Harry Benjamin Syndrome Review.  CompletelyNovel.  2010. www.completelynovel.com/books/102047/read-online 

You can read the entire book online.

Charlotte Goiar has put a link to the book on the HBS International (English) site, but only to the PayLoadz site where you can pay for it without seeing it.  There is no link to the CompletelyNovel site.  Nor is it admitted that Violet Grey is Rose White.

Actually, CompletelyNovel give the books title as Harry Benjamin Syndrome Review, but internally the title is given as Transsexual Phenomenon #2: HBS: Harry Benjamin’s Syndrome comes of age.

While the book is claiming to be a successor to Harry Benjamin’s Transsexual Phenomenon, there are no footnotes, no bibliography and no index.  Internal citations to other publications are usually either wrong or inadequate, and she freely replaces ‘transsexual’ with ‘HBS’ in quotations from others without editorial brackets and without clarity that she is doing so.  A very serious defect is that the page numbers given on the contents page are plain wrong: e.g Chapter 6 is said to be on p37, but it actually starts on p44.
The first 18 chapter comprise 108 pages, and each make a short point.  Chapter 19 alone is another 108 pages, and rambles and rants.  I suspect that many readers will skip the last chapter.

Jargon.  In addition to ‘HBS’ which is unquestioned here (as you would expect from the book’s two titles), there are other usages which need to be explained. Fortunately she devotes chapter 2 to how she uses some of the words.

• With other HBS advocates, Rose uses SAS (Sex Affirming Surgery) instead of SRS (Sexual Reassignment Surgery), a change that I am fully in agreement with.
• She and they say ‘gender’ where most of us would say ‘gender identity’.  This is confusing, but this misuse is not confined to HBS persons, and in fact is a usage popularized by Virginia Prince.
• ‘Mangina’ was a term used by Joseph Kirchner after his return to being male.  I have never seen any other person identify with the term.  Rose and HBS persons have imposed this term on men who wish for or have acquired a vagina without becoming a woman.  They show no interest in the self-chosen terms used by such men.
• She and others use BLZB, sometimes expanded to Beelzebub, which means Blanchard, Lawrence, Zucker and Bailey.  Rose sometimes writes as if this were one person or one thing.

White-Black-Grey also has some personal usages that need to be spelt out.

• As already mentioned, she persistently writes ‘autogyne’ instead of ‘autogynephilic’:  “Autogyne (sic) was conjured up by Ray Blanchard, leader of the Beelzebub gang at Toronto’s CAMH” (p13).
• She uses the old-fashioned, not to say patronizing, GG=Genuine Girl for cis women, and Norm for cis men.
• She often uses HBS, transgender etc as nouns, as against the common opinion that they should be used only as adjectives.
• Body Clocking Effect (p16).  Rose claims that an HBS woman on estrogen ends up looking 15 years younger, while a lesbian will look like an old man by her fifties.
• BRSS=Bindel-Raymond-Stein Syndrome.  See below.  One can understand Rose putting Bindel and Raymond into this, but who is Stein?  It turns out to be Gertrude.  I don’t know of Gertrude Stein being transphobic, and Rose does not produce any such evidence.
• FBMS=Fourrat-Bailey-McHugh Syndrome.  See below.
• IPAP=Induced Pheromic Addiction Perversion.  See below.
• Anne Vitale Effect.  She uses this term but does not define it.  I used Google to find Rose defining it here: “Effect of rising testo needing feminine expression followed by falling testo causing lack of female thinking and the urge to purge”.  See also here where Lilacwoman (presumably Rose again) sends readers to Anee Vitale’s TNote 15.
• Natalie-Rose Syndrome.  An increased need to urinate as the prostate has shrunk and the bladder is sitting lower.
• MBEPR=Malignant Bisexuals’ Ego Protection Reflex.
• Bigots and Fools.  This is the title of Chapter 10.  Enemies are “the Fouratist homo, the public, the press, bigots and fools, ignorant medics, penny pinching political manipulators, BRSS dykes, religious pedophiles, closet homos and  … Manginas”.  She particularly decries writers Fourat, Bindel, Burchill, Batty and Raymond.  You may know who each of these are, but in this book they are simply denounced with no explanation.  This is the most homophobic chapter with its obsession about oral sex and wild fantasies of what oral sex does.  See more below.

Some of her points:

• HBS are not “crossdressers, manginas. transgenders, autogynes, wimps, perverts, genderqueers, genderbenders, drag queens, fetishists, drag kings, transvestites, AIS, Klinfelters, hermaphrodites, male post-ops, female post-ops, non-ops, closet gay, closet lesbians, gays who have ingested too much sperm over the years, lesbians who have ingested too much vaginal secretions, people who have been exposed to unrecognised chemical poisoning at work or in the environment, mental cases” (p24).  An HBS, unlike the experts and the transgenders, can tell another HBS from all of the above.
• She explains that Harry Benjamin was a researcher in Chicago (p1). She must be better informed than other writers who thought that he worked in New York and San Francisco only.
• “We are all descended from Adam and Eve” (p28).

Read more: http://zagria.blogspot.com/2010_06_01_archive.html#ixzz1PmHaOo7r
Under Creative Commons License: Attribution

The problem with living in glass houses is that it makes throwing stones a risky proposition.

One of the things I have noticed about a number of the most fervent supporters of things such as HBS, “true transsexual”, and “classic transsexual” is that when I actually dig into their material a bit or their biographies, I often find people who wouldn’t meet the criteria they are setting forth.

It is almost as though they are trying to convince themselves.

I’ve also noticed many are late emergers and I think that plays a part of this phenomena.  It’s weird when they attack people who have managed their lives 10, 20, 30, 40 years and more post-SRS and even post-transsexual.  I find a newly transitioned person claiming to know so much more than a woman with years of actual experience being a woman to be very androcentric and dismissive of the lives these women have lived.

1. http://www.prfire.co.uk/press-release/transsexual-files-claim-in-european-court-of-human-rights-9535.html Rose White a pre-op male-to-female transsexual has filed a claim for punitive damages in the Eurpean Court of Human Rights, Strasboug, France.

From The New York Times: http://www.nytimes.com/2011/06/19/opinion/19dowd.html?_r=1&ref=opinion

By MAUREEN DOWD
Published: June 18, 2011

With his cigars, blogs, Jameson’s and Irish affability, New York Archbishop Timothy Dolan prides himself on his gumption.

Certainly his effort to kill the gay marriage bill, just one vote away from passing in Albany, shows a lot of gall.

The archbishop has been ferocious in fighting against marriage between same-sex couples, painting it as a perversity against nature.

If only his church had been as ferocious in fighting against the true perversity against nature: the unending horror of pedophile priests and the children who trusted them.

Continue reading at:  http://www.nytimes.com/2011/06/19/opinion/19dowd.html?_r=1&ref=opinion

From Bruce Springsteen and the E Street Band

It is with overwhelming sadness that we inform our friends and fans that at 7:00 tonight, Saturday, June 18, our beloved friend and bandmate, Clarence Clemons passed away. The cause was complications from his stroke of last Sunday, June 12th.

Bruce Springsteen said of Clarence: Clarence lived a wonderful life. He carried within him a love of people that made them love him. He created a wondrous and extended family. He loved the saxophone, loved our fans and gave everything he had every night he stepped on stage. His loss is immeasurable and we are honored and thankful to have known him and had the opportunity to stand beside him for nearly forty years. He was my great friend, my partner, and with Clarence at my side, my band and I were able to tell a story far deeper than those simply contained in our music. His life, his memory, and his love will live on in that story and in our band.

From Daily Finance: http://www.dailyfinance.com/2011/06/14/the-high-cost-to-the-middle-class-of-low-taxes-on-the-rich/

Taxes: Upper Class Cuts Leave Middle Class Bleeding

By Bruce Watson
06/14/11

On the surface, the national deficit doesn’t seem all that complicated: In May, America’s debt slammed against its officially set limit of $14.3 trillion, and almost everyone agrees that the federal government needs to come up with a lot more money. But when it comes to the question of how to raise that money, things get a lot more complicated — and political.

Generally speaking, Republicans want to cut taxes and slash expenses, while Democrats want to raise taxes on the upper income brackets and preserve social programs. The Republican approach certainly has its attractions: Nobody likes paying the tax man, and there’s something remarkably grown-up and responsible-sounding about phrases like “protecting future generations” and “tightening our belts.” But under scrutiny, it starts to look like these lofty goals may conceal another agenda, as the proposed cuts in taxes and spending are likely to benefit the wealthy, while placing an out-sized burden on the country’s poor and middle class.

The current top tax rate is 35%, a level that infuriates some Republicans — notably U.S. Rep. Paul Ryan (R-Wisc.). In his controversial budget proposal, Ryan suggested dropping the top rate to 25%, effectively slashing income taxes on the wealthy by 10%. This, of course, would lead to a massive cut in revenue, but Ryan has proposed methods for replacing the money — namely, a repeal of President Obama’s health care plan and drastic cuts in Medicaid and Medicare. While some Republicans have criticized Ryan’s plan — and its out-sized impact on the non-wealthy — his push for a 10% cut on taxes for the rich is a boilerplate platform plank in Republican budget proposals.

Even apart from the question of whether or not the wealthiest fraction of the country need a 10% tax cut, the loss of health care benefits are likely to brutalize many in the middle class. Perhaps this is why Ryan’s proposed cuts to Medicare wouldn’t affect people who are currently 55 or older — a group that would be likely to wage a fierce lobbying battle against any cuts to their benefits. Even so, a recent poll showed that 72% of respondents preferred increased taxes on the rich over cuts to Medicare.

Continue reading at:  http://www.dailyfinance.com/2011/06/14/the-high-cost-to-the-middle-class-of-low-taxes-on-the-rich/

From Think Progress: http://thinkprogress.org/economy/2011/06/17/247561/pawlenty-benefits-one-percent/

40 Percent Of The Benefits Of Pawlenty’s Tax Plan Go To The Richest One Percent Of Americans

Michael Linden, Director of Tax and Budget Policy at the Center for American Progress Action Fund
June 17, 2011

Recently, former Minnesota governor Tim Pawlenty (R) proposed a set of huge new tax cuts that would cost more than three times as much as the Bush tax cuts. His plan to reduce the top individual income tax to the lowest rate in post-war history, cut the corporate tax rate by more than half, and completely abolish taxes on capital gains, dividends, and massive estates would mainly benefit the extremely wealthy. In fact, these tax changes would be even more skewed towards the rich than the Bush tax cuts were.

Using analysis from the Tax Policy Center, we put together the accompanying chart showing just how tilted the Pawlenty tax cuts would be. Nearly 40 percent of the entire benefit of Pawlenty’s plan would go to the richest 1 percent of Americans. The next richest 9 percent would enjoy 25 percent of the total benefit. In other words, under the Pawlenty plan, the richest 10 percent of Americans would reap significantly more than the bottom 90 percent combined:

Continue reading at:  http://thinkprogress.org/economy/2011/06/17/247561/pawlenty-benefits-one-percent/

Also from Think Progress:  http://thinkprogress.org/economy/2011/06/17/247409/bachmann-23000-millionaires/

As Richest Pay Lowest Taxes In A Generation, Bachmann Would End Income Tax For 23,000 Millionaires

By Zaid Jilani
Jun 17, 2011

As ThinkProgress Economy editor Pat Garofalo noted last week, GOP presidential hopeful Rep. Michelle Bachmann (MN) has assembled a tax plan that would involve a massive corporate tax cut and tax increase on the working poor. Meanwhile, Bachmann would continue to cut taxes on the richest income-earners among us.

But Bachmann’s plan would do even worse things than simply continuing to hand out tax cuts for the rich and corporations. As Dan Baneman of the Tax Policy Center found, Bachmann’s proposal to repeal taxes on capital gains would actually remove 23,000 millionaires from the tax rolls altogether. Meanwhile, the Tax Policy Center’s Howard Gleckman estimates that “this largess would add about $25 billion to the deficit in one year.”

Continue reading at:  http://thinkprogress.org/economy/2011/06/17/247409/bachmann-23000-millionaires/

From The Guardian UK: http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/cifamerica/2011/jun/17/greece-bailout-austerity?INTCMP=SRCH

Without sovereign control of their country’s debt, the Greek people are being punished with extortion by the ECB and IMF

Mark Weisbrotguardian.co.uk, Friday 17 June 2011

Imagine that in its worst year of our recent recession, the United States government had decided to reduce its federal budget deficit by more than $800bn – cutting spending and raising taxes to meet this goal. Imagine that, as a result of these measures, the economy had worsened and unemployment soared to more than 16%; and then the president pledged another $400bn in spending cuts and tax increases this year. What do you think would be the public reaction?

It would probably be similar to what we are seeing in Greece today, including mass demonstrations and riots – because that is what the Greek government has done. The above numbers are simply adjusted for the relative size of the two economies. Of course, the US government would never dare to do what the Greek government has done: recall that the budget battle in April,which had House Republicans threatening to shut down the government, resulted in spending cuts of just $38bn.

What makes the Greek public even angrier is that their collective punishment is being meted out by foreign powers – the European Commission, the European Central Bank and the IMF. This highlights perhaps the biggest problem of unaccountable, rightwing, supranational institutions. Greece would not be going through this if it were not a member of a currency union. If it had leaders of its own who were stupid enough to massively cut spending and raise taxes during a recession, those government officials would be replaced. And then a new government would do what the vast majority of governments in the world did during the world recession of 2009 – the opposite: that is, deploy an economic stimulus, or what economists call counter-cyclical policies.

And if that required a renegotiation of the public debt, that is what the country would do. This is going to happen even under the European authorities, but first, they are putting the country through years of unnecessary suffering. And they are taking advantage of the situation to privatise public assets at fire sale prices and restructure the Greek state and economy, so that it is more to their liking.

Continue reading at:  http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/cifamerica/2011/jun/17/greece-bailout-austerity?INTCMP=SRCH

While all the major mainstream news outlets have been focused on the spectacle of Anthony Weiner’s dick there have been some stories of potentially very serious disasters that involve nuclear power plants here in the US.

Most notably a power plant in Nebraska.

I’ve been looking for better material on this story for several days now.  I know lots of the power blogs were pre-occupied with Netroots Nation and American Corporate media finds it far easier to report on a nuclear disaster when it happens in Fukushima than near Blair, Nebraska.

From The Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists:  http://www.thebulletin.org/web-edition/columnists/dawn-stover/rising-water-falling-journalism

By Dawn Stover
16 June 2011

Every evening, my father climbs the levee along the Missouri River in Council Bluffs, Iowa, and peers down into the black water that swallows the road. The water is rising, and the Army Corps of Engineers says the levee has never faced such a test. Dad, a retired professor, is packing his books and papers. If the levee doesn’t hold, his one-story house could be underwater for months.

A little farther up the Missouri, at the Fort Calhoun Nuclear Power Station near Blair, Nebraska, the river is already lapping at the Aqua Dams — giant plastic tubes filled with water — that form a stockade around the plant’s buildings. The plant has become an island.

In Blair, in Council Bluffs, and in my hometown of Omaha — which are all less than 20 miles from the Fort Calhoun Station — some people haven’t forgotten that flooding is what caused the power loss at the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant and the disastrous partial meltdowns that followed. They’re wondering what the floodwaters might do if they were to reach Fort Calhoun’s electrical systems.

The Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) issued a “yellow finding PDF” (indicating a safety significance somewhere between moderate and high) for the plant last October, after determining that the Omaha Public Power District (OPPD) “did not adequately prescribe steps to mitigate external flood conditions in the auxiliary building and intake structure” in the event of a worst-case Missouri River flood. The auxiliary building — which surrounds the reactor building like a horseshoe flung around a stake — is where the plant’s spent-fuel pool and emergency generators are located.

OPPD has since taken corrective measures, including sealing potential floodwater-penetration points, installing emergency flood panels, and revising sandbagging procedures. It’s extremely unlikely that this year’s flood, no matter how historic, will turn into a worst-case scenario: That would happen only if an upstream dam were to instantaneously disintegrate. Nevertheless, in March of this year the NRC identified Fort Calhoun as one of three nuclear plants requiring the agency’s highest level of oversight. In the meantime, the water continues to rise.

No guarantees. On June 7, there was a fire — apparently unrelated to the flooding — in an electrical switchgear room at Fort Calhoun. For about 90 minutes, the pool where spent fuel is stored had no power for cooling. OPPD reported that “offsite power remained available, as well as the emergency diesel generators if needed.” But the incident was yet another reminder of the plant’s potential vulnerability.

Continue reading at:  http://www.thebulletin.org/web-edition/columnists/dawn-stover/rising-water-falling-journalism

One of memes the ideology of transgender has foisted upon women and men born with transsexualism is the concept that the word “Transsexual” is bad because it has the root word “sex” in it.

What is the problem with the word sex?

Why do the words male and female seem almost taboo in the discourse regarding both transgender and transsexual?

Why are discussions regarding sex automatically considered “problematic”?

When I had my operation in the early 1970s we called the surgery a “sex-change operation”.  Why do we need dozens of variations of terms that obscure what sex reassignment surgery does?

Isn’t the invention of all these euphemisms a ceding of agency to the forces of neo-puritanism represented by conservative politics in partnership with fundamentalist religions?

Somehow this does not seem very liberating.

When I hear something some one use a phrase like “gender confirmation surgery” a couple of things cross my mind.  After I get beyond the “WTF?” phase, Tinkerbell, my slightly twisted guardian fairy, who bears a startling resemblance to Amanda Fucking Palmer, causes a snotty question to form, “Wouldn’t it have been a lot cheaper to get a visible tattoo saying, ‘I ♥ Dresses and High-Heels’?”

Gender Confirmation Surgery, the whole verbal construct causes a pounding post-modern headache.

But back to the point of this post.

The right wing fundamentalists who hate us do not hate us because the word sex is the root word of transsexual.  Do you really think they like transgender any better?

No! To quote our former leader, the idiot from Midland, “They hate us for our freedom.”

If we give in that means the terrorists will win.

Oh wait, I got side tracked…

Actually there is a more sinister reason why “transsexual” and any discussion that involves “sex” rather than gender has been banished from what passes for discourse in the worlds of Transgender Inc. and the Transgender Borg Collective.

Think about it…  It’s important along with the constantly shifting requirements for who is actually a woman. The ones that set  impossible requirements for the post-SRS women, the ones that say having a vagina doesn’t make you a woman be cause you aren’t able to have children etc. At the same time all that genitally intact, transgender people have to do is claim “identity.”

How many time have you heard the argument, “My genitals do not matter. No one besides my partner and myself ever see them.  They are my private business. You are just a “genital surgery essentialist.”

The whole argument about it not being about sex may well be valid for transgender people.

But when post-SRS women make that same claim I suspect something else is at work.  Having bought the propaganda is one possible reason, but another is sexphobia.  Sex is about more than the sex act and transsexuality isn’t really about gender.

If it were we could have lived as transgender and put that money into buying a house or a retirement program.  That we didn’t and instead put so much effort and money as well as physical pain ( at least for some of us) suggest that maybe it was about something other than gender.

I can sort of understand when a transgender person tells me they aren’t aware of those parts of their body. Or even that those parts aren’t part of their love-making.  I can understand because I was there once upon a time.

But a major reason for me getting surgery was to end the alienation from my body, the having to pretend I didn’t have male sex parts between my legs.

So for me transsexualism wasn’t so much about gender, which I view as a matter of femininity or masculinity as it was about being female bodied.

I knew transgender women who were far more into femininity than I was.  I was kind of a tomboy,  more fascinated with cameras and making art than I was with the fine points of fashion and make-up.

I know quite a few post-transsexual women who are that way, although many are more into being femme than I am.

In the past I have been rebuked for referring to my pussy by the c-word instead of the v-word, which seems rather strange since men have more names for their dicks than the Inuits have words for snow.

Over my life time I’ve had sex with more than my share of partners of all the different possible sexes.  If Susie Bright started passing out Sexpert Awards I’d be a candidate even though now I am old and that sort of adventuresome level of lust has waned and I am more than happily monogamously partnered.

Still denying wanting the ability to have sex as a woman being even a partial motivation for SRS along with feeling at home in your body seems odd to me.

Even leaving the having sex part aside.  Being whole when you touch yourself or pee.  When you bathe.  All that is about sex not gender.

Now I hinted at something earlier when I mentioned the impossible to obtain requirements transgender folks place on post-SRS women, the same something that is a subtext in the “genitalia surgery essentialist” slur.

Transgender people want the whole focus to be on gender.  They need to be linked with those of us who had SRS and to have us go along with the meme of it being all about gender as well.

Because transgender claims of womanhood are based upon “gender” while post-transsexual women have their womanhood written on their bodies.

Transgender women do not have a response to the “Oh Yeah… You’re just as much a woman as I am, let’s pull down our pants and see!”

When transsexuals let transgenders drive the discourse using the hegemonic tool of gender as signifier instead of sex as signifier then we become transgender people with inverted penises.

When post-transsexual women embrace the transgender label because “sex is dirty” they are working against their own self interests.

That isn’t really necessary because the proclaimed political goals do not require every one to be the same. Working together on the shared political goals only requires working towards political goals all parties involved in see as desirable goals.