Perhaps “Classic Transgender” is more needed than “Classic Transsexual”

Before Transgender became the dumping ground for all sorts of unrelated groups from panty wankers to “gender queers”, bois and “gender fucker”, an umbrella covering transsexuals, transgenders, transvestites and even occasionally intersex people it was a term with a specific meaning.

Now I know in the post-modern world the idea of words actually having such quaint traits as meaning is somewhat passe.  But the era of neo-con and neo-lib are over and I still remember that at one time Camile Paglia wrote a brilliant essay titled “Junk Bonds and Corporate Raiders: Academe in the Hour of the Wolf”..

I am at heart an existentialist.  I believe in actions and that people who opt to do something about having been born with transsexualism or transgenderism must act in order to create themselves from that need.  Having the “identity” is in and of itself meaningless, in existential terms.  A thought crime perhaps in religions that impart guilt and shame for even feeling something but the unrealized act of being if left unacted upon in my world.

In the world of the 1970s transgender people committed themselves to the act of living full time as the gender not associated with their current sex.  Sometime due to economic considerations or other reasons.  If their circumstances changed and they got SRS they were no longer considered transgender.  But the important element was the commitment to full time and included everything except SRS including hormones and perhaps top surgery either mastectomy or implants.

Most of these people are not all that “gender transgressive.  Indeed they are as often committed to the “gender binary” as folks who get SRS.

Celebrate diversity rather than erase it.  The different groups associated with the various trans prefixed words have different cultures and identities.  Just as women born transsexual have moved to reclaim what is theirs perhaps it is time for transgender folks fitting the classic description to reclaim that label.

New YorK Times Editorial Calls for Passage of Transinclusive ENDA

The Rights of Gay Employees

September 13, 2009

It is remarkable how little progress gay people have made in securing the basic protection against discrimination on the job. In 29 states, it is still legal to fire workers for being gay. But momentum is building in Congress for the first federal law banning such discrimination against gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender people.

Federal law has lagged behind the reality of American life. There are now openly gay members of Congress from between-the-coasts states like Colorado and Wisconsin. And according to the Human Rights Campaign, a gay-rights advocacy group, 85 percent of Fortune 500 companies have policies protecting gay employees from discrimination.

But gay rights advocates have for years faced opposition to a federal civil rights law from the religious right, and from parts of the business community, who argue that it would lead to a flood of litigation.

Bipartisan bills have been introduced in both the House of Representatives and the Senate, modeled on existing civil rights laws that cover race, religion and sex. Unlike some past bills, these include gender identity, protecting transgender people from discrimination.

The bills were written to meet some of the concerns of opponents. The law would not apply to religious organizations, or to businesses with fewer than 15 employees. It would not allow for quotas or “disparate impact” lawsuits, which generally use statistical disparities to prove discrimination.

There is reason for cautious optimism. In 2007, the House passed a nondiscrimination law that did not cover transgender people. The current Congress is more Democratic, and even in the past two years, gay rights have made significant strides. As states and localities have passed antidiscrimination laws, it has been clear that they do not disrupt the workplace, and they have not resulted in an enormous number of lawsuits.

Supporters in the House think they have the votes. The biggest hurdle is likely to be winning the support of 60 senators, the de facto number now required for most legislation because of filibuster rules.

People who believe in workplace fairness should lobby senators to get on board. It is unacceptable that in a nation committed to equality people can still be fired in more than half the states for being gay. Congressional leaders should make passing the Employment Non-Discrimination Act a top priority.

Posted in Uncategorized. Comments Off on New YorK Times Editorial Calls for Passage of Transinclusive ENDA

Jasper Gregory

There is a misogynistic dick trying to make a name for hmself by running around claiming to be a lesbian.  Of course he also claims to be “transgender” without showing any signs of living 24/7/365 as a member of the sex not commonly associated with his current genitals.  Perhaps he is female bodied in which case he has the misogynistic pig part of maleness down perfectly.

Misogyny is present when ever a male presumes to speak for women and tell women what they should do and how they should do it.  This is why most religions are inherently misogynistic.

In the case of Mister Gregory there seems to be an added layer of sexist delusion in that he claims to be a lesbian.  Again existential actions speak louder than words.  Mister Gregory displays no outward signs of being transgender therefore he is not.  You see I will allow that both pre-SRS people with transsexualism and people with transgenderism have complex lives and labeling them heterosexual or homosexual is not as simple as it is with cis-sexual folks.  Many of us are in hetrogendered or homogendered relationships prior to SRS than may techically based solely on genitals be considered homosexual or heterosexual when viewed by so-called “objective” observers.

But once again actions speak louder than words and Jasper has a collection of photos that show him to be a sort of creapy pervert exercising the male gaze in a manner that constitutes a virtual visual rape of the women he objectifies.

He tells actual WBTs and transgender folks they should live like him and be out without actually doing with our lives that which defines one as transsexual or transgender.  In that he is like the fucked up Catholic priests who tried to convince me I was a mortal sinner and should enter the priesthood and a life of denial rather tthan deal with having been born with transsexualism by having SRS.

I personally think we should exclude this misogynistic pig from further discussion or speak of him in the terms generaly reserved for that similar specimen of San Francisco dickwaddery, Michael Savage.

Put up or STFU, Jasper.  Real people with transsexualism or transgenderism commit their lives and bodies to it.  They aren’t just internet frauds espousing sexist bullshit.

Real ‘Norma Rae’ dead of cancer after battle with health insurer

From Raw Story

Posted By Daniel Tencer On September 12, 2009 @ 8:21 pm In

Insurers’ delays are ‘almost … like murder,’ Sutton said

The woman whose life inspired the 1979 film Norma Rae has died of cancer after struggling with her health insurance company, which had delayed her treatment.

Crystal Lee Sutton was 68. She had struggled for several years with meningioma, a form of brain cancer.

She became a hero to the labor movement in the 1970s, when she took on her employer, a North Carolina textile plant, and unionized the factory floor. Her story became famous nationwide in 1975 after New York Times reporter Hank Leiferman wrote Crystal Lee: A Woman of Inheritance.

In 1979, her story was turned into the movie Norma Rae, a thinly-veiled fictional adaptation of Sutton’s struggle to unionize the J.P. Stevens plant in Roanoke Rapids, North Carolina. Sally Field won an Oscar for her portrayal of the character inspired by Sutton.

As Daily Kos blogger hissyspit [1] points out, last year Sutton gave an interview to the press where she described a struggle with her health insurer over treatment. The Times-News in Burlington, North Carolina, [2] wrote in 2008:

[Sutton] went two months without possible life-saving medications because her insurance wouldn’t cover it, another example of abusing the working poor, she said.

“How in the world can it take so long to find out (whether they would cover the medicine or not) when it could be a matter of life or death,” she said. “It is almost like, in a way, committing murder.”

She eventually received the medication, but the cancer is taking a toll on her strong will and solid frame.

In 2008, the North Carolina branch of the AFL-CIO [3] urged supporters to donate money to Sutton’s medical fund. On its Web site, the union had stated that “after initially being denied coverage by her insurance company for life saving treatment, Sutton is now on drug and chemo therapies and has undergone two surgeries.”

In its obituary the Greensboro News-Record [4] describes her now-legendary struggle to unionize the J.P. Stevens plant:

In 1973, a 33-year-old Sutton was working at the J.P. Stevens plant in Roanoke Rapids, where she was making $2.65 an hour folding towels. The poor working conditions she and her fellow employees endured compelled her to join forces with Eli Zivkovich, a mill worker turned union organizer, and attempt to unionize the plant employees.

Sutton eventually lost her job, but the Amalgamated Clothing and Textile Workers Union (ACTWU) won the right to represent the workers at the plant and Sutton briefly became an organizer for the union.

In 1977, she was awarded back wages and her job was reinstated by court order, although she chose to return to work for just two days.

URLs in this post:
[1] points out:

[2] wrote:
[3] urged supporters:
[4] describes:

Domestic violence victims have a “pre-existing condition”?


5:03 PM Eastern – September 11, 2009

By Maria Tchijov

Insurance companies have used the excuse of “pre-existing conditions” to deny coverage to countless Americans. From cancer patients to the elderly suffering from arthritis, these organizations have padded their profit margins by limiting coverage to patients deemed “high risk” because of their medical condition.

But, in DC and nine other states, including Arkansas, Idaho, Mississippi, North Carolina, North Dakota, Oklahoma, South Carolina, South Dakota, and Wyoming, insurance companies have gone too far, claiming that “domestic violence victim” is also a pre-existing condition.

Words cannot describe the sheer inhumanity of this claim. It serves as yet further proof that our insurance system is broken, destroyed by the profit-mongering of the very companies who’s sole purpose should be to provide Americans with access to care when they need it most. In 1994, an informal survey conducted by the Subcommittee on Crime and Criminal Justice of the United States Senate Judiciary Committee revealed that 8 of the 16 largest insurers in the country used domestic violence as a factor when decided whether to extend coverage and how much to charge if coverage was extended.

It is clear that insurance companies refuse to police themselves. It’s up to us to call on Congress to take action now to pass health care reform and end discrimination against patients with pre-existing conditions.

Posted in Feminist, Hate Crimes, Health Care. Comments Off on Domestic violence victims have a “pre-existing condition”?