The Crashingly Boring Christine Jorgensen

I’ve never understood the fetishizing of Christine Jorgensen as some supposedly heroic transsexual/transgender icon.

I wasn’t all that aware of her and her big Copenhagen Adventure.

I’m nearly 65 and was five or six years old when the story originally broke, we didn’t have a television yet and they didn’t feature her story in my Weekly Reader.

The first transsexual sisters I heard about were far more glamorous and sexy than Christine.  They were the late 1950s early 1960s crew that worked at Le Carousel in Paris and got their sex change operations from Dr. Burou in Casablanca.

I especially idolized April Ashley.

There was a multi-part serialization of her biography to that point in one of the tabloids in 1962.

She had a sex change operation.  Not gender confirmation surgery or any other weaselly euphemism, but a sex change operation.

I wanted to be just like her. I wanted to have a sex change operation and be a hot babe who enjoyed  sex.

The whole England swings, pop culture, music and fashion scene was just coming into play.

She was hot and sexy and admitted she liked having sex.

In the late 1960s when Christine Jorgensen’s book came out I read it and was appalled at the entire white washing and expurgating of any sexual aspect.

Poor Christine never seemed to have a man in her life or between her legs.

By that time I was out , pickled on pussy pills and horny.

I wasn’t some sort of tight legged virgin saving myself for after SRS and a diamond.

Her movie came out in the spring of 1970 and she was going to be at a theater in San Francisco promoting it.  I was living in East Oakland with queen named Gina at the time.  We went to the opening to meet the famous Christine Jorgensen and were blown away by how square she came off.

This was 1970 and she looked trapped in the 1950s.  then I remembered her book, which should have been subtitled “How I got sort of a sex change, even though a vagina wasn’t part of it and managed to be so square as to not have any fun along the line.”

The movie was one of  the most abysmal pieces of dreck I’ve ever seen thrown up on the screen.  It couldn’t have been any campier if Ed Wood had directed it.

It was painful to watch.

Christine was prehistoric by 1970.

The people of my generation didn’t even have all that much in common with the gang from Le Carousel.

We weren’t dancing in shows, our Carousel Ballroom was on Market Street and run by Bill Graham.

People like Autumn Sandeen and Cristan Williams talk about medicalization and sexualization in the same tone of voice one heard from the heterosexual transvestite set.

Christan Williams transgender Borg 23 of 78 is obsessed with telling people who actually lived through that era and remember that era that they are all wrong because CW manged to dig up some obscure references.

The big problem is we didn’t talk that way in the 1970s when the generic term was “transie” not transgender and the world was divided into transsexuals who got sex change operations to be real women and drag queens who got implants and facial surgeries but kept their dicks because they liked using them.

Why are we supposed to embrace the sterile life of Christine Jorgensen who was experimented on by doctors who didn’t think a vaginoplasty was all that important?  What was done to her was kind of a nightmare that led to a whole set of myths as to why people were better not having SRS.

Dr. Burou and Dr. Barbosa understood  importance of being able to have vaginal sex as part of our motivations for having sex change operations.

This piece by Sandeen needs some comments to balance out the bullshit:

Trans sexualization; Trans medicalization

I swore I wasn’t going to get sucked into this bullshit and I may hate myself in the morning but I hate Transgender Borg fictional history as much as I hate the crap David Barton spews forth.

In fact the two have a good deal in common.

32 Responses to “The Crashingly Boring Christine Jorgensen”

  1. Sharon Sinéad Gaughan Says:

    I sympathize with your decision to comment on that turgid and misleading article. I have nothing but respect for you Suzan, and you know that, but I hope to never again debate the likes of Cristan Williams and others who willfully distort the facts of our history and being. But then, something may draw me away from (for me) more important priorities to engage them. I hope not but do keep my powder dry.

    • Suzan Says:

      I’m probably going to have to change the title of my book to avoid infringing on copyrighted material but I have been working very hard on it and It will be an open and explicit book dealing with my having come out when I did and my being part of the early transsexual rights movement.

      I don’t intend to be nice to some people who are dead and I’m going to talk about sex and transsexuals.

  2. deena17 Says:

    Autumn does a good impersonation of Milton Berle.

    • Suzan Says:

      Fight fair… No point in making yourself look bad with cheap shots when you can attack them on real issues instead.

      For the record I consider both Sandeen and Williams to be egomaniacal lying sociopaths.

  3. deena17 Says:

    Fight fair? With sociopaths? Now there is an interesting concept.

  4. deena17 Says:

    OK. I actually prefer to watch them self destruct.

  5. tinagrrl Says:

    Christine was important to those of us who had never heard of a sex change, never heard the word transsexual, had no idea anything like that was possible. I was 13 in 1952. I will never forget the photo of Christine exiting the airliner, waving to the photographers, and the “He becomes a she!” headlines.

    It was unheard of. I did not have a clue anything like that was even a remote possibility. I did not know how cool or square she was. Nor was I aware of how “the operation” was done, how well it worked, etc., etc., etc.

    I just thought it was MAGIC. I realized I was not alone in the world. There was a glimmer of hope – not much, but a glimmer. I never thought someone like me would ever be brave enough to do something like that. I wasn’t for many, many years.

    Christine is important simply because she was the very first one many of us had ever heard of. She made what so many of us felt something REAL. Prior to her arrival, we KNEW what we wanted was impossible. We HAD to make the best of our situation.

    After Christine, we knew it just might be possible.

    So, Christine Jorgensen was not thought of as cool, exciting, or anything like that — she just WAS. The fact she existed was what was important.

  6. saphirenz Says:

    Sandeen’s babble is , I think, typical of his ilk. He will dig up anything, put his spin on it and regurgitate it in order to further that particular brand of misinformation. The likes of you and I recognise this “taurus excreta abundem” and refute it……mostly

    Although it existed as long as mankind, transsexualism was little known or talked about until those days in the nineteen fifties when, for some of us, the light began to dawn. My particular heroine was, and probably still is, Roberta Cowell, a former WWII spitfire pilot who underwent sex change surgery (vaginoplasty) in 1951, closely followed as a roll model by April Ashley.
    It is, perhaps, easy to criticise those early pioneers but let us not forget that, in those days, things were far different for women anyway and sex wasn’t treated so openly as it is today.

  7. Dana Lane Taylor Says:

    I just read Sandeen’s article. ugh. It used to be called Sex Change, then it was called Gender Confirmation Surgery. Then Autumn called an orchi Gender Affirmation Surgery and also uses the term Genital Reconstruction Surgery. The porn point in her post? Who does Autumn think those men are looking for? Chicks with d*cks. Not post-transsexual women. The transgender community is working hard to delegitimize life saving treatment for transsexualism so they can feel comfy having a penis between their legs (that they own)..

  8. catkisser Says:

    Sandeen lost whatever little creds left with the “I’m too crazy to remember to dilate” and “why would I trade my low maintenance penis for a high maintenance vagina?” comments on Pam’s Sandeen Blend a while back. Couple that with the infamous teaching lesbians to pee standing up like a real tranny video (it may have been finally been taken down but lives on as a legend of internut trans insanity gone wild).

    Crispy Critters Williams is desperate to be the next queen tranny. Don’t engage her, that is what she needs, someone she perceives as a “worthy” opponent to build up her creds fighting. That one lies more often than Romney, pretty much anyone who engaged that one in the past noted that quickly…..pointless lies too.

    Forget these people, they no longer have any voice outside their own pathetic circles and precious little even there. If you don’t engage them, their attempts at attention getting will lead them deeper and deeper into their own insanity for all to see.

  9. saphirenz Says:

    I have to agree and couldn’t have put it better

  10. abbyp1 Says:

    I should know better than to comment, but I feel compelled.

    You share many of your personal opinions on Christine, do you think her (or are you trying to depict her as) somehow less valid than yourself? are your feelings or experiences the only possible experiences a TS might have?

    Was your own transition destined to be as sensational as hers? how might you and your life have been affected if it had? if you’d have had thousands of young trannies (or transies as you call them) “pickled on pussy pills and horny” come to meet you with hopes and expectations of what you might be like, reducing you to nothing but a tranny, just like EVERYONE else in the world? could you have had “fun” with that life?

    Probably would have made it easy to have a man in her life or between her legs. HUH?…

    “The big problem is we didn’t talk that way in the 1970s”

    OR, at least YOU didn’t

    Does the world and transsexualism revolve around you and your experiences suzan?

    I can tell you, I’m 28, and there aint a soul in the world who’s going near me whilst I’ve got that “thing”, that’s not natural! who’s more valid here, you or me? it’d have to be you right? ’cause you’ve been around longer, and you’ve had yours…..

    I AM getting a sex change (imminently) it’s booked and paid for, and I haven’t had a single scrap of “fun” in any part of this. (not through lack of want though).

    And make no mistake, HELL YES! SEX (with guys) is important to me.

    I’m from a generation where Christine is of little notoriety, I only really know of her because people of your generation talk about her, was she important? I think so. Did people understand her or what she’d been through?…

    they’d have to get over themselves first for that to be possible, now wouldn’t they?

    Despite what you may think, and what TG’s say(which is completely unrelated in any way), ACTUAL TS’s (as defined by those who DO get SRS) aren’t that different now-a-days, there are those who buy into the TG social bullshit (who, like TG’s, want a “lifestyle”) and engross themselves in “the scene” as it seems (from what you write at least) you did, and there are those of us who stay the hell away from anyone and anything even remotely associable with “trans” of any kind, who DO hope for love (more than sex) and yes, even that diamond.

    god forbid someone might appear to be boring, you never can tell when someone might try to throw you and your experiences under the bus in an effort to push their own agenda.

    I wanted to be just like her. I wanted to have a sex change operation and be a hot babe who enjoyed sex.

    there’s a telling statement if ever I’ve read one

    • Suzan Says:

      You are missing the point. Christine Jorgensen’s validity has nothing to do with what I said of her being or rather not being of significance as some sort of role model.

      Nor did her embracing or not embracing the transgender label influence my thinking.

      She actually booked tours seeking out the attention. But that has nothing to do with my not particularly seeing her as a role model but rather seeing a bunch of slightly younger and far hipper sister who came along 8-10 years later as role models.

      I’m only talking about Christine because her name was invoked by Cristan Williams of the Transgender Borg.

      As for my involvement with the “scene” I happened to have been one of those pioneer transsexual activists who helped pave the road and make life easier for people back in 1971-72.

      I’m not ashamed of admiring April Ashley and my partner who is a few years older admired Christine more than I did.

      As for my sexual freedom. Life was a lot freer in those days.

      People didn’t have quite the Ayn Rand self righteousness that is so common and so disgusting these days.

      There aren’t any medals given for self-righteousness….

  11. abbyp1 Says:

    Maybe I do miss your point and maybe I don’t, I don’t condone williams attempt to validify TG theory, but that is independant of my motivation for commenting here, I ALSO don’t agree with YOUR interpretation/represntation of Christine and how (and the basis of what) you’ve tried to convey your point on in this post (and that IS my motivation)

    Christine certianly DID book tours and seek attention, a girl’s gotta eat! and where else was money likely to come from?

    and yes she did take on the trangender theory outwardly, does anyone ever consider what her pesonal motivations for doing so might have been? williams doesn’t, and it also seems you don’t. When THE ENTIRE WORLD reduces you to a sex object, might you not look for ANY respite you can find?

    Everyone can judge and speculate on a person when they don’t have to examine the persons motivations, when they don’t have to live their life, last time I checked two wrongs rarely make a right.

    • Suzan Says:

      Have you paused to consider that when I came out in 1969 I had Dr. Benjamin’s book and Christine Jorgensen’s dishonest memoir?

      Perhaps you might also consider this. I co ran one of the early transsexual peer counseling centers, perhaps the first in the US.

      I did documentary photography and kept notes because keeping the history is important. Perhaps not to you.

      Perhaps you might also want to read the posthumous biography written by her friend Richard Docter.

      I figured out her story was less than honest from Roberta Cowell’s memoir. Roberta Cowell was Christine’s contemporary.

      BTW I don’t consider your idea of purity as being any more or less worthy than the life enjoyed by those who are slutty.

      Nor do I consider the idea of never being friends with or having fun in “the scene” as being one drop more virtuous than being some one who is part of the trans-scene and has other friends who are trans. Indeed I consider Calpernia Addams, Nina Arsenault, Andrea James, Julia Serano, Susan Stryker, Donna Rose and a whole bunch of other sisters and brothers who are out activists to be among the most moral and virtuous people I know and I am honored beyond words to have them as friends.

      Anything they say has more credibility than anything you say with your dummy WordPress blog.

  12. tinagrrl Says:

    Oh Dear!! “abbyp1” what are you talking about? Did you understand the post? Did you understand the direction it was going?

    Do you really think Suzan was “engrossed in the trans scene” — When you say: “Despite what you may think, and what TG’s say(which is completely unrelated in any way), ACTUAL TS’s (as defined by those who DO get SRS) aren’t that different now-a-days, there are those who buy into the TG social bullshit (who, like TG’s, want a “lifestyle”) and engross themselves in “the scene” as it seems (from what you write at least) you did, and there are those of us who stay the hell away from anyone and anything even remotely associable with “trans” of any kind, who DO hope for love (more than sex) and yes, even that diamond.” — how does that relate to what Suzan has said about herself, or about her life?

    Please remember, LIFE was VERY DIFFERENT back in the 1960’s and 70’s. As far as her being “in the scene” — if you had read this blog you would know she was involved in a peer to peer counseling group. Outside of that she had a boyfriend, was involved in anti-war activities, etc., etc. That is not the life of a “tenderloin queen”.

    First know of what you write. Then look at your life — instead of getting all self righteous about how people lived 40-50 years ago. As you say — you’re 28. Your SRS is bought and paid for — good for you.

    You quote Suzan and write: Suzan – “I wanted to be just like her. I wanted to have a sex change operation and be a hot babe who enjoyed sex”.

    abbyp1 – “there’s a telling statement if ever I’ve read one”.

    Why is that a “telling statement”? Is it not as “pure” as you are? Is it far too “slutty”? Are you a member of “the sisters of transsexual purity”? Will you suddenly be able to have sex after your SRS? What will turn on the spigot? What will suddenly make it pleasurable?

    Do you have any idea how many post-ops are almost totally asexual?

    How can you write about things you have not experienced yet? Don’t you think most of us have gone through some horrible times? Don’t you think we have all changed our minds about a lot of stuff AFTER having lived as, and physically being, women for a number of years?

    Some years ago, I wrote (jokingly) that all post-ops should be required, by law, to keep their mouths shut for two years (minimum) after SRS. The response was amazing — I was called damn near every name in (and out of) the book. I guess the humor was lost on a lot of folks. In truth, I wrote that based on my own experiences. I had made definitive statements that, in hindsight, I thought foolish. That was just my way of warning those who followed.

    Perhaps you don’t know that Suzan and I coined “Women Born Transsexual” in opposition to the “Transgender Borg”. Perhaps you are not aware of the fact we came up with it after we were ridiculed by various “transgender activists” merely for requesting folks use “transgender AND transsexual” (or vice versa). Perhaps you do not know we were among the very first to say , “there’s no ‘hierarchy’ — transsexual and transgender are just different”.

    For quite a long time we were “enemy no.1” of the “Transgender Borg”. When we actually said “Tg folks are HUMAN, and deserve HUMAN RIGHTS” — we became the sworn enemy of many of our “Sisters of Transsexual Purity”.

    When you stop to think — when both extremes write so many screeds castigating you — you MUST be doing something right.

    Advice: — Live the life — then tell us what we are doing wrong! As it stands now, it almost seems as if you are recycling stuff others have written.

  13. tinagrrl Says:

    The fact Christine did what she had to does not change the fact she might well have been a boring “square”.

    As I wrote, who she actually was made no difference to folks like me — she was a symbol of what was possible to those of us who were young, confused, and totally unaware back in the 1950’s. I was 13 in 1952. She was an amazingly powerful symbol for me.

    That has not one thing to do with who she actually was. I did not want to meet her. I did not want to be in any “scene”. I was just living my life, and trying like hell to fit in as a male person.

    I was afraid of making a break. I did not feel capable of surviving — so, I spent years ruining other folks lives, becoming enmeshed in alcoholism, etc., etc.

    I’m now clean and sober 30 years, and had to get sober before I could come out. It was a matter of healing and growing up.

    “abbyp1” you write: “and yes she did take on the trangender theory outwardly, does anyone ever consider what her pesonal motivations for doing so might have been? williams doesn’t, and it also seems you don’t. When THE ENTIRE WORLD reduces you to a sex object, might you not look for ANY respite you can find?

    Everyone can judge and speculate on a person when they don’t have to examine the persons motivations, when they don’t have to live their life, last time I checked two wrongs rarely make a right.”

    How do you know it was “outwardly”? How can you divine her “motivations” any more than Suzan can? Why is your conjecture so much better than the research a person who actually met these people, and read the books is?

    It seems your “defense” of Christine consists of attacking people who say things you do not like.

    How is that a “defense”?

    Oh, by the way — after your SRS, after you go “stealth”, you might just be surprised by the number of folks who reduce YOU to a sex object ——– just sayin’

  14. abbyp1 Says:

    Ok, to clarify a few things:

    Some years ago, I wrote (jokingly) that all post-ops should be required, by law, to keep their mouths shut for two years (minimum) after SRS.

    believe it or not, that is one of the reasons why my very first sentence was: I should know better than to comment, but I feel compelled.

    secondly, “purity” has absolutly NOTHING to do with it, I would be no less “pure” or slutty (as you put it) than the very next girl provided I had the right equipment, and do I place any measure of “validity” on that fact alone?…. how could I? just because I personally couldn’t push myself that far, doesn’t mean I know and understand what it is to live in someone elses head. however YOU both must, because that very same concept was one you used against christine. (sucks when the tables are turned huh!)

    (which Ironically, is pretty much the point I was trying to make to begin with)

    I unfortunately, cannot control how you interpret what I write ( which is ALSO why I should know better than to comment).

    the point of my comments (which obviously has been totally misconstrued) was NOT to defend christine but is that this post is riddled with hypocrisy.

    Williams uses Christine as a foundation to prove validity, Suzan questions why someone whould use Christine, and then HERSELF uses her as a foundation for her own argument, which is how debates normally go, but no-one seems to be prepared to dig a little deeper and examine the core of the issues, it is the WHY people do things that should be what an argument is based on, not just “because I said so!”

    What I read and what I hear are two completely different things. even in the comments!

    Nor did her embracing or not embracing the transgender label influence my thinking. Suzan

    your very next sentence:

    She actually booked tours seeking out the attention.

    You judged her, and that influenced your thinking.

    Perhaps you do not know we were among the very first to say , “there’s no ‘hierarchy’ and yet through your unwillingness to make valid argument, you’re EXPECTATION of respect for you “history” your actions display that deep down you think otherwise.

    I’m not here to defend Christine, in truth, I know nothing about her, but you proport to speak from a position of authority, so maybe you could base your arguments on more than speculation and self percieved experties alone.

    Suzan, have you paused to consider that I could give a damn about your personal history?

    you’re 28. Your SRS is bought and paid for — good for you.

    yes it is, good for me huh…

    Advice: — Live the life — then tell us what we are doing wrong! As it stands now, it almost seems as if you are recycling stuff others have written.

    first off, which life would you have me live? secondly, how could ANYONE possibly TELL you ANYTHING at all, let alone what you’re doing wrong?

    Oh, by the way — after your SRS, after you go “stealth”, you might just be surprised by the number of folks who reduce YOU to a sex object ——– just sayin’

    Yes, and I also might NOT be “surprised.”

    have a great day.

  15. abbyp1 Says:

    I’m not here to troll, what I care about is you trivializing the only things that girls like myself have ever clung to for hope. Disregarding them like yesterdays lunch in effort to elevate yourself in this hierarchy you also claim does not exist. I care about the message that sends to girls that are about to suck the shotgun, and that is why I tried to point out your hypocrisy.

    I DO care about your opinion, I care about the harm it can do and I believe if you were honest with yourself and not so twisted up, maybe you might have been able to do some good.

    That blog used to be substantial, I quit when the TG bullshit started to invade my head.

    You should never argue with idiots, they’ll drag you to their level and beat you with experience.

  16. deena17 Says:

    @ abbyp1. Here’s a different view. I did idolize Christine but not for what she did or said after her operations. I idolized her for having the courage and fortitude to seek out and fins a solution to her physical misalignment. This post by Suzan was not to cast aspersions on Christine Jorgensen but rather to point out that certain current day champions of the TG borg haven’t a clue what they are talking about. If those in the borg were really after accuracy they would pick up the phone and call people who are still alive such as Aleshia Brevard or Suzan. They would get a variety of opinions but one thing would be consistent. They would discover that the concept of an all inclusive term was not something that ever existed in the 50’s, 60’s, 70’s etc. They would find out that Drag queens did not think of themselves as in the same fruit basket with transsexuals. They would, in fact, discover that all of this “we should unite” business had absolutely nothing to do with having anything in common except being outcasts for all the reasons you know well.

    Now, here’s the interesting thing. Title VII now has been ruled to cover transsexuals and marriages between a post op MTF and a man have been ruled valid. That kinda does away with any need for an inclusive ENDA. No need to have ENDA with some fuzzy concept of gender identity and all cluttered up with potty politics. Let ENDA proceed on the basis of sexual orientation.

    The real bottom line has nothing to do with how you or I or anyone else who is the least bit “non-normal” wants to see things. The real determinant is how Jane and Joe Normal view the differences. And though you may doubt me, Jane and Joe Normal know all too well that cross dressers and transgender people are not the same as Suzan or Aleshia or Christine or …. on and on.

    • Suzan Says:

      The problem is that people have turned ordinary people with very human flaws into these freaking saints. They don’t realize that Dr. Benjamin’s book was a compilation of articles written over a 15-20 year period that appeared as individual article in Sexology.

      I saw Dr. Benjamin twice as a patient and he wrote one of my surgery recommendation letters.

      He also visited our Center with Zelda Suplee of the Reed Erickson Foundation who funded us via a grant. Jan and I got to ask him about some things we saw at the office that contradicted what he wrote about. His answer was, “When I wrote that I had seen so few. There are many more than I estimated and new books will be written.”

      At the time Green and Money had edited Transsexualism and Sex Reassignment which was the new definitive work.

      Jim Driscoll a Sociology professor at Sonoma State had written an article for Transactions, a sociological journal about the transsexuals in the Tenderloin and how we separated out from the queens and feminine gay boys once hormones became available in 1967.

      People like Aleshia were sort of legendary, known only to a few older sisters.

      Those three years ahead of me were going to Dr. Barbosa in Tijuana. I went to the Stanford Clinic. Canary Conn who was a contemporary live in Los Angeles and had different doctors advising her went to Dr. Babosa and encountered the language barrier I was afraid of. Bad enough to be coming out of anesthesia or on heavy pain med when you speak the language, not so great to try and struggle with your half-assed Spanglish that gets you the right food at the LA burrito stand but might not be enough to communicate you are bleeding or in extreme pain.

      I sometimes think people are happier when long time folks are icons rather than real people telling them life is hard not some sort of pink door happily ever after story.

  17. Autumn Sandeen Says:

    Suzan, you talk about being nearly sixty-five, and you talk about idolizing April Ashley.

    The type of black and white transsexualism you espouse is basically a form of cognitive distortion.; the type of transsexualism you espouse has been diversified by the World Professional Association for Transgender Health (WPATH) — the organization formerly known as the Harry Benjamin International Gender Dysphoria Association (HBIGDA) — you might want to read WPATH’s seventh version of the Standards Of Care.

    Susan, there’s now way to say agreeably state this: you’ve become an anachronism. The transsexualism you espouse is no longer sustained in the current version of the standards of care for transsexual, transgender, and gender nonconforming people. Whereas pervious versions of the Harry Benjamin Standards of Care were focused on those who needed vaginoplasties or phalloplasties to align their bodies with their gender identities, the current understanding of trans experience is one of acknowledging the diversity of trans experiences; the diversity of treatments needed for trans people to be comfortable in their own skins. But at the same time, these standards of care recognize that those who need genital reconstruction surgeries, to include vaginoplasties, aren’t requiring cosmetic surgeries, but necessary surgeries.

    It’s not that many trans people need vaginoplasties or phalloplasties to align their bodies with their gender identities, but instead that not all trans people need vaginoplasties or phalloplasties to align their bodies with their gender identities. In your anachronistic view of transsexual experience, you fail to recognize that your personal trans experience of needing a vaginoplasty to align your body with your gender identity isn’t the universal trans woman experience.

    California and Vermont now recognize this in their laws regarding gender identity and changing one’s legal sex. They have embraced the model the State Department uses for changing one’s gender marker on one’s passport as the standard for changing one’s legal sex.

    So does Argentina in their recent change regarding changing legal sex. And at the same time, Argentinean law now recognizes that a very significant number of trans people need genital reconstruction surgery as medical treatment for their gender dysphoria, and their laws now require that trans people who need genital reconstruction surgeries, to include vaginoplasties, will receives those surgeries as a legal right.

    What you are espousing, Suzan, appears to me to be a black-and-white, highly defended version of trans experience. What you are espousing is a viewpoint that attempts to take your personal trans experience of needing a vaginoplasty and require it be the universal trans experience for all transsexual people — even when the currently accepted viewpoint of WPATH that treatment for gender dysphoria in individual treatment for trans individuals requires shades of gray thinking in determining what treatments are appropriate for individual transsexual, transgender, and gender nonconforming people.

    I’m quite aware that pointing this out isn’t going to change your point of view on transsexual experience. But I believe it’s important to again point out that your community viewpoint on genital reconstruction surgeries/sex reassignment surgeries are anachronistic viewpoints belonging to the sixties and seventies versions of HBIGDA’s standards of care.

    And, don’t expect me and a significant numbers of our peers to embrace your black-and-white, highly defended viewpoint of transsexual experience. Call our viewpoints “bullshit” all you want, but at the same time realize your black-and-white, highly defended viewpoints are no longer in the trans mainstream — your viewpoints are no longer what HBIGDA’s follow-on organization WPATH embraces..

    I identify, for the record, as transgender, transsexual, trans, and female. My legal sex will be changed by California the end of the month, despite what you believe about the importance of the ability for transsexual women to have vaginoplasties to have the ability to experience vaginal sex.

    And, I can comfortably live with that.

    • Suzan Says:

      My reply to this pile of bullshit will be in the form of a post later today or tomorrow.

    • saphirenz Says:

      Yada yada yada yada. Aurtumn Sandeen I have never before engaged you in conversation. So this is a first and probably a last. I only do so because I just happen to be here and have taken part in this thread otherwise I wouldn’t be the slightest bit interested in your ridiculous nonsensical fiction..The lengthy babble you have just written convinces me that you have absolutely no idea what you are talking about with regard to transsexualism.

      The sources you quote eg..WPATH have little or no credibility, as far as many of us are concerned, since it is highly likely that they have been thoroughly compromised by borg infiltration.

      I have no intention of continuing to discuss anything with anyone without a real cause who just talks rubbish and persistently. changes tack.

  18. tinagrrl Says:

    What I find most interesting is how some folks speak so authoritatively about things they know nothing about, and have not experienced.

    Transsexual is transsexual and transgender is transgender. The fact WPATH thinks differently only means there has been a palace coup.

    I suspect the fact that people with a penis will be LEGALLY women only means there will soon be at least two “official” classes of women – leading to an “official” recognition of a “third sex”. You can call it whatever “gender” you like, the decider will be , “what SEX are you?”.

    In the long run, this will hurt both MtF’s and FtM’s.

    Short sighted. Thoughtless. How many lives do you want to destroy in your personal quest?

  19. tinagrrl Says:

    O.K. — it’s time for me to leave this little “discussion”. All this “trans wars” crap serves to do is remind me of the stuff I went through prior to SRS — and then the additional losses I suffered AFTER SRS.

    Some folks do not quite understand how being post-op can affect how people look at you. Prior to SRS some folks still tend to see you as playing “dress up” (at least that’s how it looked to me). After SRS they understand you are really SERIOUS about all this shit. Some folks who stood by me prior would have nothing to do with me after.

    Those losses were among the most difficult to sustain.

    Then there were the few post-ops I knew prior who were telling me how different it would be after. I, of course, said the usual — “things are different today”, “I still have a strong support group”, etc., etc., etc. It was AFTER SRS that I began to understand how right those “veterans” were.

    In addition, when I get involved in “trans-war” activities, I look back at other, earlier parts of my life. I look at all the bullying I suffered. I look back at the way my father rejected me. Now, don’t get me wrong — he never tried to TEACH me anything, he just expected me to know stuff even he didn’t know — then rejected me. I truly think he only liked other folks kids — his own were too damn real.

    I look back at how my alcoholism twisted my life, etc., etc.

    There’s just too much pain that gets uncovered — again.

    I’ve made so many efforts to forgive myself and everyone else. Through my program, in therapy, in moving forward.

    At the same time, getting involved with people who claim to know stuff they never experienced, who actually believe they know stuff they’ve never experienced is way too upsetting.

    So, everyone — go your way. Live your lives. I hope I’m wrong, and you all are right. I hope it all works out. I just have to take a break.

  20. deena17 Says:

    Now now Tina let’s not get carried away. Long ago I accepted Autumn for what Autumn says Autumn is and what the Navy says Autumn is. Let’s recap. The navy says Autumn is a 20 year retired enlisted man with mental impairment. Autumn has confirmed this many times in many posts. Autumn also says Autumn has been castrated and still maintains a penis. Autumn has posted many youtube videos. Those clearly demonstrate Autumn’s preference for skirts, dresses and other typically female attire.

    So what we have here is a mentally impaired retired enlisted naval man who likes to dress in women’s clothes and has been castrated. How simple is that? I think we should all accept Autumn for exactly those things because Autumn has posted all the facts. We should not deprecate Autumn but we should celebrate how far Autumn has come. We should praise Autumn for championing the downtrodden. We should celebrate and demand equal rights for Autumn and all who share Autumn’s life experience.

    • Suzan Says:

      Just as we support the human rights of all oppressed minorities, even when we neither understand them nor appreciate their ways.

      I do not mean that sarcastically either. Sandeen represents an extreme that does not reflect the actions or most transgender people just as a few self appointed sisters of transsexual purity do not represent most post-transsexuals.


Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: