AS you watched the Oscars last night, did you think to yourself: “Golly, the best Actor and best Actress categories are transphobic towards those with “nonbinary” gender identitays”?
If the answer is no, then you may be surprised to learn that those in the Transgender Movement are complaining the broadcast was one long “triggering” ode to “transphobia”.
First, the Best Supporting Actor winner Jared Leto, who has been attacked for weeks- and even heckled- by transgender activists for his portrayal of a gay male queen in “Dallas Buyers Club”. Leto has been criticized for not playing the character as a “transwoman” (an identifier that did not even exist in the 1980’s era in which the film is set), for not being a “transwoman” himself (strangely it’s okay that he is heterosexual though), and for making jokes about the pain of bikini waxes (because when a “transwoman” gets one it’s a horrible price to pay that no mere woman or man could ever understand).
Not holding back on the anti-gay sentiment, the transgender activists and their supporters are now attacking Oscars emcee Ellen Degeneres for the “transphobia” of a gay woman cracking a gay community drag queen joke. One that heterosexual male “transwomen” found offensive to (you guessed it!): heterosexual males.
If you’ve ever wondered why members of “the LGBT” constantly question the wisdom and practicality of a political alliance with the “T”, the accusations against Ellen ought to help highlight the problem.
The transphobic hate-crime in question was the following joke made while addressing audience member Liza Minelli:
“Hello to the best Liza Minnelli impersonator I’ve ever seen. Good job, sir.”
You can watch Ellen tell the joke in the brief video clip which is helpfully linked here: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/03/03/ellen-degeneres-transphobic_n_4890369.html
Washington Post Style columnist (and clearly not a member of the lesbian and gay community) Caitlin Dewey ran with a headline claiming an “Internet Consensus” ruled Ellen as “transphobic”. Which is incredible. I mean forget the transphobia: this may be the first time in history there has ever been such a thing as an internet consensus! Who knew? The internet is of one mind: one fabulously anti-gay mind. You heard it from Caitlin first.
Should we let Caitlin and the other gender-loving heterosexuals in on the joke?
The humor rests on the ubiquity of male Liza Minelli impersonators in the Gay Community, Caitlin, where Liza is considered a Gay Drag Icon. Sheesh.
I can’t believe I really need to spell that out. Then again I suppose one shouldn’t be surprised.
It’s gotten to the point where Gays and Lesbians cannot even talk or joke about our own community without heterosexual Transgenders and their supporters like Caitlin (and the “consensus” of the entire internet, apparently), accusing us of being ANTI-HETEROSEXUAL-BIGOTS.
Want to mention the fact that lesbians don’t like penis? You are now an ANTI-HETEROSEXUAL-BIGOT.
Want to joke about how Liza Minelli looks more realistic than her best gay male drag impersonator? You are now an ANTI-HETEROSEXUAL-BIGOT.
Want to make a movie about gay culture in the era of AIDS? You are now an ANTI-HETEROSEXUAL-BIGOT.
The WHOLE INTERNET says so folks! It’s a consensus!
“They Looked Beautiful. They Looked Normal.” Dr. Norman Spack- TED talk on creating transgender children
January 28, 2014
There’s a reason not a single trans website, blogger, or journalist has reported on, commented on, or re-posted the “Dollmaker” Dr. Norman Spack’s recent TED talk. It is, as they say, “problematic”. He is completely clueless about women, sex politics, transgenderism, and the medicalization of gender. Frighteningly uninformed and ill-spoken by any measure.
He extols on various sexist stereotypes then reports how he diagnosed pediatric UK trans “chicken circuit” celebrity Jackie Green as being “destined to become six foot five inches tall”. This caused him to dose the child with cross-sex hormones AT THE AGE OF THIRTEEN, against all medical advice. The child then underwent surgical removal of his testes and inversion of his penis into a cavity designed for other males to sexually penetrate AT THE AGE OF SIXTEEN, with Dr. Spack’s approval, by a surgeon in Thailand, where such procedures were then legal. These procedures have now been criminalized as medical crimes against children.
In related news, Dr. Spack was quoted in an article this week titled “Uncertainty Surrounds Medical Treatments For Transgender Youth” He offered this clueless gem: “The difference between a tomboy and a trans-male who starts puberty is that the tomboy accepts having breasts, accepts having periods.” Has the eugenics doctor never spoke to a single pubertal female, tomboy or not? Has the Docktor never heard of anorexia, bulimia, cutting, breast ironing, or THE ENTIRE ENDOCRINOLOGICAL INDUSTRY marketed to women who DO NOT WANT to menstruate EVER?
Dr. Spack began transgendering children because he “wanted to do something dangerous” with his medical credentials. He has succeeded in that alone, and that is how he will be remembered by history.
December 1, 2013
The following review of Julia Serano’s “Excluded” by lesbian Kit Van Cleave was published by Houston’s OutSmart, owned by publisher Greg Leu. In response to complaints by male transgenders, the review was redacted, censored and removed. An apology to men was issued:
November 12, 2013 | Greg Jeu
In the recently released November issue of OutSmart, we published a book review of Julia Serano’s Excluded, which dealt with issues pertaining to the transgender community. Although the piece was run through our normal editing process, the extreme insensitivity of the review did not come to our attention until after publication. For this, we truly apologize.
As soon as we realized we had erred, the review was removed from our website immediately. At OutSmart, our goal is to be informative, not harmful, and to build bridges between members of the LGBT community, not to create divisions. OutSmart aims for the highest level of inclusivity and has utmost respect for all of our readers, regardless of sexual orientation or gender identity. It is very apparent that this incident does not reflect that goal.
After holding a staff editorial meeting on Tuesday, November 12, we have taken steps to ensure that this type of mistake will not occur again. We thoroughly appreciate the feedback the community has given us regarding this piece. Listening to each of your experiences with the review is the first step to fixing the issue. Whenever we let our readers down, we always strive to use the situation as an educational moment to improve the magazine, its content, and ourselves.
Again, our sincerest apologies to those we have offended. We thank everyone who continues to support our publication and help us grow.
Greg Jeu Publisher
Here is the oh-so-offensive, terrifying (to men) and censored review, published without permission under fair use. Make up your own mind:
”All that aside, some books I just can’t get through, even with sustained effort, like a pair sent to the OutSmart offices. I’ve had to struggle to grasp the authors intentions, and examine why I found these books impenetrable. Sometimes it’s just style- long sentences covering half a page without ceasing, terms created without definition or juxtaposed to other terms so that the two don’t make sense: lack of logic; inability to support an argument; unclear overall goals; ambiguity.
In Julia Serano’s “Excluded”, for example, the first twenty pages is given over to redefining terms, making up new terms, and wrestling terms about the various available “lifestyles” in the gay community. As Serano puts it, “I call myself a woman and transsexual…because I feel those words best describe some parts of my person.” Okay, fair enough, until this comment follows immediately after: “ I do not believe that there is some magical underlying quality all musicians, or all bird people, or all women, or all transsexuals have in common.” Huh?
Another puzzlement is the prefix cis. “It is difficult to discuss trans people without also having langage to describe the majority of people who are not trans.” Serano writes, continuing, so “transactivists often use the word cisgender as a synonym for non-transgender and cissexual as a synonym for non-transsexual.” And that’s all the definiton of cis we’re going to get from Serano. According to other sources, the word actually stands for people happy with the gender and sexuality they feel they were born with. I know gay people reject being called abnormal, but that’s no reason to come up with a new word for “normal”.
Wikipedia attributes “Cisgender” to Carl Buijs, a transsexual from the Netherlands. In April 1996, Buijs wrote in a Usenet posting, “I just made [the word] up.”
As Serano’s book is also a bit of a memoir, I found in Part One, Chapter 2, that this writer, who calls herself a woman, has made the decision to still retain his penis. As a matter of fact, Serano went to a summer camp specifically to protest people with penises not being allowed to attend the Michigan Women’s Music Festival (the sponsors were apparently avoiding “male energy” with this fest.)
I believe I’m lost. If we’re going with the idea that semantics is dead (i.e. “transsexual” doesn’t mean what it means), or no longer useful, then throw out the dictionaries. Until then, I expect writers to try to stay within the agreed meaning of the words we all use. Otherwise, I can call myself a puppy, but no one will know what I’m talking about when I describe my life.”
November 19, 2013
GLAAD -formerly the Gay and Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation- is now an organization headed by heterosexual male Jennifer Finney Boylan and representing the medicalization of social sex roles or “Transgenderism”. GLAAD, who have removed “gay” and “lesbian” from their name and now wish to be known by the stand-alone acronym only, has issued the following video in an attempt to persuade New York State to provide Medicaid coverage for “gender treatments” designed to disguise the sex of individuals who would like to appear as the opposite sex, or who would like to use medicine and/or surgery to modify their secondary sex characteristics in some way.
Stephen Ira, the daughter of Annette Benning and Warren Beatty, appears in the video. Stephen Ira is known for her activism against lesbians and feminists, having publicly organized against the rights of women to hold radical feminist conferences, at one point even publishing on her blog that she often thinks about shooting feminists. Stephen Ira is a heterosexual woman who identifies as and calls herself a female “fag”.
The following is a partial list of some of the treatments and procedures identified as “medically necessary” by WPATH, the World Professional Association of Transgender Health:
Synthetic Cross-sex hormones
facial feminization surgery
Laser hair removal,
November 15, 2013
“The over-emphasis on sexual activity as an essential part of the lesbian experience is concerning. Most heterosexual women have experienced pressure to be sexually active. We have all been conditioned to believe that sexuality is a major part of intimate relationships or else the relationship is not ‘real’. Few very old people, generally, have an active sex life. They have other challenges to deal with. Lesbians are no different but they don’t stop being lesbians. Celibate older people do not get constantly questioned on their sexuality; it is assumed they are heterosexual. Whether sexual attraction is current or not, should not be the definition of what it is to be lesbian. Being a lesbian is a social construction of intimacy, community and cultures. Usually, initially, it takes a sexual expression but it does not always for all time for many lesbians.”
October 16, 2013
You will seldom see a more sobering example of the utter disrespect, silencing, censorship and complete removal of women and lesbian representation from public discourse regarding our rights as human beings than you will from the New York Times this evening.
The Times has initiated a male-only “debate” about the impact of attaching the transgender politic (which promotes and codifies noxious social sex roles and sex stereotypes against women) onto the lesbian and gay rights movement. Eliminated from this debate are the women and lesbians whose rights are directly at odds with this movement.
The New York Times culled ALL women from this discussion. They invited six men: four gay, and two male genderists (one gay: drag queen Laverne Cox from RuPaul’s “Drag Race”), and one straight (explicitly anti-lesbian activist Susan Stryker, who has campaigned to outlaw lesbian public gatherings, organizations and activism on the basis that they exclude men) to “decide” whether the LGBT movement should further support the anti-female sex roles and sex stereotypes championed by the transgenderist movement.
Missing from this discussion of women’s rights? Women. Missing from this discussion of the lesbian and gay movement? LESBIANS. All of us. Every single one. Total and complete lesbian and woman erasure.
Much like the recent assembly of all-male US legislators who convened to impose legal limits on our female right to control the reproductive capacity of our own bodies this “debate” will include none of the people involved. WOMEN. LESBIANS.
The “Grey Lady”, once considered a reliable balanced news outlet, has gone full-on …. irrelevant. There is a reason millions of people read blogs like mine while the Times goes out of business. That reason is WOMEN. Keep chatting amongst yourselves boys. Good luck with that bros.
September 27, 2013
GUEST POST by Bev Jo:
CENSORED FROM “BUTCH VOICES”
For the last three sessions of the Butch Voices Conference in Oakland (2009, 2011, and 2013), I have offered to do a Female-Identified Butch Workshop and have been denied, as have all other Radical Feminist Butches I’ve known. (In 2009, one of the organizers who had partially “transitioned” did a Female-Identified Butch workshop, which, from seeing the emotional reaction of the over 100 Butches who showed up, was desperately needed. But it felt like BV co-opted it, diluting the female energy in what was already a very male-identified conference, by choosing someone who had so recently identified as male (she had had her breasts removed, taken testosterone, and had worn a shirt identifying as trans a couple of months earlier at the Dyke March). No Female-Identified Butch workshop was allowed in 2011, even though there were several by men who call themselves “Butch.” This year, however, I was scheduled to participate in a panel of Female-Identified Butches, but then was later told I was no longer allowed to participate.
One of the men who did “transwomen” “Butch” workshops, Tobi Hill-Meyer, had been allowed to be a member of the Butch Voices 2013 Advisory Board. He is part of the reason I was censored/banned — the complaints came from “transwomen” and he was the only one named as objecting to my being on the panel. The Butch Voices statement is: The mission of BUTCH Voices is to enhance and sustain the well-being of all women, female-bodied, and trans-identified individuals who are Masculine of Center. – in spite of the fact that Hill-Meyer, like the other men who pretend to be Lesbians, is very male-identified feminine and clearly male, and exposes his prick online in photos and videos. (Be warned that he is a pornographer, if you don’t want to see his or his fellow pornographers’ penises, or as the trans cult calls them, “lady peens.”)
Can any reasonable women look at him, his videos, or read his statement and not see clearly that he is a man, and certainly not a Butch? He identifies as “Indigenous, colonized mestiza, poly, kinky, trans woman, queerspawn, activist, butch, feminist, pan-dyke, genderqueer…. All my life I’ve had a drive to surround myself with queer people and community. Queerness gets me hot. I’m a major dyke, but there are definitely some hot queer guys that I go for.” Ironically, he has also written “straight women have absolutely no right to tell dykes how to have sex.” – as if he is a “dyke” and not a bisexual man.
This is the genderqueer, female-hating, Lesbian-hating, and Butch-hating mind-fuck/gaslighting that defines us out of existence. Lesbians, Dykes, and Butches do not fuck with men, not to mention that men are simply not women.
For those who insist that Lesbians can raise non-sexist, non-oppressive men, this man is a horrifying example of what happens when males grow up with inside access to Lesbian culture, making them far more dangerous than other men. They are left with a sense of ownership of Lesbians as well as entitlement, and proceed to try to erase us.
August 27, 2013
The following is an excerpt from the 1997 Presidential Address at the Harry Benjamin International Gender Dysphoria Symposium. This organization is currently known as WPATH (World Professional Association for Transgender Health), and is the preeminent transgender lobbying organization for the medical industry.
WPATH devotes itself to promotion of medical/surgical “treatment” of gender nonconformity, based on the philosophy that females and males who non-perform social roles ascribed to their sex should disguise themselves as members of the opposite sex to prevent corrosion of the gender hierarchy which ritualizes and enforces male domination and female subordination.
Dr. Harry Benjamin, an endocrinologist and sexologist, pioneered this “treatment” and is known as “The Godfather of Transsexualism”.
By Friedemann Pfaefflin, MD
“For a continental European it is a great pleasure to visit British Columbia and to watch the salmon climb the rivers and the salmon ladders to reach their spawning grounds where they fertilize and start their new journeys through the oceans. Just like the tides it seems to be an eternal circuit of being born and dying away. Every individual salmon contributes to it. It goes on and on, although not all salmons reach their places of origin and are able to procreate. Quite a few are caught by fishermen on their journey, and others are devoured by bigger fish or by the black bear. Some grow to an enormous size and if caught they are exhibited as trophies: the salmon king of a certain year or of an individual valley.
It is this picture that came to my mind when I was pondering the prospective topic for the Presidential Address at this Symposium. The journey of the salmons seemed to be a metaphor for our scientific dreams and endeavors. They are born and they die away, and we treat the names of selected individual scientists as trophies. We may call such a person a king scientist, and we admire this person for his or her contribution to the progress in the eternal quest of mankind to transcend its boundaries. The ideas of such a person may fertilize the minds of many others. They also may be treated by the entourage of the king salmon as if the truth had been found forever and as if the narrow stream of the individual valley is just like paradise. The followers thus may never become aware of what is going on in neighboring valleys. That may be one of the reasons why mankind has to repeat itself over and over again, and why every new generation seems to have to invent the same things that could have been known if one looked across the boundaries of one´s own valley.
It is the purpose of this presentation to demonstrate that some of the issues we are struggling with look like second or even third editions of problems our forefathers in the field had already tried to solve. I will use Harry Benjamin, Sigmund Freud and Magnus Hirschfeld, three of the most outstanding sexologists of the beginning of the century, who worked in the field, before the term sexology was known, to exemplify this.
Our Association carries Harry Benjamin´s name in its coat of arms as the name of the physician and scientist who paved the way to a better understanding of transsexualism, and above all, an easier access to cross gender living, cross sex hormonal treatment and sex reassignment surgery. Without his deep caring for far more than a thousand patients, without his engagement in academic and professional organizations, without his numerous talks and writings, these treatments might not have become as easily accessible as they are now. We owe him a lot, and his work has been acknowledged in previous presidential addresses, in the special issue of the Archives of Sexual Behavior in his memory, published about a year after his death (Ihlenfeld et al. 1988), and in the short portrait of him in the introduction to the abstracts of this conference (Schaefer & Wheeler 1997).
Before he turned to treating transsexual patients and responding to their concrete wishes, he had devoted much of his work to rejuvenating individual life or rather prolonging it. Both wishes, to transcend the time limitations of an individual life as well as to transcend individual boundaries of sex and gender most probably are as old as mankind itself – religious traditions of various backgrounds, myths, philosophies, pieces of art and literature giving testimony thereof.
We know quite a bit about his work and his life, but we are still missing a biography of him putting the roots of his research and clinical work into the perspective of contemporary scientific developments and investigating mutual influences between him and other king scientists and clinicians of his era, an epoque which witnessed an unprecedented development of sex research and sexual science. When he was a young man, the capitals of Austria and Germany, Vienna and Berlin, were the two very places to study sexology. Although he set off very early for the United States, he stayed in close contact with the leading researchers of those places, and he eagerly soaked up every new finding of sexual endocrinology and sexual psychology years before he met the first transsexual patient. Let me highlight just a few examples.
He was an ardent admirer of the work of Eugen Steinach (1940), Vienna, who, together with Magnus Hirschfeld (Steakley 1985, Baumgardt et al. 1985), Berlin, experimented with the transplantation of gonads to cure all kinds of what then was considered a sexual disorder, for instance homosexuality. Like Steinach, Benjamin believed in the beneficial effects of vasoligation or sterilization respectively, to postpone the process of aging and to cure – among other complaints – erectile dysfunctions. For the psychoanalysts among you it may be worth mentioning that even Sigmund Freud underwent such a sterilization operation in the hope to thus defeat his cancer disease and to slow down the process of aging (Schur 1972). This is worth mentioning because so many psychoanalytic colleagues are still reluctant to accept the overall beneficial results of somatic treatment measures in gender reassignment.
On one of his visits to Vienna, Benjamin met Freud and consulted him because of personal problems with sexual potency. Freud, at that time, was still rather inexperienced in his psychoanalytic technique – at least when judged from our knowledge of today – and he gave Benjamin a very primitive interpretation. He suggested Benjamin´s erectile dysfunction was due to his latent homosexuality, and you certainly can imagine that Benjamin did not appreciate this interpretation.
This short interaction between the two great men resulted in a permanent skepticism of Benjamin against psychoanalysis if not a thorough dislike which since then has been replicated in many encounters of transsexuals and their doctors. A prototypical example of it is found in the movie “I change my life” in which Vanessa Redgrave plays Renee Richards and in which the attempt of a psychoanalytic cure of the patient´s problem is profoundly ridiculed.”
Since sexism no longer matters, plaintiffs try using “gender identity” to win relief from sexist injury
August 12, 2013
“I lean more towards the feminine spectrum, but I do ovulate between masculine and feminine. It just depends on the day, girl!” – B. Scott, explaining his gender suit.
There was a time when lawyers filed actions against individuals and organizations that discriminated against their clients based on sex. Some of these cases involved damages caused by institutions or officials who illegally discriminated via enforcement of sexist stereotypes. These cases were usually brought on behalf of women. Examples include women who were not promoted due to their failure to exhibit ritualized behaviors of submission not required of their male coworkers , women who were required to don sexualized uniforms and maintain specific, expensive (unpaid) time-consuming body grooming and face-painting regimes as a condition of workplace readiness not required of male co-workers.
These lawsuits were filed on the grounds that sex-stereotyping is discriminatory against women, and when institutionally or officially enforced, illegal.
The current age of profound political backlash against the rights of women has resulted in a reinvigoration of state, official and institutional codification of sexual stereotypes (“gender”) as a legally protected form of discrimination now framed as a personal belief or “faith”. As such, sex discrimination has been re-classified as a state-protected institutional and personal “value”.
The new form of sex-based discrimination has elevated the sex-stereotype to a protected legal category that eclipses sex itself. Claims of sex discrimination are now opposed by the new protected “right to believe in” sex discrimination. This new protected form of sex stereotyping is called “gender” or “gender identity”. The legal creation of “Gender Identity” is identical to the old form of discriminatory sex stereotyping except that it now protects and codifies the “right to stereotype” while providing limited recourse against sex discrimination to individuals that publicly, formally pledge belief in sex stereotypes. Examples include statutes which allow males to displace females in state education Title IX sports programs on the basis that the males believe themselves to possess thoughts, feelings, and behaviors sex-stereotyped as female.
What then will become of those claims formerly filed under now eliminated sex discrimination protections? Two recent actions provide us with a clue.
Fashion pundit and femme gay male internet personality B.Scott filed a 2.5 million dollar lawsuit against Viacom and the BET cable network last week after an incident which took place during his July appearance on the pre-show for the BET Awards. Scott claims he was pulled off the air and told his clothing did not adhere to the company’s sex-based dress policy. He states that he was forced to change outfits to one that BET producers deemed appropriate for males based on sex-stereotypes. These actions resulted in alleged damage to Scott’s reputation due to an interruption of his performance, wrongful termination, loss of income, and emotional distress due to the unlawful infliction of discriminatory wardrobe policies based on sex. However since sex-stereotyping is now a protected legal category Scott’s attorney recommended filing suit on the basis of “Gender Identity” discrimination. One problem: Scott has no record of ever making public pledge or testimony of a personal transgender belief or “identity”. On the contrary, Scott has always maintained a strong pride in himself as a flaming gay man. As part of his lawsuit, Scott was forced to make a public statement adopting a personal “gender identity” and proclaiming himself to be transgender.
”Over the years my love muffins and strangers alike have questioned me about my gender identity. What IS B. Scott? As a society we’ve been conditioned to believe that a person has to be ‘exactly’ this or ‘exactly’ that. Biologically, I am male — as my sex was determined at birth by my reproductive organs.
However, my spirit truly lies somewhere in between. It is that same spirit that has allowed me to become so comfortable in my skin, choose how I express myself, and contributes to how I live my day-to-day life.
Transgender is the state of one’s gender identity (self-identification as woman, man, neither or both) not matching one’s assigned sex (identification by others as male, female or intersex based on physical/genetic sex). [source]
It is by that definition that I accept and welcome the ‘transgender’ label with open arms.
It is also by that definition that BET and Viacom willingly and wrongfully discriminated against my gender identity during the 2013 BET Awards Pre-Show.”
B.Scott’s announcement did not sit well with many in the transgender community who disputed the authenticity of his newly declared protected gender beliefs. Longtime trans activist and Transgriot blogger Monica “Fishy” Roberts (who believes he is female and refers to his penis as a “six inch neo-clitoris”) tweeted “When B Scott starts taking hormones and calling himself Brittany (or another femme name starting with ‘B’) and declares he’s transitioning then I’ll consider him part of Team Trans.”
Roberts and others rightfully observe that Scott’s sudden public testimonial of his newly adopted Gender Identity beliefs appears insincere and mercenary. However unlike an individual who suddenly proclaims Judaism to access a protected legal right to compel an employer to give them the day off for Passover, the protected legal category of Gender Identity requires no evidence of authenticity. Duration of belief, performance of rituals, membership in a faith affinity group are objective criteria used to parse self-declared legally protected personal belief identities. Gender Identity requires no such objective criteria. Anyone can claim it at any time, even retroactively, purely on the basis of personal report of one’s feelings. Gender Identity offers legal protection to anyone who is willing to declare at any time that they:
- possess intellectual, psychological or behavioral characteristics which fail to conform to social stereotypes based on reproductive sex,
-believe such non-reproductive traits are inextricably caused by reproductive biology,
-draw the conclusion that reproductive biology itself is therefore not objectively observable.
This new protective legal status for “sex-deniers” has undermined, if not removed, the grounds for claims based on sex discrimination, or at least provided cover for the lack of political will to enforce anti-discrimination claims of women, who are overwhelmingly the victims of such sex discrimination. It is little wonder that femme gay man Scott decided not to pursue remedy via sex-discrimination suit although that is obviously what he was a victim of if his account of events is factual.
Instead of asserting his right to dress as he wished regardless of sex, Scott’s representatives found it more advantageous in this legal environment to argue that Scott’s right to wardrobe hinged on his self-concept of himself as reproductively (partially) female.
In Quebec last month, management consultant and butch lesbian Tommi Sojourner filed a Judicial complaint on the grounds of “Gender Identity” after an incident of apparent sex-based harassment that occurred in a bizarre courtroom exchange with a judge who insisted on referring to the claimant as male over and over and over again, even after correction by Sojourner and opposing counsel over a dozen times. Sojourner, who does not perform femininity, expressed that being repeatedly referred to as male – after multiple corrections- based on her failure to conform to female sex-stereotypes was insulting, sexist, and deliberately harassing. Further, she alleges that her case was not given an objective hearing due to judicial bias based on her sex-role nonconformity. This is sex discrimination. It is discriminatory for a judicial official to insist that a woman is actually a male due to the fact that she fails to conform to sex-based stereotypes of dress and behavior and it is harassment to continue to do so after being corrected more than a dozen times.
Sojourner’s claim rests on the fact that she is not transgendered. If she was a genderist she would have been well pleased by the judge’s repeated cross-sex identification of her, based on sex-stereotypical norms. Regardless, in the post-sex legal landscape where “sex-denial” is itself a protected category, her attorney thought it expeditious to utilize a Gender Identity claim vs. a sex discrimination case. By this erasure Sojourner was not discriminated against as a woman based on sex, or as a lesbian, but on the dis-acknowledgement of her own personal free-floating self-concept of herself as (like Scott) inhabiting “femaleness“.
If sex does not exist, sex discrimination does not exist. Class-action litigation based on sex does not exist.
With the elimination of the legal category of sex and the removal of sex-stereotyping as an actionable wrong, litigants have no choice but to seek protection under “Gender Identity” on the basis that formerly discriminatory (now protected) sex-stereotypes are being incorrectly applied to them based on personal testimony of their self-reported, objectively unobservable, sex reproductive “self-concept”.
This is legal political feminist backlash circa 2013.