September 28, 2011
The following was posted this week on a Bay Area Lesbian listserve:
“ 9/25/2011 8:31:28 A.M. Pacific Daylight Time
Autumn Sandeen, a transgender activist and a blogger at Pam’s House Blend, has written about petitioning for a new birth certificate with a female designation based on removal of testicles but not actual full sex reassignment surgery. The Oregon surgeon who left Sandeen with a penis but no vagina has provided an affidavit asserting Sandeen “has had appropriate surgical treatment and has completed her transition to be female.” I would like to find an activist in San Diego who can monitor the Superior Court calendar, attend the petition hearing, and tell the judge that Sandeen does not meet the requirements of California Health and Safety Code section 103425 for a new birth certificate with amended sex designation.
H&S sec. 103425: “Whenever a person born in this state has undergone surgical treatment for the purpose of altering his or her sexual characteristics to those of the opposite sex.” It should be obvious that removal of testicles alone is insufficient to meet the requirements of the Health and Safety Code.
The San Diego Superior Court posts a five-day calendar of pending actions at
Sandeen’s relevant blog entries are at:
The relevance of Sandeen’s petition is that there are transgender activists who continue to press for access to venues where public nudity is common, necessary and/or required on the basis of asserting an identity as a woman, regardless of genital configuration. While my analysis of the legal issues is that any kind of “post-op only” policy will withstand any legal challenges claiming discrimination, defending and upholding the boundaries set in H&S 103425 is an important thing to do. I have written the Oregon Medical Board requesting review of the Oregon surgeon’s sex-reassignment affidavit practices.
As I do book publicity for the new edition of “Mirrors – Portrait of a Lesbian Transsexual,” I continue to get flamed for signing an open letter to Camp Trans in 2000 opposing its actions aimed at opening the Michigan Womyn’s Music Festival to all “self-identified women” rather than female-bodied women, and for having prepared testimony for the San Francisco Human Rights Commission backing Osento’s inclusive policies when transgender activists wanted that beloved bath open to all “self-identified women” rather than female-bodied women.
As I cannot afford to take a day off work and pay for airfare and airporter fare to testify in San Diego, I would like to find someone local willing and able to attend the petition hearing and uphold the law.
(Please do not respond to this post with one of the “transsexual women are all castrated men” rants that can be found elsewhere on the web.)
“Don’t Call It ‘Virtual’” (the novel)
“Buried Treasure” (the CD)
“Mirrors” (2011 edition) Amazon.com or CreateSpace store via gerinettick.com
“What’s my religion? I think it’s California.”
Gottardo Piazzoni (1872-1945) “
Who is Beth Elliott, and why is he looking for Lesbian proxies to conduct his very personal war against Autumn Sandeen?
“Beth” Elliott Basil Mattiuzzi is a fellow who has waged an unsuccessful 30 year battle to become a Lesbian. How has he attempted to achieve his fantasy? By lying about his sex, and disguising his body medically and via cosmetic surgery in a failed attempt to appear female. By writing “Lesbian Sex” articles under a false Lesbian persona a’ la LezBeReal and Gay Girl in Damascus. By “educating” Lesbians on improving Lesbianism, with writings such as “Why Bisexuality Is The Best Thing To Ever Happen To Lesbian Feminism”. By repeatedly attempting to insert himself into Lesbian politics and events and creating a fantastical and widely disputed biography. By ranting incessantly for thirty years about how unfair it is that women don’t embrace male “Lesbians”.
Some of you may recognize Mr Elliott from his recent public campaign against the Feminist submission letter to the UN by Lesbian attorneys which suggested that non-transgender males should not be permitted to file litigation claiming subjective “Gender Identity” rights in cases where there is no prior evidence of such a claimed “identity”. His rambling argument was focused on some fantasized future conspiracy where Lesbian Separatists could take over all Lesbianism and cause him to be ejected from private events for females (Guess what dude! You’re already not invited!) He ended his UN letter by asking UN officials to read his self-published book (lol!) titled “Mirrors: Portrait of a Lesbian Transsexual by Geri Nettick and Beth Elliott” (Mattiuzzi now admits he is both Geri Nettick and Beth Elliott and wrote the book about himself in the third -or forth???- person perspective).
Elliott is a guy who wrote the United Nations Commission on the Status of Women with his fears that “Lesbian Separatism” may take over an entire sexual orientation, causing every female who is oriented to other biological females to want him even less; he told the UN to read his “book”, and shared his strident concerns that non-transgender males may be restricted from free-access to private sex-segregated areas set aside for female protection from male predation.
Why would a peach like Elliott single out one particular transgender for trying to apply a liberal “interpretation” to laws that apply to fictional legal sex marker changes? Especially when thousands of other transgenders do the same? And when tons of out-loud-and-proud Men’s Rights Advocates are lobbying for- and litigating- their rights to “be women” and access female locker rooms, receive title nine sports funding, access female-only college dorms, etc while preserving their penile erections?
Don’t get me wrong, Mr Elliott is not alone. A well-known transsexual blogger not only took issue with Autumn’s public conflation of his orchiectomy with SRS, but actually wrote to Autumn’s surgeon to clarify whether the doctor classified testicular castration as legal sex reassignment, as Autumn claimed. (The surgeon’s office manager clarified that the surgeon did not support such a claim). Since that blogger decided their post singling out Autumn and their contacting of Autumn’s surgeon was not the best way to address the widespread issue of male transgenders fudging legal requirements, I will not identify them or quote their post here- although I will if anyone requires substantiation of my report. Autumn has blogged obliquely about the issue, framing the issue as one of “cyberbullying” (which is pretty funny considering the comments left on his post), and completely ignoring the issue of false legal recognition of “crossdressing dudes” as “female”. It’s all an issue of BIG MEANIES, apparently, and Sandeen forwards a restriction on First Amendment rights.
Which seems like an argument that Beth Elliott could get behind. So again, why the reason for Elliott’s very singular, very targeted war against Sandeen and his balls? Why appeal to the Lesbian community to target Mr Sandeen personally for a phenomenon which is widespread? (Hint- Lesbians are not interested in Elliott’s personal pathos). I’m not a huge fan of Autumn Sandeen. But I have observed that, unlike Elliott, he has never demanded that he has a “right” for Lesbians to pretend he is biologically female. Unlike Elliott, Sandeen has never tried to hide his transgenderism. Sandeen has always had the balls (ha) to be an openly male transgender (except for that whole little “I’m legally a female with a dick” thing). Is that why Elliott has targeted him? One can only speculate. But whatever the reason, it seems personal. Very personal.