December 29, 2011
Women need to take back the public Gender dialogue from the Genderists.
From Right Wing Conservatives to Transgenderists, all the members of the Genderist spectrum claim that certain unrelated traits, roles, abilities and proclivities are based on reproductive sex (or it’s facsimile). And they are forcing their sexist beliefs into law. Females are being driven back into the dark ages.
Help me with this. What initiatives would fix this mess?
What are some of the Gender Initiatives that those harmed by Gender (females) should be actively lobbying for?
- Laws against Gender based marketing to children should passed, and enforced, including toys, activities, media including television film and internet.
- Genderism should be eliminated from public education, and not on an “opt out” basis either. All students should take Home Ec and Shop, whether they want to or not. Sex based discrimination such as hetero prom requirements and sex based dress requirements for school photos should be outlawed as well. Sex-based differences in rules about clothing should be eliminated. The only difference based on sex in public schools should be actually based on biological sex (and in defense of females against male predation traditions) such as female bathroom facilities, female sports opportunities, female locker rooms, appropriate sex-based health care. Schools should be evaluated for sex-based equality in achievement, and departments which show a sex-based disparity should be fixed.
- Violence against females should be prosecuted as a hate crime, with increased penalties.
- Curfews for males in areas where male crimes exceed female crimes by more than 20%.
- Censure of advertising which exploits Gender stereotyping based on sex.
- Penalties for all commercial enterprises who exhibit sex-based bias in numbers of females represented, female beauty requirements, sex inequity in producers, directors, staff, crew, techies, laborers, associates, workers, management, executive boards, union members, etc. Penalties exist until inequities are corrected. Funds from penalties go to training females.
- States with more than 10% sex difference in representation should be federally penalized with decreased funding.
- All overseas aid should be retracted for countries with more than 10% sex difference in government.
- All laws enshrining legal status for sex-based roles (“Gender Identity”) should be eliminated and replaced by laws against sex-based discrimination.
- 200% tax on pornography, tax benefiting initiatives to support females out of porn.
- Huge fines for punters/johns, criminalization, and the money going to supporting females out of prostitution.
- Class action suit reimbursing Lesbians and Gays retroactively for tax penalties for sex-based tax discrimination.
Okay, help me out here. Add your legal initiative that will help fix this whole female hating/sexism/gender mess. Or critique the ones I’ve added. Let’s make a master list of what it would take to turn this shit around. A do-able, actionable, list of initiatives that we can lobby for. Be realistic but visionary. Be concrete. Let’s make a list of goals to implement in 2012.
December 29, 2011
FTMs: Girl Things I won’t get rid of after transition-
Pink pajamas, fuzzy bunny slippers, pink slippers, conditioner, lotion, pink hoodie, pretty teardrop knife, colorful socks, yoga pants, jacket, hair care products, knitting, pony stuff, jewelry, birth control, stuffed animals, anime and manga, prom dress, baby clothes, pajama pants, crochet, nail polish, eyeliner, pierced ears, beadwork, knitting, sewing, conditioners and shampoos, facial mud masks, bubble baths, stuffed animal, striped socks, boots, jacket, dolls, skirts, sewing, embroidery, stuffed animals, nancy drew books, shampoo, conditioners, scented wall plug-ins, knick-knacks, belly-dancing stuff, jewelry, knitting, colorful socks, jewelry, engagement ring, painting my toenails, stuffed animals, prom dress, conditioners and shampoos, nail polish, hair stuff, notepads, pink things, knitting, jewelry, make-up, pants, stuffed animals, knitting, purple clothes, socks, musical instruments, feminine behavior habits that I taught myself to “try to be normal”, crochet, jacket, jewelry, stuffed animals, painting drawing and sculpting, stuffed animals, underwear, socks, tops, jewelry, stuffed animals, dolls, purses, make-up, skin products, hair products, bright patterned socks, puppies and kittens, jewelry, clothing, hair straightener, lotion, stuffed animals, hair straightener, twilight series, lesbian books, DVDS, hope chest, Tegan and Sara CDs, knitting, Backstreet Boys CDs, nail polish, stuffed animals, plushies, yaoi manga, paintings, teddy bear, shampoos, shower gels, underwear, pink diary, pink horse grooming tool box, scarves, nail polish, floral sheets, stuffed animals, dolphin and puppy stickers, underwear, dresses and skirts, crotchet, beadwork, ceramics, yarn, armpit shaving, nail polish, ponies, nail polish, Gilmore Girls DVDs, stuffed animals, chick flicks, cooking, stuffed animals, artwork, pettypoint, stuffed animals, stickers, stationary, pajama pants, clothing, teddy bear, wig, stuffed animals, pants, nail polish, underwear, “Labyrs-like pendant”, Lesbian books, pink flower bed linen, old photos of me, my “sense of style”, stuffed animal, skin care products, lotion, stuffed animals, pajama pants, Christmas sweater, perfume, the color lavender, stuffed animals, acting, decorating and photography, being afraid of snakes, coloring books, HS senior picture, dresses.
MTFs: Boy Things I won’t get rid of after transition-
Male sex drive, interest in “exclusively gay stuff”, poker, football and hockey, “maturity and general good taste”, good music, playing drums and starting an all M2T band, guns and knives, hunting and fishing, fast cars, weight lifting, video games, jacket, technical things, engineering and physics stuff, football and baseball, violent video games and horror movies, jackets, combat boots, fast cars, big trucks, fishing, guns, more guns, jackets, comics and video games, real rock music, baseball, black powder weapons, heavy metal music, “outright enjoyment of confrontation”, my addiction to porn, nerd games, need for girlfriend to feel protected by, and proud of me, sci fi and fantasy genres, time with male friends, colognes, $400 sunglasses, band t-shirts, Vans and Converse shoes, jacket, NY Yankees cap, boxers, Xbox, snowboard, cars, racing license, watching rugby, action anime, fart jokes, saying the word “bro”, my “guyish personality”, being the big spoon when spooning, boxers and boxer briefs, bacon, woodworking tools, rugby, hockey, loud bands, pom poms and tight jazz pants from HS dance team, weight lifting, sports, football, baseball, guns, target shooting, fishing, metal music, expensive suits and bespoke shoes, woodworking tools worth $10,000, video games, football and baseball, being a huge nerd, beating people at driving games, cars and trucks, cowboy hat, toy collection, hunting compound bow, games, anime, manga, video games and guitar playing, “Real Rock” music, flying- solo pilot’s license, learning to sail, maths, physics and science, computers, geeky stuff, my penis, video games, my sense of being protective over my sister, competitiveness, geeky stuff, cologne, sports, buffalo wings, “my career”.
Compiled from the “Boy/Girl Things I Won’t Give Up” threads on a trans forum.
December 18, 2011
November 16, 2011
September 16, 2011
NJ appeals court affirmed yesterday that the government has a “moral” interest in enforcing unequal laws based on sex. In short: Male bodies are fine, Female bodies are obscene and must stay covered. Male chests are respectable, Female chests are pornographic. Male breasts = Moobs. Female breasts = Illegal Dirty Pillows.
Phoenix Feeley, a women’s rights advocate and (literal) fire-breathing performance artist and circus performer lost the appeal yesterday in her ongoing battle against charges incurred in 2008 when she was arrested –twice in one day- for removing her top on the beach like a male.
From the appeal decision:
The facts are essentially uncontested. On June 28, 2008, defendant removed the top of her bathing suit while sitting on the public beach in Spring Lake. Police officer Robert Zoino approached and asked that she put her top back on. When defendant refused, Zoino arrested her and brought her to police headquarters.
After being processed and supplied with a tee shirt by the police, defendant was released. However, shortly thereafter, Zoino and another officer responded to a call of a topless woman at a street intersection near police headquarters. Defendant was again arrested and issued additional summonses. Police officer Michael Rutka found the tee shirt supplied to defendant hanging from the entrance door of the police department.
Before the municipal court judge, and again on appeal to the Law Division, defendant did not challenge these proofs.2 Instead, she argued, among other things, that application of the public nudity ordinance under the facts presented violated defendant’s rights to equal protection under the fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution. Specifically, defendant contended that men were permitted to appear topless on the public beach, but women were not. Both the municipal court judge, and the Law Division judge, rejected the argument.
In a thorough written opinion, the Law Division judge cited extensively to our decision in State v. Vogt, 341 N.J.Super. 407 (App. Div. 2001). Noting that “defendant . . . [may have] present[ed] compelling policy arguments in her brief,” the judge nonetheless concluded he was “bound by the holding of the appellate court because both the factual circumstances and the regulations in question in Vogt and in this case [we]re indistinguishable.” He found defendant guilty of two ordinance violations, imposed an aggregate fine of $750, and this appeal followed.
Defendant argues that we should depart from continued reliance upon our decision in Vogt because it “unjustifiably sanctions arrest and prosecution based on gender.” The argument lacks sufficient merit to warrant extended discussion in this opinion. R. 2:11-3(e)(2).
[I]t shall be unlawful for any person to appear or travel on any street, avenue or road, beach, waterway, alleyway, driveway or any area of private property open to public view in the Borough or appear in any other such place in the Borough in a state of nudity; in an indecent or lewd dress or garment; or make any indecent exposure of his or her person; or urinate in any of the above described places except in public restrooms.”
She was charged with two counts of Public Nudity, one count of Dressing and Undressing in Public, two counts of Disorderly Conduct (later dismissed) and one count of Obstruction.
According to her blog she was:
Feeley has been fighting for years against antiquated sex-based clothing laws that discriminate against women, and has put her safety and freedom on the line to do so. In 2005 she was wrongfully arrested and detained in Manhattan for walking down the street bare-chested, even though New York City had repealed its discriminatory sex-based clothing laws in 1992. She won a $29,000 settlement for that illegal arrest.
From yesterday’s NJ appeals court decision:
“In Vogt, supra, 341 N.J. Super. at 416-17, we concluded that “there [wa]s no constitutional right for a woman to appear topless on a public beach,” and “[r]estrictions on the exposure of the female breast are supported by the important governmental interest in safeguarding the public’s moral sensibilities, and th[e] ordinance [wa]s substantially related to that interest.” Id. at 417. We further noted that distinctions based upon gender must satisfy an “`intermediate’ level of scrutiny,” i.e., “the distinction must be justified by an important governmental interest that is substantially accomplished by the challenged discriminatory means.” Id. at 417-18 (citations omitted). “The burden of justifying the classification is on the state, which must show that the claimed justification is `exceedingly persuasive.’” Id. at 418 (quoting United States v. Virginia, 518 U.S. 515, 533, 116 S.Ct. 2264, 2275, 135 L. Ed. 2d 735, 751 (1996)). We determined that “the ordinance satisfie[d] both the federal and state tests for equal protection.” Id. at 417.
Defendant has presented no principled reason for us to depart from our holding in Vogt. We therefore affirm.”
(All Bolding mine.) In other words, women’s legal rights to equality are based on safeguarding arbitrary cultural sex discrimination traditions. The court’s obligation is to uphold sex-based social customs, even if discriminatory against females.
July 20, 2011
“OK so behaving male seems to be an issue for me. I know I FEEL male inside, but sometimes I act way to girly and I need to work on that. I guess part of the reason is my family expects me to be a girl so I do all I can to make them happy so I haven’t really had the chance to practice. How do I behave male? I’ve tried studying my father’s behaviour and sometimes I have rare cases when I act a little male myself. Other than that I haven’t got any idea on how to act like a boy. Any suggestions? Advice?” Read the rest of this entry »
I dropped back over to the Alice Dreger article on the medicalization of gender non-conformity in children (that I mentioned the other day here) to check out the comments. There were a few comments left by an Intersex person and activist named Georgina that were so thoughtful, well-researched, and well spoken that I am reprinting them here.
I get an awful lot of parents coming here to read and get perspectives on their sex-role noncompliant children who are so often pushed into a “treatment path” towards medicalized sterilization and lifetime disability by the trans lobby and by groups that claim to be supportive of children that reject sex roles but are actually pushing a medicalized gender enforcement. Groups like Trans Youth Family Allies, whose very motto “Trust. Accept. Confidence. Treatment.” epitomizes submission to sex-role enforcing and medically disabling “treatments”. For that reason I am reprinting a few of her comments to assist questioning parents who might otherwise miss such an important perspective left 60 comments down on a thread. Do feel free to read them on the original article comment thread if you prefer by clicking on the link to the article at the top of this post. Otherwise, for your convenience here they are:
“Actually this is NOT a trans issue, it is a human rights and children’s rights issue. Children should be accepted and loved as they are, and a societally defined “mismatch”of Gender and Sex should never lead to assumption that a child will need to or ought to change their mind or their body. Children should be free to explore and to be and to grow. We should start with the assumption that everything about them (body, mind, gender expression) is to be treasured as it emerges. The type of thinking that starts socially “transitioning” children in a pathway towards surgery at 5 or six hatefully pathologises the childs body in the same way earlier therapies hatefully pathologies hatefully pathologised childrens minds and identities. Intersex activists like myself have fought long for acceptance of diversity and against parents or mediocos making life-limiting decisions for children. This applies as much to children society (or parents or medicos) judges as having as miss-match of gender and biology as it does to intersex children with biological aspects that don’t match conventionally.
In adult life people chose gender expressions, sexuality and roles they never could have anticipated as children. We should not let parents or medicos limits life options for children by offerring sterilization and medical dependancy as part of package deal to “fix”gender/sex missmatch. The possibility that a child might grow up to be gay, genderqueer, or even a non-op transgender person is denied these children. While I am utterly against Dregar’s (former) advocacy of DSD terminology I believe she is that rare species of Academic who actually braves learning and changing her opinion to adapt to new understanding. This issue is really important human rights one regardless of your views on Dregar. And to the Academic [refers to Zoe Brain-GM] who has an astounding ignorance of the growing practice of transitioning children before they have the cognitive development to understand sex v’s gender (let alone the happy missmatches they might find as an adult) – please try to familiarise yourself with this very visible increasing trend (the topic of this article). Type “trans children” into you tube – and watch the multitude of interviews with children and the parents who descibe their 6year old’s genitals as birth defects and watch while parents tell lies to their children about the exciting surgical plans already made for them.
Posted by Georgina on July 8, 2011 at 6:35 AM “
” Two Families’ Reactions to Sons who like Pink:
The program and article I’d like you to look at show two different ways parents might react to having a son who from pre-school age seemed to behave in non-gender conforming (“girly”) ways.
What if your preschooler son was “Girly”?
If your preschooler son asked for a Barbie doll, how would you feel? Would you give it to him? In years gone-by almost all parents would answer a resounding “no!” to that question and would probably add “my son would never ask for that” in a defensive or dismissive tone. These days many parents are more flexible. They allow children access to toys and even clothes of the “opposite” gender, seeing it as part of growing up and exploring. But what about families of boys who recurrently break gender norms, those who raise undeniably feminine boys?
Let’s look at two very different families who let their son’s “choose pink”, and how these families different assumptions about gender lead to very different socialization of their children, and, consequently a very different range of future possibilities for their children.
Family One : “My son the pink boy” – by Sarah Hoffman
This article “My son the pink boy” (published on the Open Salon blog on 21st Feb 2011) describes a mothers acceptance of her son’s gender non- conforming choices. She let her son wear dresses, grow his hair and do ballet instead of football. The mother “Sarah Hoffman” notes other parents mixed reactions to her son, but also describes his happy interaction with both boys and girls his own age. She still sees her son as a boy – but describes his shade unconventional gender expression as being a “pink boy”. Hoffman notes peoples assumptions that her son will grow up to be gay but asserts “Random Mom doesn’t know who or what my son is going to grow up to be, any more than she knows who or what her kid is going to grow up to be.” Hoffman asserts that gender expression doesn’t necessarily predict sexual orientation and gives her husband’s feminine behavior as a heterosexual example of a feminine man, but further states that she will embrace her son’s orientation whichever way it goes.
Sarah Hoffman defends her son’s right to self-expression, and embraces and accepts his choices and his right to determine and define his own identity and sexuality as he grows. She accepts him as a perfect and healthy variation of his gender and sex and does not limit what or who he might be in the future. Hoffman’s son is likely to internalize positive and accepting ideas about himself because of this positive upbringing
Hoffman’s article also provides an insightful analysis of hidden homophobia in both social and media reactions to non-conforming gender expression in boys. She describes how talk show Guru Dr Phil discourages feminine behavior in boys because of its association with homosexuality
In the 1970’s when feminine behavior in boys was widely ostracized, many feminine boys were diagnosed with Gender Identity Disorder. Researcher Zucker theorized these boys would go on to be surgery seeking transgender people. In a large scale longditudinal study it was found that these boys rarely ended up trans – usually ending up self-accepting homosexual men (roughly 3/4) or heterosexual men (roughly 1/4). This is important to consider when looking at the socialization in the following video, set in a cultural context where there is little tolerance for gender ambiguity.
Family Two – Real life: Transgender Kids – The Romero Family
This documentary details the journey of a number of children who are being socialized towards surgery intended to match their body with their gender expression.
Josie Romero was born male, but showed a preference for feminine toys and clothes. In Josie’s cultural context gender roles are still very traditional, with no room for ambiguity. Such cultures are usually also stridently homophobic. In such cultures men are masculine, and because homosexuality is seen as “sinful”, it is something you would avoid seeing the possibility of in your child. Boys in such cultures internalize the view that pink and sparkly is only for girls, so if they feel drawn to such things it compromises their gender identity. Socially unacceptable variations can sometimes be excused as blameless by re-conceptualizing them as medical problems. Here Josie’s family describes their child’s penis as a birth defect. They are blind to other differences in primary sexual characteristics. Josie is told by her mother she will get an operation that will fix her birth defect by turning her penis inside out to make it the vagina it was meant to be and hormones will give her a female puberty. When Josie asks “How?” her questions are brushed off. Science and medicine don’t offer Josie these possibilities. If she does not escape the path already plotted for her Josie will be sterilized and artificial genitals will replace her real ones before she even gets to try them. She will be medically dependent for life. She will never experience a live and responsive endocrine system, only a flat-line one delivered by pills. Josie is being socialized in a way that deprives her as self-determination and betrays her with false choices. The characterization of her biological self as defective, will likely be internalized in her self –perception, as will the lack of autonomy created by her dependence on medical intervention she has not initiated. Her experience of surgery and treatment might be expected to be closer to that of an intersex child who has had surgery chosen for them than the potentially empowering experience of a self-determined transexual who has chosen surgery for themselves. Josie’s parents say she has made this choice, but it is clear that an informed choice could not be made by an eight year old in this situation.
Josie has been socialized in a way that limits her future choices and autonomy. The drastic pathway planned for Josie at the tender age of eight is new and extreme form of gender policing, where if minds and behavior can’t be conformed, to sex –matching ideals then bodies are controlled to give the appearance of a match.
Henslin, J. M., Possamai, A. and Possamai-Inesedy, A. (2011) Sociology: A Down-to-Earth-Approach, Pearson Australia
Hoffman, S. My son the pink boy, Salon.com 2011, Feb 21st.
Zucker, KJ. Gender identity development and issues. Child Adolescent Psychiatric Clinics North America 2004, 13: 551-568.
Posted by Georgina on July 8, 2011 at 6:53 AM “
July 12, 2011
July 7, 2011
Just a quick plug for an interesting article that ran last week in Seattle’s The Stranger by noted Bioethicist (and non-feminist) Alice Dreger. Even though Dreger remains somewhat uncritical about the causes of objectively observed statistical differences in male and female behaviors, the article is quite interesting and well worth a read for anyone with an interest in the medical/surgical “reparative treatment” of gender non-conforming (mainly gay) children and the promotion of such by the Transgender Lobby.
Unlike many writers Dreger is well aware of the research and statistics around gender non-conforming children and presents the data objectively.
“Sex-changing interventions are nontrivial. They involve substantial physical risk, including major risk to sexual sensation, and a lifelong commitment to trying to manage hormone replacement. Most people seem to get how serious sex-changing interventions are when we’re not talking about transgender. A couple of weeks ago, a man writing into Savage Love mentioned that he had voluntarily been castrated—a fetish, don’t you know—and the commentators went, well, nuts. And most people get that it was wrong for doctors in the past to take baby boys born with small penises and sex-change them with genital surgeries and hormonal interventions.
But somehow if we wrap these major interventions around gender identity, we’re supposed to believe they are not that big a deal in terms of planning for a child’s future? And the clinician who tries to get a gender dysphoric kid to learn to like her or his innate body really is a Nazi? Not buying it.”
Read the whole article (and see why I posted a pic of Tommy the Train ) at: