Beth Elliott Makes It Personal

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

San Diego lesbian activist contacts wanted for one-day action

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,1056880&_dad=portal&_schema=PORTAL.

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.)

beth elliott

“Don’t Call It ‘Virtual'” (the novel)
“Buried Treasure” (the CD)
“Mirrors” (2011 edition) or CreateSpace store via

“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 Elliot

“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”.

Beth Elliot's widely disputed biography

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.

Recent Amazon prices for a used paperback copy of Janice Raymond’s The Transsexual Empire: The Making of the She-Male.

Coming this Fall on ABC and NBC.

Violent, Bizarre, Bloody illustration from Kelley Ann Busey's Planetransgender post "Cathey Brennan UN letter: Toxic Transphobia Death" (sic)

I was looking at Fab’s post about the Trans Panther Party’s terrorist activities and threats against myself and the women who sent a feminist legal submission to the UN . Reflecting on all the violent rhetoric and genuine threats that have come about and been directed toward the Lesbian authors of that UN submission (some of which I’ve documented on this blog), I thought back to where it all started.

I really think Bilerico and Pam’s House Blend need to be blamed for creating and stoking this campaign of disinformation, harassment, and stalking of Lesbian activists Cathy Brennan and Elizabeth Hungerford. Bilerico and PHB were the first LGBT media outlets to respond to the UN legal submission.

To anyone who hasn’t been following this:  the UN submission suggested that in matters of litigation involving males in female sex-segregated spaces, non-transgender males should not be able to claim “gender identity”, if they have no prior history of transgenderism. That’s it. Non-transgender males would be prevented from falsely claiming transgenderism to gain access to female sex-segregated spaces. Not unlike the caveat in the CT Gender Identity protections law which was passed this year and heralded as a success by the trans community. Nothing to do with surgical requirements, or any restriction whatsoever on transgender people. There’s nothing even vaguely anti-trans about the UN submission. It’s a pro- women’s rights submission. Not an anti-trans one. One could even say it was a pro-trans submission, as it proposed codifying the rights of transgender males to enter female spaces.

What freaked out the genderists is that two feminist attorneys drafted a letter to the UN that addressed “gender” in any way. That they spoke of that which must never be mentioned by women: Gender. Women who do speak of Gender must be attacked and silenced immediately. Which is what Bilerico and Pam’s House Blend did.

Bilerico and Pam’s House Blend, both mainstream LGBT sites, were the first to fire shots. Bilerico ran a hideously inflammatory and inaccurate post titled “Less Than Woman, Less Than Human“, which actually raised the topic of violent retaliation against Brennan and Hungerford. The Bilerico post falsely claimed that the UN letter sought to deny basic human rights to trans people. It claimed the letter sought to discriminate against trans people in employment and housing (which couldn’t be further from the truth). Then the post uncritically, and bizarrely went off to conflate the UN submission with Radical Feminism, solely because the post author apparently first saw the letter’s text on a Radical Feminist site.(Cathy Brennan has never been a Radical Feminist and has in fact spent considerable unpaid time advocating for the rights of transgender people.)

This was followed by descriptions of attacks and hate crimes against transgender people, claiming the UN submission would increase such attacks. It was the worst sort of “reporting”: inaccurate, inflammatory, and unrelentingly addled. The author Mercedes Allen never did post a retraction. Fellow Bilerico blogger Jillian Weiss later posted an appeal to decency to the violent rhetoric that followed, but Weiss never mentioned the original post that started it all: the Bilerico post. As an attorney Weiss was uniquely positioned to refute the disinformation. But apparently chose not to.

Pam’s House Blend published their version the next day, the disgustingly titled “Cathy Brennan and Elizabeth Hungerford Take Their Anti-Trans Hysteria to the UN”.

This post was bursting with the same outrageous level of untruth, hyperbole, disinformation and downright lies. The author Laurel Ramseyer claimed “… it would presumably allow any women in or near a public bathroom to become “panty police” and make a “show me your papers” demand of any other woman entering the bathroom.” – which is absurd since the UN submission only deals with civil litigation matters. It was another mainstream LGBT post filled with hateful anti-feminist rhetoric and pure shit-stirring fabrication. Not only was there no published retraction- but soon after Cathy posted a link on her long-term Pam’s profile to the blog set up to refute the disinformation  ( Pam Spaulding BANNED her, and deleted her account.

There will always be crazy-ass losers and unstable fringe activists that lack the social and intellectual skills required to discern nuance or legal complexity. OR EVEN REALITY. Violent bullies like Anthony Casebeer and weekend terrorist paramilitary warriors the Caucasian Trans Panther Party, cognitively impaired Kelly Anne Busey of Planetransgender, violence obsessed Marti Abernathey at Transadvocate and the disturbed Katrina Rose at Endablog have never read (or never comprehended) the Brennan Hungerford UN submission. But they damn sure read the mainstream posts from the “authorities” at Bilerico and Pam’s House Blend.

Eleven years ago Lyralisa Stevens killed a woman with a shotgun blast over a dispute about clothing. His victim was survived by two daughters. At the time of his incarceration Mr Stevens had been taking female hormones for 10 years, and had received silicone injections to his hips and buttocks. He received taxpayer funded female hormones during his incarceration at an annual cost of $1000.

According to CBS5 San Francisco, California provides such hormones to at least 300 prisoners at a taxpayer cost of $300,000 a year. It is unknown how many prisoners would request the $15,000 to $50,000 surgery if a precedent is set.

The first taxpayer-funded criminal “sex change” surgery in the UK, performed on John/Jane Anne Pilley, (incarcerated for kidnap and attempted murder of a female taxi driver) not only received a taxpayer funded “sex change” surgery and was transferred to a female prison, but later filed suit for taxpayer-funded surgery to try to reverse the procedure when he changed his mind.

No US state has yet approved such tax-payer funded surgery for convicted criminals.

From the Sacramento Bee:  “Although California and other western states are required to provide transgender inmates with hormone therapy pursuant to a 2000 federal court decision, a ruling in Stevens’ favor would have made California the first state required to provide medically eligible inmates with sex reassignment surgery.”

Two years ago, after serving nine years of his sentence for the murder of Bonnie Lynn Lewis, the California shotgun-wielding murderer Lyralisa Stevens decided he wanted to be transferred to a women’s prison, which California permits when males have had their penis and testicles surgically removed. Using a court-appointed attorney he filed suit for the state to provide and fund the surgical procedure that would make his transfer possible, claiming that his clinical transgender condition had taken a turn for the worse. Clinical transgender diagnosis is based solely on the patient’s self-report, and is the only psychiatric condition that is treated surgically.

Ronshonda Renee and Staci McWilliams, the children of Bonnie Lynn Lewis, who Stevens murdered in 2003, became aware of the situation when they saw it on the news in April and were aghast. They told CBS5 “I just feel that it was totally wrong for you to take someone’s mom away from them and then still turn around and want special privileges. I feel that whatever you are getting, you deserve it,” said McWilliams.

“You want the tax payers to pay? For you to use our hard earned money to pay for you to have surgery after you committed a murder? I don’t think so,” said Ronshonda Renee.

The court gave no reason for its dismissal of the appeal. Transfer to a female prison was also denied. Mr Stevens, now 42, is serving 50 years to life. His attorney has not decided whether to challenge the San Francisco 1st District Court of Appeal’s decision by appealing to the state supreme court.

From the LATimes:  “Alison Hardy, Stevens’ attorney, acknowledged that a victory in her client’s case was always a long shot but said the court’s decision still came as a disappointment. “Fifteen years ago, hormones weren’t prescribed in California prisons, either,” Hardy said. “We were hoping to…establish a beachhead.”

 Research shows that there is no evidence that transgender “sex-change” surgery improves the lives of transgenders.




When Trannies Attack

September 19, 2011