SCIENCE!

November 8, 2013

1380553_10103937554441214_557615254_n

.

Here is an example of this “science” at work:

http://lilydoessf.tumblr.com/post/66023565311/transgender-discrimination-at-holy-cow-on-folsom

81 Responses to “SCIENCE!”

  1. Michelle Says:

    Oh my goodness, he claims the male security guard is using his masculinity to intimidate him. I can’t even begin to comprehend the double standards here. Then he completely dismisses the manager/owners concern for women’s safety and the threat of rape. The very real threat of rape which does occur in women’s restrooms.
    Last month a teacher was murdered in the women’s bathroom by a young male.
    This man claims he is a woman yet he shows absolutely no concern or respect for actual women. Actual women care about not making others uncomfortable even at their own expense – he is the opposite, and places himself far above women’s comfort.

    • Ashland Avenue Says:

      I KNOW, RIGHT?!! He whines about masculinity being intimidating, but then shows the oh-so-typical trans total lack of understanding as to why women might be upset at having a male (and he looks very male) in a private space such as a women’s restroom. Because somehow we’re just supposed to know, with our magic girl powers, that he somehow isn’t up to no good.

      And it’s not just the threat of rape or molestation – it’s also about basic freaking privacy. When I’m changing a tampon, I don’t want a male around. It’s a woman thing, dude.

      What a narcissistic POS this guy is. The unisex bathroom just wasn’t good enough for him! Waaaaah! Yet another white male crying victimhood. I guess we lesbians and gay folks are now supposed to get all up in arms about this – and straight people too. Or something. Yeah, I’ll be sure to get right on that.

      • svenn diaphragm Says:

        “The unisex bathroom”

        For frickin’ seriously?! So it was self-inflicted discrimination or some crap? ack. wtf. *facepalm2000*

      • anon Says:

        Well of course, it’s up to women not to get raped isn’t it? But no no, he doesn’t have any male privilege in his thinking- I mean her thinking. That’s just transphobic!

      • Adrian Says:

        @svenn diaphragm – That’s just it though. The “unisex” bathroom doesn’t serve the need for validation.

        If an M2T fully passes at first glance (clothed, dark bar, most people are a bit tipsy, he’s using a stall) no one will say boo when he enters the women’s room. If he’s just in there to pee and leave (as surely plenty are) no one says a thing, he leaves, everyone is happy or at least none the wiser.

        These issues only come up when an M2T is NOT passing, even under those conditions. That’s the elephant in the room no one ever wants to face.

        When it’s a non-passing M2T, he goes into the women’s, and people think the obvious “oh no, skeeve in the women’s room” (because the “dressing” is not helping, here – if it’s a non-femmed-out man in the women’s room people probably assume he made a mistake and just politely tell him he’s in the wrong bathroom, which in most cases is true and the guy apologizes red-faced and leaves). So they make a stink. If the situation is really bad, people outside the bathroom already noticed and made a stink too.

        So the confrontation happens. And the suggestion of “hey, you can use the unisex bathroom” happens. But the thing is, that would be admitting a sort of “failure” for the M2T. The sting has already happened – he didn’t pass, obviously.

        The wonderful magic of the laydees washroom (well, aside from the amusement park in there, right? LOL) is that if a questionable possibly not quite passing M2T goes in, and isn’t questioned, it’s like ammo – “hey, I went into the women’s and no one said anything, people who go into the women’s and no one complains are obviously women, because women use the women’s, so – importantly! people who see me go in must surely assume therefore I’m a woman! SCORE!”

        If we got rid of sexed bathrooms and had only unisex bathrooms (say, a series of only the “one holer” single room bathrooms, so no danger of anyone walking in on anyone else) I suspect a lot of the M2T bathroom brigade would be upset because that means losing the potential validation of being seen entering the women’s.

        It’s a general phenomenon, I think – the whole idea is to reify the “gender” binary, keep the boxes (hell, FORTIFY the damn boxes) but proclaim to the world that they belong in the “other” box. So people see them sitting in the other box, the “women” box, and say, well, they must be women, they’re sitting in the women box.

        Whereas, if we smash the boxes entirely, then there’s no potential validation happening that way. People see a human in a box, a generic “human” box, or just sitting in a field that has no boxes, just a crowd of humans, and they can’t tell what “gender” any individual is and don’t care, well, that messes up the whole game.


    • He calls that (picture) presenting as a woman?!


      • Adrian: ” The wonderful magic of the laydees washroom (well, aside from the amusement park in there, right? LOL) is that if a questionable possibly not quite passing M2T goes in, and isn’t questioned, it’s like ammo – “hey, I went into the women’s and no one said anything, people who go into the women’s and no one complains are obviously women, because women use the women’s, so – importantly! people who see me go in must surely assume therefore I’m a woman! SCORE!””

        This is brilliant and right on the damn money.


  2. That link…!
    “I don’t know of any magic test to differentiate cis women, trans women, cross-dressers, and others, but believe me, this was about the most unambiguous presentation you can imagine.”

    He included a picture of himself into his rant. He could have DDD-cups, and he still looks male. That “magic test” is one glance, and a casual one, to boot.
    But of course that must be my inability to do science speaking.

    Also, I have a question: Holy Cow is obviously private property. These laws he is presenting, do they apply to a private restroom? I mean, is there something like domestic authority in the US and if so, can it be overridden by SF’s rules?

  3. Violet Irene Says:

    Well I’m impressed! The majority of those snappy “answers” are total non sequiturs. Even the Bible one! Just because it says not to “speak ill” of people doesn’t mean “let creepy dudes do whatever they want, to be nice.” Sheesh. And the answer to “it will encourage men to dress like women” is completely unrelated. Yet, I am sure they see this as some kind of monument to their intellectual superiority.

    • femingen Says:

      Not even. Leviticus 25:5 – “A woman shall not wear man’s clothing, nor shall a man put on a woman’s clothing; for whoever does these things is an abomination to the LORD your God.” If you care about such things…


  4. Wow. Apparently ‘gender-determining brain structures’ is what causes most male-born people to be a danger to females in the restrooms.

    So if they lack those structures, it’s all good.

    And here was me believing those feminist ideas about males being socialized to be predatory.

    I also believed that the physical component of privacy needs relating to changing clothes and toiletting are about bodily functions not brain structures …

    But if all this is the case, shouldn’t our activist response be to try amending the brains of the majority of the male-born so that they no longer have these structures that cause all the problems?

    • anon Says:

      You gotta love when these people who want the support of feminists and gays rely on sexism to justify their own existence.

  5. liberalsareinsane Says:

    Translation: “I’m a fuckin pervert”!! “I LOVE being a sanctimonious pervert and it’s my fucking right as a man, er, woman to get my way no matter what”!! “Your noticing that I’m a huge asshole makes you a horrible human being”!!”Stop looking at my dick,er, ladystick”.

  6. JT Says:

    Hi GallusMag:

    Sorry for writing a message in comments, but I didn’t see an email link anywhere. There’s nothing in this message that can’t be shared publicly, anyway.

    You probably wouldn’t approve of my personal politics. I can just some them up by saying I’m male, traditional, and patriarchal. However, I have read most of your blog in the past few days, and intend to read the rest of it. I’ve been fascinated by the perspective and insight you present. I really thank you for making this blog.

    A few decades ago when I entered puberty I started experiencing what is now called autogynephilia. However, back then there was no Internet and I had no clue what it was about. Before I could physically masturbate, for about two years, I would wear clothing from female family members. (Obviously it’s pretty embarrassing to admit this.) It was extremely arousing, though I didn’t know what arousing was back then. I would have described it as feeling great. However, a couple years later when I became sexually active with girlfriends, the cross dressing ceased. It picked up a little later in life, but, only in the closet. The truth was, perhaps due to my orthodox upbringing, this aspect of myself always caused revulsion. I was also disgusted by MTFs that I met.

    I never heard anyone describe autogynephilia as misogynistic until I read this blog. But I will say that I think it’s entirely appropriate. I am happily married and have been for some time. Kids, house, etc. But when I think that if I had been brought up in a household where I had access to the Internet and ‘understanding’ parents, I would have possibly transitioned…It’s really horrifying. I think an irony is that despite the ‘liberated, sex-positive’ atmosphere of today, there’s no teaching about the nature of lust and sexual arousal, and how they are not our persona. (Hope you don’t think I’m evangelizing). But the problem of men making their lust and sexual arousal their persona is working to the detriment of women. Also a coincidental agreement between traditionalism and radfem seems to be the understanding that there are physical sexes. This is something the transcommunity seems to deny. Though it seems that radfem sees no mental differences. (Correct me if I’m wrong. Yours is the first Radfem perspective I’ve read.)

    I’m somewhat out of touch, but I had NO idea that trans men could use female bathrooms and were waging campaigns to eliminate female (do I really have to say ‘real female?’) meetings, etc. And by trans-men, I mean men with working male sex organs? Really?! Because from the mass media perspective that I’ve received over the years, it only seems like men who are legally women, after sex changes. Actually, now that I think about it, the reason I got to your blog was because I read about Christine Benevuto and her ex Joy Lidy. When I read more about it here, I realized that Joy Lidy is a female professor who has a dick and his balls. This I really met with disbelief, because from a mainstream perspective you only hear people saying (in a high-pitched ‘laydee’ voice) “I’m a woman now, blah blah blah.) And there’s no mention of the fact that this woman is a man who can still fuck women. In short, I’m really disgusted. By the time I got to the ‘cotton ceiling’ war, my perspective on MTFs has totally changed from understanding them as people struggling with a terrible problem to mentally sick people counseled by mentally sick people.

    I guess the idea that men in drag are waging successful legal wars to congregate with females was the biggest shock to me. Well, I could go on and on about what I’ve learned from this blog. As I stated before you and I would probably not get along politically. But I will say I think you’re awesome and I thank you for the courage and work you’ve put into this blog.

    • GallusMag Says:

      Thank you for reading and commenting!

    • Ashland Avenue Says:

      JT, if you’re going to be reading more about this issue, you should know that “trans men” has come to mean women who want to be men, and “trans women” means men who want to be women. (I noticed in your next-to-last paragraph you had it backwards.) I know, it’s confusing. And FWIW, I like your way better.

      Also, I was like you once – I had great sympathy for trans people. Then I saw what they thought of women (demonstrated by their selfish actions), and I witnessed their staggering narcissism. Now I know better.

      If you’re a conservative (it totally sounds like you are, of course, but I didn’t want to presume), I’d like you to be aware of this: not all lesbian and gay people think alike. The GLBT organizations like to make it seem like we do, but it simply ain’t the case. Whether it’s the trans issue, or Bradley Manning (nope, not gonna call him Chelsea!), or issues of what constitutes prejudice, there are a myriad of opinions within this large group. Unfortunately, recently anyone who questions trans actions in any way is slapped with the “bigot” label, so that keeps a lot of folks from expressing their true feelings. Whatever. I’ve been called worse.

  7. survivorthriver Says:

    Great push back from the authorities, here. “This is a female bathroom” sez it.

    A straight born-woman friend of mine, now educated about trans tropes. says that if she ever sees a person with a penis in her public bathroom she’ll announce loudly that “females don’t have penises and get out.”

    I wonder what I would’ve done in this Holy Cow case. I would’ve probably born witness outside and stayed as long as the scene unfolded. I think we need creative, massive female resistance to this replacement of logic and biology with delusion and fantasy gender.

    These transgender laws sure got shoved through into policy before most of the born women were included in that decision. What if we put this to a citizen initiative, that born women can vote to keep penis out of XX bathroom? Can this push back be effective? Somebody, educate me if this is a dumb idea. I think we could post the petitions in women’s bathrooms all over the place to get the signatures. Would women, who are 51% of the population unite to get legislation to override these municipal penis power over policies?

    Skimpy leather top, bah. Wait until he next wants to strip to his skimpy leather bikini bottom barely covering the dong. shudder

    I can’t imagine his fake boobs being hot, that could only be real in the heat of his own imagination. I’ve always hated plastic boobies in women, when the implantee lays down the tennis balls sit on top of the chest wall at military attention, it’s so unnatural.

  8. Ashland Avenue Says:

    “I don’t know of any magic test to differentiate cis women, trans women, cross-dressers….” Well, I sure do! And so does Science! And billions of other people with common freaking sense!

    “…but believe me, this was about the most unambiguous presentation you can imagine.” Well, he’s right, but not in the way that he thought. Looking at him, he’s unambiguously male. Doesn’t matter if he was wearing his cute little leather bra and some eyeliner. Dude looks like a dude.

    “I had been attacked. I was dehumanized. My body was objectified….Not to imply I even felt safe in my apartment. If I can be treated that way in a business, without any police protection, what exactly makes me safe in my own home?” To quote a wise woman who once posted here (I’m very sorry I can’t remember who, if it’s you, please claim this): womanhood, it’s nothing like the brochure, is it?

    “….it’s my experience that managers are in the habit of describing themselves as owners when problems arise.” Um, exactly how many problems have arisen for him at clubs that he can notice this as some sort of recurring thing? Maybe – oh just maybe – the problem’s with you, dude.

    “He launched right back into his rapist speech….” Aaaaaand we have yet another dude feeling completely free to use the word “rape” as he sees fit. Which in this case means that he didn’t get his way, his delusion wasn’t catered to, so the person not catering to his whims is a rapist. Or something. Nothing insensitive to rape victims about that, no sir.

    God, what a dick.


  9. This is GOLD, baby! I have another use for this chart that I’m very pleased about.

    From the graphic:

    “Being trans is biological. A 2011 study found that trans people have the gender-determining brain structures of their affirmed gender. This is natural and isn’t a choice. Not accepting someone for who they are is unnatural.”

    I assume the 2011 study[sic] they are referring to is TWO of them by Rametti & Guillamon. But, you know, I have this thing called REASONABLE DOUBT–I mean, “brain sex” skepticism– and “Guillamon isn’t sure whether the four regions are at all associated with notions of gender…”

    TSER is engaging in WILD SPECULATION that is not supported by the SCIENCE. Oh dear. Precision matters.

    See here for source of quotation above and related research citations: http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn20032-transsexual-differences-caught-on-brain-scan.html?DCMP=OTC-rss&nsref=online-news#.Un0eCnC0_To

    This study was also published in 2011: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21467211

    “The present data do not support the notion that brains of MtF-TR are feminized.”

  10. LC Says:

    Ok… so let’s make all transgender women get brain scans to use the women’s restroom… The ones who don’t have these “scientifically proven brain structures” are obviously lying.

    Deuteronomy 22:5: The woman shall not wear that which pertaineth unto a man, neither shall a man put on a woman’s garment: for all that do so are abomination unto the LORD thy God.
    …Actually, there aren’t “numerous mentions” of cross-dressing in the bible, to my knowledge. Kind of odd they’d say that, when it makes their position sound worse. That passage in their answer refers to “brethren”, which typically means that Christians shouldn’t SLANDER fellow Christians… not that no one can ever say anything bad about anyone, no matter what creepy shit they do. It’s also forbidding false judgments… so much like the use of ‘transphobic’ for calling out nonsense like this. Yeah, actually, I am afraid of people who threaten and harass and bully women. That’s called “common sense.” Which the bible is in favor of, too.

    As for Deuteronomy, the intent is to not cross dress in order to deceive others. Hmm…

    • Adrian Says:

      Heh. Seriously. The minute people start running to the “but… but… but… BRAIN SCANS!” I have to wonder if they’d sign up for a fMRI and be willing to say, my brain doesn’t meet the X mm wide part Y standard so I’m not trans, okay, I’ll stop this now.

      Somehow I doubt it – they’d be screaming to the rooftops about how terrible the “gatekeeping” is.

      • ellaminnow Says:

        If an actual test for trans differentiation were invented, one can imagine ensuing cries of neurosexism and insistence that men and women don’t have different brains, therefore their male brain is identical to a female brain, and don’t you know the true sex isn’t defined by adherence to an observable pattern of traits anyways?

      • BadDyke Says:

        “If an actual test for trans differentiation were invented,..”
        I think you’re right there! Since trans already says that the tests for sex we already have don’t COUNT compared to their perception obviously due to some difference in their brain, then they’d move the goalposts yet again if their internal perception disagreed with the supposed test.

        “A 2010 study of 121 transgender people found that 38 per cent realised they had gender variance by age 5.” And this was based on their self-reporting in later life, and given the oft-repeated trans trope about knowing when they were kids, is it any surprise that so many CLAIM they were? Of course, put this alongside the sissy boys and the tomboys who later turned out to be gay……………..

        Of course, ANY of these studies are nonsense until they first show a region that is diagnostic for male/female in the first place, THEN you can start wittering on about those ‘in between’. Oh, and have proper sample sizes, AND weed out those who claim they weren’t stealing their moms birth control pills, honest…………..

  11. K Says:

    So we can only be civil human beings by feeding into the delusions of some creepy guy whose current obsession is forcing women to accept his presence in a place where they are vulnerable and easily harmed? Sounds legit.

  12. Ashland Avenue Says:

    Gallus, please do not to post this if you think it’s too off-topic.

    As published at the truly shitty website LGBTQ Nation, some “LGBT advocacy groups” (Lambda Legal, Human Rights Campaign, and the LGBT Rights Committee of the New York Bar Association) got some pro bono help from Hogan Lovells US, LLP to put out a publication called Creating Equal Access to Quality Health Care for Transgender Patients: Transgender-Affirming Hospital Policies. This is to “provide guidance to U.S. hospitals seeking to improve health care for transgender patients.”

    As you might expect, it advises bending over backwards to cater to the whims of trans people when it comes to restroom use and room assignments. I’d cut and paste the recommendations here (you gotta see ’em to believe ’em), but I don’t want to totally take over this comments section either. Gallus, if it’s O.K. for me to do this though, I’d be happy to.

    Short version: doesn’t matter if a female patient is uncomfortable or frightened having to share a room with a male, no matter her history or reason for being hospitalized in the first place. Doesn’t matter what he looks like. His “rights” come first. If she desires more privacy, well, there are curtains for that. I kid you not, that’s what it says. Ever been a patient in a hospital? I have. Curtains sure as hell don’t provide ANY privacy when your physician or nurse is speaking with you, sometimes necessarily about rather intimate things.

    It’s brutally clear: Women, and their dignity and safety (which includes both physical AND psychological safety), DO NOT MATTER to the GLBT organizations. And we’re supposed to be fine with this.

    • GallusMag Says:

      I think this is very much on topic. Thank you for posting it! The trans politic always likes to frame the issue as a “bathroom” issue, ignoring all the other places which are sex segregated for the comfort and protection of women from men, who so frequently harm us.

    • Violet Irene Says:

      “If there is no private or empty double room available and a
      transgender patient does not wish to share a room, other
      patients may be moved to make a private room available if
      doing so would not compromise the health or safety of the
      patient(s) being moved.”

      So wait, I’m sick in the hospital, and as long as it’s not going to kill me to move, no matter how upsetting, stressful, painful, etc it is, if a tranny wants my private room, he gets it? And I get moved wherever they can throw me?

      Can they make it ANY clearer that I am a second class citizen and the tranny is some kind of royalty?

      Has this atrocious document been adopted by any official healthcare groups yet, or is it still in the recommendation stage?

      • Ashland Avenue Says:

        You got it, Violet. As this POS document has just come out, I doubt it’s been adopted by any healthcare groups yet. I also foresee A LOT of hospital administrators having MAJOR problems with it. Like this part, for instance!:

        “If a private room is not available and the transgender patient
        does not wish to share a room with a roommate, the transgender patient should be assigned to an empty double room with the second bed blocked.”
        So, in other words, the hospital is supposed to not use a bed that they may really, really need, simply to placate a tranny.

        Or, put another way: In a busy hospital another patient may a) have to remain in the oftentimes noisy and chaotic ER until another bed does finally become available, due to a tranny’s whims tying up an otherwise available bed; b) have to postpone a surgery or procedure, no matter the inconvenience incurred due to plans made for days off work or childcare, due to a tranny’s whims tying up an otherwise available bed; or c) have to be brought to another hospital entirely because there’s no beds available due to a tranny’s whims tying up an otherwise available bed. Got it.

        How about this doozy: “If upon admission it is impossible for the patient to inform the staff of his or her self-identified gender because he or she is unconscious or incapacitated, then, in the first instance, inferences should be drawn from the patient’s presentation and mode of dress. No investigation of the genitals of the person should be undertaken unless specifically necessary to carry out treatment.”

        Well, heaven help a butch woman or a man wearing makeup (some do). They’ll wake up having been presumed to be transsexual. Or hell, even someone dressed in neutral clothing – what then, exactly? A woman in jeans and a sweatshirt, not wearing makeup? This whole thing is beyond ridiculous, and I’ll bet it’s going to be laughed into smithereens by busy nurses, doctors, and administrators who simply don’t have time for this shit.

    • anon Says:

      Well we can’t have better healthcare for them that involves finding out the causes of gender dysphoria, treating their dysphoria in other ways preventing people from having sex change operations they’ll regret cause that’s transphobic derp.

    • Motherhood Says:

      Oh that was my first experience with “Trans” was a hospital room. I was in one bed and sir was in the other. He was brought in the middle of the night raving, cursing and was finally strapped to the bed. He cursed and threatened me and called me a cunt from the curtain until morning. I was terrified. The nurses tried to get him to shut up but oh no. I chalked it up to Xmas eve in an over crowed shitty urban hospital and not to “Trans” until my next experience. Then I caught. He came middle of the night with a social worker or advocate in tow–Xmas eve. They moved him to another room and he was arrested and then he set his bed on fire because he did not want to go to jail.

  13. belindieG Says:

    Sometimes I think M2Trans do have laydee brains because they sure don’t understand reason and logic.

  14. svenn diaphragm Says:

    “I was born this way, it’s biological!”

    So then, what tests did your doctor perform to determine that? *crickets chirp*

    • svenn diaphragm Says:

      ” In fact, even if I wasn’t clearly presenting as a woman, I’d still have that right.”

      So legally there is no point in even having sex-segregated facilities anymore?

    • svenn diaphragm Says:

      “He was clearly using his masculinity to intimidate. I get attacked (verbally and physically) for being transgender on the regular, so I was especially terrified.”

      A woman could say the same thing about finding a penis-waver in the ladies room.

      I’m not trying to minimize their own bashed-upon experiences, as I also live similar crap; but I just because I’m afraid of being bashed by dudes in the men’s room, doesn’t mean I go all dong-fu in the ladies’ room.

      “It’s a mostly straight early-20s crowd”

      Perhaps that’d hint that you might not (as a visibly trans person) want to practice your cross-pissing.:/ And if the bouncer(s) was so all up in his job, then maybe it would have been safe for you to use the men’s room after all?

    • Violet Irene Says:

      Right? If someone needed to prove I was biologically a woman, we could do an ultrasound and physical exam and look over the medical records for my three pregnancies while we wait for the karyotype to come back from the lab. When I learned about biology, chromosomes, empirical observation of physical characteristics, and Occam’s Razor were all involved. I guess that must have been a different biology class than what these guys took.

      • Ave Says:

        ” If someone needed to prove I was biologically a woman, we could do an ultrasound and physical exam and look over the medical records for my three pregnancies while we wait for the karyotype to come back from the lab. ”
        That’s very twansphobik!
        They could test twanses for lady brains, they’re more women than youll ever be.
        Well…uh…there is no lab test that can test it but i can prove to u they have lady brains! they do harry benjamin test for a year! they copy women on pop tv! they wear makeup and skirts unlike u big ol nasty dykes!
        u should just get on ur knees and stop complaining and start suckin the big lady clit-sticks, its a female cock and is just as much a pussy as urs gosh

  15. gabrielsglen Says:

    i call bs when i smell it. dude or dudette use the darn uni bathroom problem solved. . traumatized my fanny. how about my gf is tramatized by seeing male people in the loo? are her rights as a woman to be in the ladies room less than yours? i think not. use the unisex loo.

  16. survivorthriver Says:

    I echo the rejection of trans “rights over” those of born women.

    I appreciate the autogynenophile discussion here about what relief that he (hi) wasn’t “transitioned” as a young male for certain underwear explorations.

    Exactly how did “trans rights” get the fast track? I know, they play the patriarchy game and insert plastic boobies, and many men are more gay than they’d like to admit and like some tranny something-something especially when they debase themselves by looking like porn queens, so it makes more f-holes available I guess. That’s what I’ve gleaned, correct me if I’m wrong.

    SOME of these trans butchered-boys sure have the born male attitude, totally obvious.


  17. “We went home. I was so traumatized I couldn’t speak. Panic attacks, intense fear. I was literally shaking and had to get in the bath tub to warm up. I had been attacked. I was dehumanized. My body was objectified. My gender was rendered illegitimate. And like so many trans women before me, the police did nothing to enforce the law or protect me…

    I was fucked up for days after the incident. I still am in many ways. I was afraid to even leave my apartment. Not to imply I even felt safe in my apartment. If I can be treated that way in a business, without any police protection, what exactly makes me safe in my own home? Still working on that one.”

    Dude it’s this bit that gets to me the most, this is so fucked up, he’s having a sooky lala because he was asked to use the uni sex toilets and acting like it’s a traumatising experience?

    I was fucking raped in my own fucking bed, tried to the “right thing” and report it and ended up having charges made against me for making a false statement even though it was obviously not false. The fuck is this shit? Oh man, this kind of trans bullshit fucking pisses me off so fucking much. It’s been more than five years since then and I still fucking struggle to leave the house. What a fucking, ugh. So much rage right now.

    • sevenn diaframpton Says:

      “he was asked to use the uni sex toilets and acting like it’s a traumatizing experience”

      That they offer unisex restrooms seems like a pretty nifty thing in itself. I may be all podunk, but is that common? Why complain when apparently they went out of their way to be super-inclusive? It’s not like they just left a light on for you, they built a whole ‘nother restroom. In my opinion, that reeks of coolness.

      (I have never actually seen a unisex facility before, but I like to imagine they’d have smooth jazz muzak (perhaps live?), beanbag chairs, and complimentary Jolly Ranchers(who doesn’t love free toilet candy?))))).

      • sevenn diaframpton Says:

        Mods: replied before getting to the rape part. Death & deletion to my flippant reply to a serious post is maybe a good thing. Sorry. ack.

      • GallusMag Says:

        Publishing it with your disclaimer. Hope that is okay.

      • Adrian Says:

        It’s fairly common for modern buildings to have at least one “family bathroom” or bathroom otherwise marked with both the man and woman symbol. It’s a bathroom like the those in private homes, with a toilet and sink in a little room, no stall, the entire room locks at the door.

        Some places ONLY have this type of bathroom, sometimes they’ll have two, technically marked with the “man” and “woman” (one bathroom per sex) but once everyone knows the situation those in practice become “family” or “unisex” bathrooms just because there’s no way for unwanted people to pass each other inside. One you lock the door no one is coming in to use the sink.

        The family bathrooms are a great thing for a lot of uses – if you have to accompany someone else of the opposite sex into the bathroom (a kid, someone who needs assistance), or even if you just have a lot of luggage with you or need a bit more room to change clothes or whatever. Often they have a changing table sort of thing that folds out from the wall, or a seat with straps to hold a baby while you do your business.

        I’m in a medium-sized town in the US midwest, these bathrooms are at coffeehouses, malls, offices. Bars, not so much, though quite a few bars do have in practice only “single bathrooms” so they are de-facto unisex.

        You can find commentary from trans people (usually M2T) complaining that they can’t possibly use the unisex or family bathroom as long as there is also a regular multi-stall “women’s room” there available, because they’ll be targeted for violence, because going into the family bathroom (purposely avoiding the women’s room) surely makes it obvious to all onlookers that they’re trans. Talk about massive insecurity… but meanwhile as a woman I do use the family bathrooms all the time. More space.

        I don’t think I’ve ever been in a unisex bathroom that was multi-stalls and common sinks in the US (I’ve been in some that way in Japan).

        Thing is though, “stalls” in the US usually have pretty flimsy doors that are at least a foot or so off the floor so really easy to look under (you’re expected to check for feet to see if a stall is occupied) and often there’s a gap between the door and the doorframe as well. It can be trivially easy to see people doing things in the stalls, it’s only a matter of politeness to not look.

        If there are to be multi-user unisex bathrooms in the US, I think they’ll have to start by getting some decent stalls in there with actual privacy.

    • belindieG Says:

      As if being “objectified” isn’t his dream.

  18. Random RadFem Says:

    ” Let’s do the gender math. If cis women and trans men are king, while cis men and trans women get to sit on the sidelines … yeah it sure seems like female-assigned people have enormous privilege in the queer community. That leads us to my current view of the queer world: a romping ground for female-assigned people to explore their genders and sexualities while male-assigned people cheerlead.”

    This was this dude’s diatribe on his problems with the queer community. The epitome of a privilege-denying tranny. He honestly believes that he gets shit from queer women because he is a “femme woman”??? LOL! The delusion is strong in this one. Maybe he should get back to doing his “gender math” because Man + Leather vest ≠ Femme woman. A man is a man no matter what he chooses to wear. Or am I not doing the “gender math” correctly? This is a young, wealthy gay man in SF- wealthy enough to be club-hopping in the middle of the week. Kid’s got it made! But no, there is something to fight for as long as women still have rights to spaces free of men like him. Ohh, the oppression!! Can’t you all see that we women are the problem here? Discriminating against this young “femme”, who is just out there trying to fight for men’s rights???


  19. In regards to that bullshit about tranz special rights at a hospital:

    http://www.aafp.org/afp/2009/1201/p1254.html

    Men and women take drugs differently. So…? Can’t ask/check for a biological sex because of dysphoria, even if it has serious medical consequences. Jesus, these people are crazy. What about F2T that are unconscious, should they check biological sex if they need an X-ray? If they haven’t been internally mutilated and are engaging in sex with men there’s a chance they may be pregnant. Are you even allowed to ask before an X-Ray if they are? Or does that make them dysphoric and distressed? Because they’re “men” and can’t get pregnant…

  20. ChicagoRefugeeC Says:

    Here’s what I don’t get about their little chart: it says men won’t be allowed in my ladies room, but doesn’t tell me how the bloody hell I’m supposed to be able to tell the difference between a guy in dress and a MtT? Or is there some magic ray at the door that keeps the guys out?

    (Hi, btw. Longish lurker, het & married, but my high school kid has a couple of FtT trans kids in his class so here I am ….)

  21. feral opera company Says:

    OT: from today’s Daily Mail, a man who helped torture a man to death will serve his life sentence in a women’s prison, thanks to a sex change paid for by the taxpayers.

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2494991/Murderer-born-man-sentenced-life-womens-prison-arranging-sex-change-taxpayers-money.html

    • seventh diaframptor Says:

      That is insane. I can neither open nor close my jaws all the way because state-funded healthcare won’t touch anything that has to do with mouth/teeth/jaws, but elective cosmetic surgery for prisoners is all gravy?

      ‘She and two others tortured a man to death after row over a bag of chips’

      http://www.scotsman.com/news/scotland/top-stories/54-years-for-trio-who-tortured-victim-to-death-1-3181158

      That’s some seriously cold-blooded shit right there. Whoa!

      Is it normal for non-prisoners to get all expenses paid cosmetic gender ablation surgery in the UK? Or is this a privilege offered only to mentally-fucked violent monsters? I spent a night in jail once and it was uniformly unpleasant in every way–in many ways I never would have thought of (the water fountain is part of the toilet? oh gawd seriously?). They certainly weren’t handing out cosmetic surgery or, you know, ridiculously frivolous benefits. Isn’t jail/prison supposed to be a *punishment*? By giving violent offenders vouchers for free ‘sex changeovers’ then jetting them off to sunny lady penitentiaryland, isn’t that encouraging antisocial behavior, won’t that cause violent sexual offenders to intentionally land themselves prisonwise?

      ‘Sure, why not torture and kill that dude over a bag of Funyons. Then I can get a free sex change and then be loosed upon captive female subjects to fuck with. Win-win!’

      I assume ‘sex change’ means female hormones, hair removal, and perhaps breast implants. Is a penis a valid female organ now in the UK as it is in the US? Back like 8yrs ago when I was shopping for a pseudovulva (not to be confused with aquavulva) it was considered a requirement, I do believe, to get birth certificates and legal documents changed over; nowadays, I could have a therapist write a note that reads, ‘This dude is now a woman’, and that’d be it. I wonder if I’d even need a letter nowadays to change that F back to M?

      BTW:
      “Paris green, also called Schweinfurt green, an extremely poisonous, bright green powder that was formerly used extensively as a pigment (e.g., in wallpaper) and that is sometimes used as an insecticide or to kill plant fungi; it must be used with great caution because of its poisonous nature.”

  22. Bev Jo Says:

    We KNOW girls and women will be raped and otherwise sexually assaulted as more men and boys use “women’s” public restrooms. Now imagine if every time it happened, the girl or woman attacked would be able to successfully fight off the men and boys, and somehow the attackers did not survive. (The more vulnerable a girl or woman is who is attacked by males, the more seriously she has to defend herself or she will be raped or killed.)

    Do you all think that over a period of time that there would be any men calling themselves “transwomen” left? I don’t. I don’t think they will assault girls and women in restrooms any less than men who identify as just men.

  23. anoner55 Says:

    This phenomenological study of gender dysphoria seems a bit more interesting the brain scan stuff:

    http://www.academia.edu/3658461/Primordial_Sexuality_Merleau-Ponty_Michel_Henry_and_the_Sexual_Body

    (Phenomenology, btw, refers to the study of the structure of subjective experience.)

    It’s interesting to see them turn their study to conditions other than schizophrenia. I’m not sure what to make of this particular study yet, though. It seems like it can elucidate things better than what others have been doing.

    • BadDyke Says:

      Had a quick glance. First (apart from the usual psychobabble nonsense and Judith Butler and her deliberate impenetrable prose) thing that struck me is the FALSE analogy with phantom limb syndrome. Surely, whatever causes phantom limb effects, the point is that BEFORE the amputation you actually had the limb, and associated chunks of brain which processed the feelings in that limb. Whereas the attempted false analogy, surely, is with limbs/organs that the sufferer feels they SHOULD have, but never actually did have.

      There is a VAST difference between feeling pain in a limb that has actually been amputated (i.e. where you actually KNOW what it is to feel pain in that limb because you did, when you actually had a limb, FEEL it), and imagining that some sensation or need you may feel is actually the FEELING of something where you don’t know how it should feel (because you’ve never had it). A supposed feeling of absence is not the same as a feeling when there should be an absence (becuase they chopped your leg off so why does your foot itch!).

      Main response, Judith Butler, Foucault, the whole shebang is all a load of utter tosh, worthless pseudo-philosophical nonsense. From a bunch of numpties who failed to understand the difference between theory and experiment (in science that is), and seem to think that pretty theories are enough. Even if what comes out is nonsense/nonsensical/incomprehensible. Seems to me, being just a humble scientist, that it involves making up some pretty stuff, arguing about it, then behaving as if your made up nonsense was actually TRUE. Well, someone who can argue that sex is actually constructed, or thinks that that is a worthwhile line of reasoning, needs a reality check……………………..

    • Random RadFem Says:

      Who is the “they” you are referring to? I wouldn’t consider this a study- this seems like an undergraduate essay, and a poor one at that, to be honest. It proposes to explore gender dysphoria through phemonenology and post-structuralism, but fails to say anything at all, much less anything new or topically relevant. Phenomenology has been a point of philosophical discussion for over a century, and femenist phenomenology cannot really be discussed without addressing Iris Marion Young. Her explorations of the lived experiences of female bodies are essential to any contemporary phenomenological discourse on gender or femenism.


    • anoner55, thanks for linking my paper. The idea is pretty primitive in this form.But I am hoping to develop a properly fleshed out version of this in a year or two as I work on adapting “radical phenomenology” toward the questions of sexuality, gender, the body. I think that gender dysphoria is a really ripe field for phenomenological study.

      BadDyke, you might want to take some more time to look into Butler and Foucault. While their language is often difficult, they are tremendously rewarding and insightful (even though I am positioning myself against them in this article). I recommend Butler’s “Gender Trouble,” I found that book fairly readable with a basic background in post-structuralism. In fact, she actually looks into the construction of sex from a scientific perspective there as well (i think, it might be somewhere else….) which you might appreciate (particularly, she is interested in the xx male, xy female, hermaphroditic, and other naturally occurring non-normative sexual identities etc.etc.). As for Phantom limb, I would beware of distinguishing between somethign that has “actually” been amputated, etc. etc. This paper is explicitly from a phenomenological perspective, and central to that perspective is the “epoche,” the bracketing or setting-aside of all metaphysical presuppositions, most importantly, the presupposition of “existence” vs. “non-existence” in the sort-of naive positivistic sense.

      Random RadFem, Ouch harsh! lol. (But yeah, I acknowledge it was a the odd space of trying to find a balance between being readable to people with no introduction to post-structuralism or phenomenology, and also trying to do some work. So admittedly, I was never really happy with the final product, but it is what it is. But I would like to think I did “something” by opening up the question of gender to a new methodology, radical phenomenology). That being said, good point with Young. I have a great interest in her work, but here I was more interested in “radical phenomenology,” and she is very much a “traditional” phenomenologist,” so she wasn’t quite appropriate for the project. But, thanks for the recommendation, when I work on my fuller work in this area over the next few years, I will certainly be thinking through her work.

      Thanks all!

      Justin

      • Motherhood Says:

        Bad Dyke I agree.
        What a condescending prick.
        Oh yes B. D. give that another shot. Don’t you know that every third 3rd rate grad program may still be talking about Butler.
        Red alert women– Big thoughts on the floor. Butler can’t string two words together. Really, I was laughing so hard coffee was coming out of my nose– Read Gender Trouble–really deep–“Jender” She talks about science in much the same way the Nazi’s talked about science.

      • anoner55 Says:

        Thanks, Justin, for posting.

        My concern is that your paper was difficult to follow, as it seemed to jump all over the place. Now, this isn’t my first encounter with phenomenology; I was introduced to it by authors like Josef Parnas and Louis Sass, who mainly focused on schizophrenia. Even those these were papers on PubMed we’re talking about, I found them to be pretty accessible and easy to follow even though I was basically getting a crash course in phenomenology with them.

        Even when it came to feminism/gender issues and phenomenology, I did find one work by a feminist to be fairly accessible and easy to follow (and she does quote Iris Marion Young); this work looks at a striking parallel between schizophrenia and the experience of being a woman, namely bodily alienation:

        http://uu.diva-portal.org/smash/get/diva2:382483/FULLTEXT01

        I could follow her main points pretty well, also.

        I just couldn’t do the same for yours, however.

      • cerulean blue Says:

        Justin, that’s some pretty awesome mansplaining you’ve got going. If you’d actually take a look around the site (which you’ve obviously located by Googling yourself) you’d find that the people here actually have a great deal of expertise when it comes to Foucault, Butler, et al. Much, much more than you, as evidenced by your facile response.

        As an aspiring researcher, don’t you think it’s a fairly obvious sign of respect to do the background reading before jumping into a conversation to tell others what they should be reading? Haven’t your professors stressed this? Or do you routinely walk into classrooms you’ve never before visited to tell others exactly how things are and what they should be reading?

        Also, you’re wasting your (or your parents’) money on a humanities degree. It’s nonsense masquerading as a science, without any objective, measurable evidence (a key attribute of actual science) to support it. “Epoche.” LOL.

      • Random RadFem Says:

        I don’t know about youse guise, but Justin really inspired me ejamacate myself more good! Sheesh. Justin, you really have no idea who you are engaging with here. You have no idea about our educational backgrounds and your comment was incredibly condescending. Your paper shows a tenuous grasp of the concepts that you are discussing, so you really need to work on your own understanding before you present yourself as an authority to anyone at all. It wouldn’t hurt to take some time and look around the site before posting if you want to avoid looking like a pompous fool.

        Walter Sobchak: So you have no frame of reference here, Donny. You’re like a child who wanders into the middle of a movie . . .

      • BadDyke Says:

        “BadDyke, you might want to take some more time to look into Butler and Foucault.”

        WHY do you ASSUME I haven’t? I have, it’s crap.

        “particularly, she is interested in the xx male, xy female, hermaphroditic, and other naturally occurring non-normative sexual identities”

        Sorry, but this is ALSO utter crap. Being an XX male or whatever other genotype/phenotype combos you want to come up with ISN’T a sexual IDENTITY, it’s just plain ole fact, it’s just basic biology. A totally different beastie to touchy-feely ‘identity’. Hey, but we all see WHY you want to mess about with language like this, to try and get trans ‘identities’ mixed up with intersex and biology………..

        “As for Phantom limb, I would beware of distinguishing between somethign that has “actually” been amputated……”

        O dear, you get funnier every MINUTE! WHY beware, and why put ‘actually’ in quotes as if the very notion of ‘amputation’ is somehow in question? If someone HAS ACTUALLY had their leg amputated, there is no frickin’ DOUBT about that FACT………

        Golly, let’s face it folks, to any ordinary person, or even a plain ole science academic like myself, there is definitely a major, physical DIFFERENCE between a limb that has been amputated, and one that never existed in the first place, or one that hasn’t been amputated, Anyone who wants to BEWARE of making those distinctions is just plainly insane and deluded, however much pseudo-academic polysyllabic vomit they want to spew over it.

        Plus if you REALLY claim you understand Butler, I know you’re lying……………….

        “the presupposition of “existence” vs. “non-existence” in the sort-of naive positivistic sense. ”

        See what nonsense comes out of some supposed parts of academia! We always used to laugh at stuff like this especially when they came across and tried to argue with the physicists. Of course, what makes it REALLY funny (and possibly annoys the heck out of these fantasists) is that the FACTS of science, like quantum theory, are WAY weirder than ANYTHING they could have dreamt up — with of course the additional advantage that we have evidence to back up even the really, REALLY weird nature of existence on a quantum level. The cat really is alive and dead (well, the electron spin is both up and down🙂 ). Butr however quantum the electron/photon may be, that doesn’t mean the amputated limb can be treated similarly.

      • BadDyke Says:

        “Also, you’re wasting your (or your parents’) money on a humanities degree. It’s nonsense masquerading as a science, without any objective, measurable evidence (a key attribute of actual science) to support it. “Epoche.” LOL.”

        Well, not ALL humanities degrees are nonsense, but THIS one seems to be!

        And always amuses me when some numpty doing philosophy or whatever imagines they are being all profound wittering on about existence or whatever, whilst being utterly and profoundly IGNORANT of what quantum physics has to say about the nature of the world. Physics and science has shown the world is stranger than any of them EVER imagined on a totally fundamental level. And it wasn’t airy-fairy humanities nonsense that discovered that, it is plain ole boring physics (and in this case, for example, measuring really, realy carefully what happens to a piece of metal when you shine ultraviolet light on it. — In case you’re wondering, the experiment here is called the photoelectric effect. Light (photons) can knock electrons out of a metal. The EXACT energies of the electrons that come off tell you that the WAVE that we thought light was, actually comes in chunks (quanta). That something is at the SAME time, both a wave and a particle. Which knocks this wibbling about whether legs are amputated or not into the silly dressing-up box where it belongs! The actual world of science is far weirder than their made-up, pretty nonsense.


      • I apologize if my comment came across as condescending or something along those lines.You are quite right that I am not particularly familiar with the site, I merely received an email from academia.edu that it had been linked, and was happy to see people engaging with my paper, even critically. I meant absolutely no disrespect and apologize if I was unclear with my tone or something along those lines.

        Once again, thank you for your comments.


      • Baddyke: Thank you for excerpting the sentence that I posted. I was honestly quite confused by the anger that my post had generated. But when you pulled it out, I very much see why that would be seen condescending. I greatly apologize for the confusion, and hope to assure you that I meant absolutely no disrespect or condescention. Post-structuralism and phenomenology are very unknown in the circles that I run in, and so I my default assumption is to avoid presuming familiarity with the topic. Thank you for pointing out that this can sound condescending or presumptuous in circles where these ideas may be considerably more common. I hope that this reply can be received with the sincerity in which it is being sent.

        all the best

        Justin

      • BadDyke Says:

        “I was honestly quite confused by the anger that my post had generated.”

        Not anger, we just think you’re talking bollocks! Although I grant you, NOT a phrase that you tend to get away with using in an academic context.


      • @jleavittpearl:
        Don’t assume that critics of Foucault’s and Butler’s nonsense just haven’t given enough thought or haven’t read them enough.

        Replace Foucault or Butler (or Freud or or or or) with bible, and you will realise that you are promoting some kind of religion here. “If you read the prophet’s word just closely enough and strive to understand, enlightenment will come over you!”

        Many of us have read closely and wasted our energy on it. We consider them nonsense BECAUSE we have done so. But of course to accept this, you would have to admit that your own belief in Foucault and Butler is just that: a belief, as unfounded as any other belief system based on prophets and revelation. And we all know that this won’t happen.

        And @cerulean blue: Thanks for bashing the humanities. Woe forbid that there are people who want to know where we come from and why things are the way they are. The world definitely needs more engineers and scientists. Some even can quote the Baghavadgita. That has to be enough.— And, to put the sarcasm back into the drawer: Judging the humanities by taking this nincompoop as an example is like judging science by taking Deepak Chopra as an expert for quantum physics.

      • cerulean blue Says:

        @icemountainfire:

        You’re right– I should have said post-modernism-focused areas of the humanities. I thought that would be easy to infer given the nonsense Justin was spouting, and the fact that many programs in the humanities have a post-modernist focus. I guess not.

        But in defense of science, the fact that the high school my son will attend next year is allocating funds in a ridiculously overstretched budget to remake teacher bathrooms into trans* bathrooms (that lock, btw, all the better to serve as a place for students to have sex, get beat up, do drugs, etc.) is not the fault of science. It is the fault of a multitude of humanities programs that in many subject areas are absolutely intellectually bankrupt.Even if they can quote from the Baghavadgita. Academics in humanities (not ALL of them, of course, but gee, a heck of a lot of them!) have exhausted the old theories, but still need something “new” to publish, hence the focus on post-modernism. I have to say I am glad my son isn’t interested in majoring in the humanities in college– not because they aren’t subject areas worth studying– of course they are!– but because academia is overrun with post-modernist nonsense, which doesn’t rear its ugly head in the hard sciences.

      • Loup-loup garou Says:

        Oh, Lordy. I read Gender Trouble when it was first published — and that would be back in 1990, folks. I was in grad school at the time, in a humanities field that had not yet gotten caught up in the Derrida, Foucault, Butler, etc., etc., etc. brand of sillinesss. But so many of my friends over in Comp Lit were referencing that book I decided to read it for myself to see what all the fuss was about. And I was not impressed.

        And icemountainfire — you are right, many of the people who go in for queer theory, gender theory, post-everything polymorphous perversity theory etc., etc., etc., treat it like a kind of religion — and a fundamentalist one, at that. Trying to present a different point of view to them is like arguing with a Jehovah’s Witness.

  24. femingen Says:

    From that guy’s Tumblr: “I’m sad it’s come to this, after five months of trying to be a queer trans woman. The queer lifestyle was my lifestyle for many years, including my most formative ones. But today I feel excluded and unappreciated. I’m a femme trans woman attracted to masculine people, and that’s just *not ok* in the queer world, where trans-masculinity is preferred to trans-femininity, trans men are preferred to trans women, pansexuals are preferred to straight people, and there’s a stunning near-total absence of gay cis men.”

    Wow. You notice what is absent all together? Did you? Lesbians. Don’t even exist in his world.

    • K Says:

      All I can parse from that is something about how some guy is having a hard time finding men willing to screw him when he’s got his ladyface on.

      Isn’t NOT attracting homosexual men (i.e., ‘passing as female’) his intention? Or is he saying that he wants heterosexual men (obv. NOT attracted to men) to lust after his ‘female’ penis?

      • BadDyke Says:

        I think his ‘problem’ is that rather than being cooler than kule in his queer lifestyle, he has discovered that being femme and being attracted towards masculine people is making him look like a boring old straight woman in the eyes of his queer crowd. IF, for example, he was a femme trans woman claiming to be a lesbian, and wittering on about him and another ‘lesbian’ playing with their ladysticks, he’d be cooler than cool again. In effect straight acting femme trans woman attracted to straight acting men (trans or cis I presume) is about bottom of the heap in queer terms, cos it looks just like boring straight folks.

        “in the queer world, where trans-masculinity is preferred to trans-femininity” I find this a very intriguing statement, if true. Seems to say that what the homophobic and misogynistic side of trans want (i.e. I want to be a straight girly-girl just like NORMAL folks) ISN’T edgy enough for the queer crowd. So we have pretend lesbians and their ladysticks, or transmen playing at being gay guys — with the latter being preferred because the queer gay blokes find it flattering, and gay anyway is miles better than lesbian (even pretend lesbians with ladysticks).

        Or could just be — masculinity ALWAYS preferred to femininity, and having (or wanting) a penis is always preferred to not having (or not wanting) a penis.

        Or could just be bitching about it cos he can’t get laid anymore on the queer scene…………..

  25. Bev Jo Says:

    So true. Very revealing. Female-hating and Lesbian-hating. And I can’t imagine that women pretending to be men are more welcome than men pretending to be women in any imaginary world. And if he’s not seeing gay men, he must not be looking.

  26. Bev Jo Says:

    Bad Dyke, I just love how you and others here dealt with all the academic mindfuck.


  27. @cerulean blue
    Thanks for your reply. You are right with your criticism of this particular brand of humanities. I’m in a field which – as a by-product of the field’s history – has very little to do with all the postmodernist nonsense. We are somewhat caught between the two parties, getting shit from both sides. The ″fancy theorists″ call us ″too positivistic″, and the scientists consider us wishy-washy babblers. Last time I heard something like that was a 18 y old physics student (whom I met in a professional situation) who said with big doggie eyes ″But you are smart, why didn’t you choose a real science?” (Besides, when I’m done with my work, I will leave university and get a job. Indeed I think I should never have gone to university in the first place, no matter into which field. Strictly speaking, my time there was a waste of money, but I contributed something that maybe will be a starting point for someone else.)

    On the other hand, my best school friend is a genius mathematician. After her doctorate she didn’t need to apply, she had offers. The place she works now even handed out a stipendium to her husband so she would come to them. She got her doctorate document by the president because she always only had the best grade in all final exams since and including high school. She works on a very theoretical level, very abstract. And yet she has been asked by a male engineer in a condescending tone what her work should be good for, since she made no money with it (her uni salary = no money, apparently.)

    My point is: In my experience (which of course is not limited to the two incidents above) the criticism of humanities has not only to do with the weaknesses of a certain indeed stupid and politically dangerous strand of it. It ties into a whole lot academical sexism and classism (jargon!), too.

    You are entirely right with your concerns about your son’s school, though – what a waste of money. And I can understand what you are talking about with the lock. A week ago I learned my all girls highschool is co-ed now. It has endless underground halls with countless rooms and niches and hidden corners. Entirely uncontrollable and unsafe.
    And do the teachers go behind the bushes now?

    @Loup-loup garou
    That’s why I don’t discuss with them anymore. It leads nowhere, because it always comes down to ″Who are you to criticise?”

    • cerulean blue Says:

      @icemountainfire,

      I didn’t mean to suggest that *all* of the humanities are worthless. I don’t think that at all. I was referring to the ones that have been colonized by post-modernism, and only in reference to the post-modernism. Are the “fancy theorists” the post-modernists? May I ask who is funding them?

      I sympathize with what both you and your mathematician friend have dealt with. There is a certain type of anti-intellectualism– the type you see in news stories questioning the reason why certain basic research is funded, e.g., “Who care about the genes of flies?”– that thinks anything that does not have an immediate, obvious practical benefit is a waste of time and talent. But on top of that, I recognize there is a specific disregard of the humanities as useless or silly. I would think that your friend gets the first directed at her, while you get both. Plus additional insults. After leaving the lab I became a science teacher. I also got to hear the “You’re so smart, why are you teaching?” comment regularly. It was dispiriting and insulting.

      And then there’s the sexism on top of all the things listed above. Ugh. In science, the areas women tend to populate (biology, etc.) get called “soft” science, while the other, male dominated areas are “hard.” An icky sexual metaphor, now that I think about it.

      As for the classism due to jargon, I believe Einstein said that if you can’t explain something simply, you don’t understand it. I don’t have a lot of patience for people who call an explanation “simplistic” when it doesn’t use highly technical words. I see a difference, though between jargon that is necessary (sometimes an event or object is so narrowly defined, so specific that it needs a new vocabulary) and that which has been constructed as some kind of roadblock. As far a post-modernism’s jargon is concerned, it seems to be more the latter. I’m speaking as a non-professional, however. Is that your experience of PM jargon?

      As for the high school restroom issue, given how few teacher restrooms there are in most schools, and given the long periods in the day where there is literally no time available to get to the restroom, my guess is there will be a lot more bladder infections.

  28. 1899fcbarcelona Says:

    (Sarcasm) Yeah…it’s real natural to have one’s healthy reproductive organs scraped out or chopped off.

  29. WTF Is This Nonsense? Says:

    They didn’t list my objection. “Because thinking you’re the opposite sex doesn’t make you the opposite sex”.

    How about we just put ‘male’ and ‘female’ on the door? I’m pretty sure the restrooms were separated depending on the reproductive system, not depending on how you feel. So far, medical science has not been able to change one sex to another.

    I’m sure there’s an incoherent objection to this though, to go with all the other nuttiness.

  30. WTF Is This Nonsense? Says:

    A Dude in the Ladies Room at Holy Cow on Folsom Street

    I informed the security guard that I’m a woman. A transgender woman. AKA a man pretending to be a woman. His harassment would not abate.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: