“Jacki discovered a loophole”

July 15, 2014

93 Responses to ““Jacki discovered a loophole””

  1. Motherhood Says:

    Okay that wasn’t a joke right? Those two are on the planet with the rest of us? What kind of morons would believe in an institution called marriage enough to have their tits cut off? What the hell doctor would do such a thing. Both of those women are not even pathetic they are arrogant and revolting. Conformity like that is arrogant and revolting. That was horrifying and stupid. What the hell kind of psycopathology do they have going on there? Poor kids, poor little dog too. It made me shudder.

  2. blackmetalvalkyrie Says:

    It makes me sad she had to mutilate her body for her wife to get something she is entitled to ethically regardless of stupid homophobic laws.

    • Motherhood Says:

      Homophobia did not make you, or either of them idiots–nice try though. I would actually blame LBG and gender for this one. Take responsiblity, grow up.

      • Motherhood Says:

        Someone sent me this–http://www.genderodyssey.org
        All of it cringe worthy.

      • blackmetalvalkyrie Says:

        I never called her an idiot. I don’t think she’s stupid at all. I said I think it is wrong that to get equal rights she had to get surgery to be “legally” considered a man and this loophole exists because of homophobia. God forbid two people that dedicate their lives to each other have the same benefits and security as everyone else. -sarcasm- She is certainly no idiot. It is definitely regressive gender roles to blame. It’s not her fault these restrictions on same sex marriage exist.

      • blackmetalvalkyrie Says:

        Ugh I cannot stand the trannie symbol. I see it as a symbol of rape of women which when it comes down to it is what the trans lobby is all about. I can’t help but fear transgenderism being introduced to developing countries where women have never had decent protections will be extremely detrimental in their fight for equality. Transgenderism is backlash against feminism, plain and simple.

      • blackmetalvalkyrie Says:

        I’m saying the laws are homophobic, she is not homophobic for being pressured by the state to have her breasts removed and I’m sorry if it sounded like I was saying that. She is a victim of state mandated homophobia.


      • @Motherhood.

        Re: That link.

        It’s interesting to note that in that side bar there is the National Centre for Lesbian Resources, in addition to a bunch of other LBGT groups that are sponsoring this nonsense.

        What I never see (and if someone has seen some, link me please) is GAY MEN’s advocacy groups involved with this stuff.

        I see the alphabet soups and the lesbian resources taken up with this shit but never anything specifically for gay males.

        Why are women and lesbians always roped into their shit?

        Gay men have more money and more power (by virtue of being men).

        Why aren’t they helping the lovely darlings at the end of our acronym?

    • Random Radfem Says:

      I also see a lot of self-loathing and internalized homophobia here. This is a very clear example of how neatly trangenderism enforces compulsory heterosexuality. If you can’t marry your partner as a women, just chop off your breasts and claim to be a dude! Lesbianism is feared and heterosexuality (even the illusion of heterosexuality) is celebrated. The blond has a wide-eyed, Stepford quality that creeps me out. She (and her gay ex-husband) were probably raised in a deeply repressive, homophobic, gender enforced environments- probably religious, but not necessarily so. If she was growing up in today’s milieu, she might have been transgendered by her own parents. The partner just seems very sad and resigned. She discusses the financial benefits, but that was worth undergoing an elective double mastectomy? She is the saddest woman to even hold a wiener dog . . .

      • blackmetalvalkyrie Says:

        Well said. She does look slightly less feminine when she is with her female partner though. Which is of course a good thing.

      • Random Radfem Says:

        I meant her demeanor had that Stepford quality, not her looks or attire. I get skeeved by the wide-eyed, look-into-the good-doctor’s-hypno-spiral stare and the permasmile to let the world know that things are so fucking wonderful. Looking at her past marriage and this one, it seems like it is very important to her be married with a capital M, to verify that her life and her relationships are legitimate and acceptable by malestream standards. It comes off like her partner’s breasts were just collateral damage in maintaining that in her life when Jacki says, so sadly, how happy she is that she could give her this- her breasts in exchange for a marriage license. Maybe there is totally different dynamic than the one I am reading from this short clip, but any situation where a lesbian has to butcher herself to marry her partner “as a man” is obviously loaded with homophobia and misogyny.


  3. It’s obvious that the double mastectomy is being used as a societal punishment.

    People die on the operating table all the time through wrongly administered anaesthetic and other reasons (blood clots etc). Not to mention the pain and scarring involved.


    • It’s quite common for men to cut women’s breasts off during war. I just see a parallel here. I’m only assuming the surgeon was a man. I may be wrong. They tend to be men.

      In Japan, the kimono is designed to eliminate all signs of the breast shape. Breasts are just not noticed as much in society in general, and the shape is not as eroticized. Women hide their breast shape with baggy tops and low cut tops are not the done thing. I would go so far as to say that (outside of porn) breasts are kind of invisible.

      I mention this because in some societies breasts are less important. It’s the over emphasis on breasts in women that has lead to this tragic situation of medical institutions equating “Breasts” with “women.” What I’m trying to do is show how absurd I feel it is that chopping off breasts has got anything to do with turning that person into a man. Men don’t have chopped off breast tissue, do they? So are they saying the SIZE of the breasts is a problem? What if the woman has small breasts? Does she get away with not having a double mastectomy? Who decides whether they’re small enough for her not to have surgery?
      The whole thing is completely stupid, and designed to hurt women.


  4. That is just bizarre? I’m with Motherhood, where DO they find these doctors who will do this type of thing? Cutting off healthy and crucial parts of your endocrine system is just insane. And for what? People really aren’t putting enough thought into these things. You have to live in your body a long time. It’s in your best interest to take care of it.

    • born free & female Says:

      FTMs usually seem to be more realistic, but a lot of MTFs genuinely believe that they’ll end up with a “vagina” that’s indistinguishable from a real one. Maybe one reason patients don’t think it through is that they don’t think “They’re cutting and stitching my body into a shape that’s not natural for it”, they think “I’ll have a vagina just like those girls in the porn I watch.”

      As for what the doctors are thinking … IMO most of them will think whatever they need to think if it lets them keep cashing checks. Some others may have bought into the usual “counterargument” you hear whenever someone questions the surgery: “But they’ll DIIIIEEEEE without it!” If the surgery is lifesaving, then any other long-term effects are secondary.


      • So basically they find doctor’s who don’t subscribe to the Hippocratic oath. I used to wonder the same thing about folk who doctor shop for pain meds. I’ve had chronic back and neck pain for more than 30 years now. All I’ve ever gotten is a short term prescription for pain meds and a trip to the physical therapist. I’m grateful I didn’t wind up in the hands of these quacks, but it just seems to me that some of them should be reported to a medical board or something. I remember reading a post by a FTt who said that a mastectomy is “minor surgery.” I mean she was so glive. And I, who nursed my mother through a mastectomy and who had breast reduction surgery myself actually gasped out loud. Breast tissue is insanely prone to infection. Plus, as a part of the endocrine system, if they damage your lymph nodes (very common) you can wind up having painful swelling in your arms that pretty much never goes away. This is not a trivial matter and the glib way they reduce the rises to the level of malpractice, IMHO.

        Another issue is with giving FTt testosterone, which can cause irreversible damage to their uterus. I have two friends who are child-free, and they’re STILL trying to find surgeons who will perform a tubal ligation on them. Yet, these young women, girls, really are able find doctors who’ll give them these drugs. I’m amazed there haven’t been lawsuits.

      • kesher Says:

        They’re sterilizing kids as young as 16 (under the guise of saving these kids’ lives), while adult women can’t get their tubes tied.

      • Leo Says:

        Ouch, I really emphasise, I have back and neck issues myself.

        That’s a good insight into the issues that can occur. Them calling it ‘top surgery’ instead of ‘mastectomy’ contributes to disguising that. This post here also proves it can and does go wrong (graphic): https://gendertrender.wordpress.com/2014/03/16/if-the-nipple-falls-off-just-throw-it-in-the-garbage-when-ftm-top-surgery-goes-wrong/#more-6477

        The flippant attitude to surgery just makes me want to cry, or scream, at the moment. I just learned a couple days ago I now need two major spine operations, and am still trying to process that. Before my first operation, the surgeon told me I’d be fine, totally normal life, but it was his error that caused these further issues. I’m torn between feeling sorry for them, and wanting to grab them and shake them and beg them not to be so stupid as to actually have surgery on their healthy bodies, no matter how desperately they might feel they need it right now. They are in a lot of psychological pain, but they don’t understand how lucky they are if their body is healthy.

        How DARE the surgeons mess with healthy tissue like that, really. Surgery isn’t trivial, it just isn’t. They could end up like me, with nerve damage, also. Anyone who risks damaging genital nerves is just… it’s torture to live with, utterly. Forget the surgery being supposedly ‘life saving’, if nerve damage occurs – it can make you want to kill yourself. Losing days to a haze of pain, not being able to think through the fog of it, feels like it has killed part of you, pretty much. How can they decide surgery is appropriate for these people who are psychologically vulnerable? It’s completely unethical, and needs challenging.

  5. lin Says:

    The original show was one of the rare ones that I watched when it first aired. I felt sorry for the kids. At the time of the original show, Christine said she loved some butch woman.

    Fast forward, Jacki never thought Christine would be a lesbian because she was so beautiful? Yikes. Then they keep meeting, I’m thinking, stalker? And Christine sure is fickle.

    The screen says Christine is in love with a woman, not a man. Jacki kept her female name. So despite having a completely unnecessary medical procedure to chop off her apparently healthy breasts, how exactly is she a man?

    How the hell does not having breasts mean you legally are a man and apparently always have been?

    And all this so C gets J’s social security and pension. Have these people never heard of things like life insurance and wills and trusts? And they’ve been married for a year, so wasn’t gay marriage legal then or about to be? Now that gay marriage is legal, will she just switch everything back?

    For some reason I was just wondering if F2T age 18-25 with male birth certificates have to register for selective service. Apparently not, but M2T do: SEX GENDER CHANGE / TRANSEXUAL
    Individuals who are born female and have a sex change are not required to register. U.S. citizens or immigrants who are born male and have a sex change are still required to register.


    • >Individuals who are born female and have a sex change are not required to register.

      MISANDRY!!!!!!!!

      Further proof that MtT are the most oppressed EVAH and that wimminz aren’t doing their National duty and the poor poor male soldiers!1111

      /s

      I’m a little alarmed that someone would cut off their breasts for marriage. Over here (AU) we’re a little safer in terms of what they can do to us in terms of removing benefits from a de-facto spouse (regardless of sex)

      I agree with you though. Breasts ≠ woman.

      I feel that porn has a lot to do with breasts meaning woman.

      It seems like for MtT that having breasts (silicone or grown from hormones) is the most important body mod. Keeping your dick is perfectly fine.

      As for FtT, the breasts are the things that HAVE to be removed.

      There was a video (from here) with a FtT singer called “Boys can have vaginas”.

      But apparently not breasts?

      Even though men can actually have breasts (gynecomastia and other conditions) and they can’t have vaginas.

      lolwut.

    • Xena Amazon Says:

      When you ask “How exactly is she a man” I’m seeing that you’ve missed the point. (Because the video sure didn’t present it). Your gender ID is defined by statute in each state. In some states, all of your sexual organs must be removed. (Some states would require hysterectomy as well as double mastectomy). Why do I know this? In law school, LONG before gay marriage was even on the horizon, I did a research project and to determine how two lesbians could “legally” marry and this was (sadly) the ONLY option open to them. One could legally “become” a man, as this woman did. (I think that’s why the whole “queer” identity feels like insanity to me, personally, as a lesbian. But, anyway…) No, this is NOT A JOKE!!

      I suppose that another dimension of this may be fear of a possible backlash and (again, a fear, I’m not saying it could come to pass) that certain states might arbitrarily decide that legally sanctioned marriages (between gay people) would no longer be recognized. If you’ve mutilated yourself (err, I mean, “become a man” – ahem) then I suppose you sleep more soundly at night.

  6. kesher Says:

    This really illustrates why the “states’ rights” concept of marriage equality is so bananas. In some states, all that matters is gender identity. So, if a transwoman and man who want to marry are good to go. In other states, all that matters is biological sex, in which case the transwoman/man couple would be considered a same-sex couple. Making it even odder is that you wouldn’t even necessarily be able to guess which is which. If I remember correctly, some very conservative state (I think Texas) gives priority to gender identity in marriage laws over biological sex.

    I’m no cheerleader for the trans cause, but this country needs to make it legal for two consenting adults to enter into a marriage contract regardless of their sex and how they identify.

    • LC Says:

      Texas does give priority to gender identity, because transgenderism isn’t a liberal concept. Some prominent conservative Christians have come out in favor of it likely for the same reason they’re opposed to homosexuality: Genderists don’t challenge patriarchy. The idea that there are fundamental differences between males and females is far more comfortable for them than same-sex relationships, and for some, the former explains the latter. The issue of same-sex marriage comes up often in religious disputes, but transgenderism? Not a peep. And it’s not that they’re ignorant… one of the most far-right, fundamentalist, conservative Texans I know believes that transgender individuals are ‘born that way’. And also that being female means looking pretty. It’s completely in line with conservative thinking.

      • Xena Amazon Says:

        Ayatollah Khomeini was a great supporter of transsexuals. Of course, homosexuality/lesbianism is punishable by death… That tell us something. According to Wiki – sorry, not exactly a scholarly link – Iran carries out more sex reassignment surgery than any other country (but Thailand). Iran’s gov’t pays more than half the cost of the reassignment surgery. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transsexuality_in_Iran

        For some odd reason, fundies are far more willing to accept transsexuality than they are homosexuality or lesbianism. It’s troubling but irrational people always seem willing to split hairs, even if it just underlines their irrationality and ignorance of science.

    • Krs Says:

      Ew, he’s such as scumbag. Unlike pseudo scientific “brain sex” theory we know for sure who we’re sexually attracted to. Hint, it’s not mythical brain sex that is the motivator of our attraction. People exclusively attracted to women will not be attacked to Daryl, poor dear.

    • druidwinter Says:

      he just deleted it, but not before I screenshot a copy.😀


  7. Hey Gallus, I just wanted to make you aware that there is a campaign to shut your blog down again at http://www.reddit.com/r/TransAction/comments/2aq1wb/please_report_gendertrenderwordpresscom_to/

    They are asking people on reddit to report your blog for hate speech😦 It’s fucking disgusting

    • GallusMag Says:

      Thanks. The dickhead who talks about trying to have the GenderTrender site censored several times here:

      “[–]BlueGodFace 5 points 1 day ago
      As someone who has there very own page on that site dedicated to them (…Gallus did not write nice things about me) I would say I have tried this. A few times.
      Wordpress don’t care.
      I would just ask that you stop looking at the site. That is what I would want, so it falls down the google rankings till it is practically invisible.
      And she won’t get to say “we are being oppressed” unless she counts people not reading her stupid website as oppression.
      Gallus, if you are reading (and I know you are, you spend more time here than most trans people do) please know, you are the most pathetic person in the whole world. xxx”

      Is this guy who harassed me for covering a news article that he initiated complaining about mistreatment in a women’s changing room:

      https://gendertrender.wordpress.com/2013/03/20/how-to-become-a-trans-jacktivist-in-two-weeks-or-less/

      You can see what a “nice guy” he is.


      • Yeah the same guy was recently in the GenderCritical subreddit “just asking questions!!” but ended up deleting everything when things didn’t go as he wanted and people in there actually asked HIM questions, which he was unwilling to answer. Boo hoo why are radical feminists so preoccupied with transwomen???

  8. Bev Jo Says:

    For the doctors and pharmaceutical industry, it’s all about money.

    I’m sure very het-looking, male-identified feminine Christine will feel more “normal” and safer in the patriarchy with a woman who appears to be a man rather than a Lesbian, which is what so much of “Lesbians” transitioning is about. If Jackie saw the het-looking Christine and thought she was so “beautiful,” more beautiful than the many Lesbians in the community she obviously is in, so that’s a lesson too in buying men’s cons.

    But please, women here who are choosing to not be Lesbians, don’t add to the Lesbian-hating from men and patriarchy, by blaming “LGB” for this travesty you are blaming. Why are you blaming Lesbians at all? I and no Lesbian I know agreed to be added with our oppressors, gay men and women choosing to be bisexual. That is done against our will and continuing that myth adds to our Lesbian oppression.

    • Random Radfem Says:

      Thank you, Bev Jo! Lesbians ARE NOT to blame for this example of violently enforced illusion of heterosexuality!

  9. jdmarsh89 Says:

    Well… that was depressing. I thought the whole point of being a lesbian is that you’re sexually attracted to female-bodied persons? It seems like lopping off your girl bits would be a total buzzkill for your partner, right? Hopefully one day people will see transgenderism for what it really is: gender eugenics and the mutilation of healthy persons. How is this different than FGM except that it’s done under general anesthesia under the direction of a man in a white coat?

    • Lizzy Shaw Says:

      I can say that I would not be into that level of self-hatred from my significant other. Losing your breasts to cancer or getting a double mastectomy to prevent cancer like Angelina Jolie, who had an 87% risk of developing breast cancer (and a whole family tree of women who died from it) is one thing, but doing it to get social security and marriage benefits is insane. Plus, it seems silly to me that Jacki is supposed to be a man now that she doesn’t have breasts…so was Angelina Jolie a man after she had the double mastectomy but before she had the reconstructive surgery and breast implants? If a teenage boy takes that one drug they’re having a lawsuit over right now (it makes them grow breasts), is he now a teenage girl?

      I do think this is a form of eugenics, especially in Iran where they force homosexuals to undergo SRS. Just because some people want it doesn’t mean it’s a good idea; self-hating homosexuals used to volunteer for lobotomies, electro-shock, and other barbaric treatments to “cure” themselves.

      • LC Says:

        Not only the self-hatred, but the obsession with another person to the exclusion of yourself. I’ve heard of stories of people who would move to another state(leaving their job/friends/family, etc.) to be with a non-spouse, and that seems creepy enough to me. Willing to cut off body parts? Not going there.

      • Lizzy Shaw Says:

        I’m not cutting off any body parts and changing my sex just because my state hasn’t legalized same-sex marriage. I agree, it’s a total obsession with another person to the point where you lose yourself. Even Christine in the video was going on about how she couldn’t believe someone would do something like that for her and it’s just creepy.

  10. Hilda Sweck Says:

    eug. I can just imagine how awful the world would have been if the suffragettes had decided that they wanted to cut their breasts off and ‘become men’ to have the right to vote.
    Trans seems like a cop-out. Rather than fighting for equal rights, and fighting against sexism, they give in to it.


  11. So, it goes like this. If I get my boobs lopped off and call myself a man, she gets my Social Security. To me, this sounds like a financial decision. I thought it was all about the “gender dysphoria”.

    Isn’t it true that one of the reasons that FTM Thomas Beatie got her breasts lopped off and changed her sex was so that she could marry crazy Nancy, the drunk ex-wife. What did Thomas Beatie do after legally changing her sex to male? She gave birth to three babies, all through artificial insemination.

    In my opinion, only people with diagnosed rare disorders of sexual development should be allowed to change their sex. When it’s clear that we are dealing with either a biological female or a biological male, it’s ludicrous and scientifically inaccurate to state that they can actually change their sex. Human beings are a sexually dimorphic species and all primates reproduce sexually. Unlike some species of fish, primates can’t change their sex. SRS does not change one’s sex. We all know it. It’s basically extensively cosmetic surgery on otherwise health breasts and genitals.

    To me, Jackie looks like Keith Richards. I’m talking about an old Keith Richards after all the hard partying and drugs.

    @Hilda,

    “Trans seems like a cop-out. Rather than fighting for equal rights, and fighting against sexism, they give in to it.”

    True, and I would go one step further. They are both cowards and traitors to their sex. Gallus, will this post be deleted because of these last comments? I don’t care because we know it’s true.

    • kesher Says:

      Unless one dies prematurely, they’re both, what? Thirty years off from being eligible for Social Security? They couldn’t wait for the political tides to change?


  12. Apparently, having her female partner lop off her perfectly healthy breasts and get her nipples and areolas surgically trimmed down to size isn’t as important as getting “his” pension and Social Security. If a lesbian really loves a woman, why would she want her partner to mutilate her healthy body for some financial benefit?

    Don’t most reputable surgeons require some sort of letter from a therapist saying that the “gender dyshporia” is real before they surgically remove healthy breasts? If it’s a loop hole for the purposes of pensions and Social Security, what does that have to do with “gender dyshporia”?

  13. anon male Says:

    Wait, so you can lie to psychologists and all these gatekeepers to surgery and they won’t realize something is up? I thought that was unpossible. But they’re professionals!?!?


    • Medicine has always been on very shaky ground when it comes to legitimacy. Considering that doctors and surgeons have been brutally experimenting on people (mainly women) for centuries in the name of medicine, it’s astounding how little they still know about health and healing. Doctors are professionals only in name.

    • Random Radfem Says:

      Unpossible! lol!

  14. andrea Says:

    I’m writing this to say that I fell for the “trans” trick myself a year ago when I decided to to identify as M2T (which I wrongly understood as MTF). It’s only as of recently that I have been lucid enough in my thinking to realize that this is motivated by my own homophobia, and inability to accept that I am just a homosexual man who presents effeminately. I am devastated, not only that this “trick” (if I am this way therefore I must be that; motivated by dysphoria from abuse/bullying) happened to me but that it is actually increasingly a common occurrence.

    Not sure if my personal story is what you would like to hear, I am merely agreeing that these genderist ideologies have a devastating impact on peoples lives, particularly women. Even though I am into men, and just feel more comfortable expressing myself in ways that are stereotypically “feminine”, I did often get the gut feeling that the other trans girls were straight up fetishists or creeps, and I understand the general hostility towards “transwomen” because of this. It’s funny that this in itself caused more dysphoria in me, because I didn’t even want to be associated with these weirdos. If I am an effeminately presenting male, I shouldn’t have to be like them. They absolutely need to be called out though!

    I am aware that this blog is focused on women’s issues front and foremost, but I also have to ask, are radfem politics inconsistent with, say, a male expresses effeminately and wears women’s clothing? I acknowledge that essentializing these is problematic, but I feel as if I’d be targeted as a “trans woman”, even though I make no claims over womanhood, I just look and act in ways that are normatively associated with women. Hope this is not too much of a ramble, I’m quite weary from all of this. I’m quite grateful towards the women who contribute to this blog, in spite of our differences.


    • Men wearing make up, and say, deciding to wear a flowery or pastel colored top or whatever it is doesn’t bother me in the slightest, as long as they’re not trying to parody women. The same goes for long hair in men. Not bothered what they do with their hair.

      But speaking as a radfem, it’s the fact that transwomen (supposedly) believe that a male body *could* ever be female is what really irks me. The idea that women are nothing more than men without penises is a complete and utter colonization of women’s bodies, lives and existence.

      A woman is a not a “male without a penis” despite what these pea-brains think.

      What confuses me is why gay men don’t speak out more against transwomen because the trans movement is now targeting young boys for surgery and puberty blockers if they “present effeminately” as you put it. In other words, those boys if left alone, might grow up to be gay men. Lesbians are speaking out about this atrocity. Why aren’t gay men? Is it lack of knowledge about the trans movement? Lack of interest? A feeling that children are not really your business or concern?

      And yes, they look and behave like weirdos. So if I were you, I would make sure I wasn’t associated with them in any way, neither socially or politically.

      • Krs Says:

        I wish more gay men would speak up, I’m currently helping to run the “LGBT” society at my uni (it’s only small and I’m one of 5 on the panel running it) and feel like a coward that I can’t speak up against trans as I’d probably be thrown out. Luckily it’s only a small society and not like some of the crazy ones I’ve heard about “queer this/trans that”, puke!

        Hopefully the backlash will happen, I just can’t understand how something so antithetical to homosexuality could be grouped together?

      • kesher Says:

        I think gay men would likely stay far away from issues regarding children lest they be accused of “recruiting”.


      • Yes, they would probably receive criticism for getting involved in children’s rights issues. Which shows where the power really lies in the LGBT alphabet soup because TRANSWOMEN and their medical posse ARE harming children, physically and psychologically, and are being given free reign to do sol Nobody is allowed to criticize their preoccupation with children’s behavior.

      • andrea Says:

        Agreed, even before halting transition I felt pressured to cut ties with them.

        I have known of some gay men who express strong skepticism of trans*, specially when it is one of their friends who decides to come out. I would say though that the more critical/radical gay men, don’t want to have anything to do with the mainstream LGBT organizations that encourage this stuff, though that might just be a generality.

        A lot of this is under the radar too for them. Historically in gay nightlife it seems like there were mostly homosexual transsexuals, but probably far less autogynephiles. I think those guys have separate communities really, many of them online.

        As a sidebar, I would add that often in the gay community (and not all gay men) are pretty hostile to men who just dress too “feminine” for them. I think that for someone dealing with dysphoria, in a bad enough state (I was psychotic), the trans narrative seems more welcoming so to speak. This is what angers me the most, that I was genuinely vulnerable, suicidal, and confused when the trans cult put me on the fast track.


      • Yeah, I have come across confusion by gay men when it comes to trans. Not “phobia”, just confusion. I went to Thailand with my gay friend for a month. Gay men are attracted to men, the male physique aren’t they, so my friend didn’t “get” the whole ladyboy thing.

        So transwomen/ladyboys are sought after by STRAIGHT men. it seems.

        Well I think straight women should pay VERY close attention to this, because it tells women where straight men are in relation to how they perceive women, and what women are for them.

      • Krs Says:

        Yes it is the “transwomen” (and the money grabbing doctors) pathologizing children as transgender. I would be horrified if gay men took a similar stance to advance our rights by somehow declaring children as gay, unfortunately because of the “LGBT” it’s gays and lesbians receiving the backlash for idiotic parents calling their 5 year olds transgender because they’re gender non-conforming. I’ve read so much crap on the internet with people blaming gays for all the transgender insanity, how do we speak out against them when every mainstream gay website is pro-trans these days (gotta get that ad-revenue)?

      • kesher Says:

        Given the way homophobes have pointed to the Gay Menace coming for your children for the past few decades, I find it baffling that the T in LGBT doesn’t see anything wrong with blatantly championing supposedly transgender children. I don’t think I’ve ever seen so much fixation on young gay kids among gay men and lesbians (aside from fighting back against bullying and counseling these kids that things will get better). How this hasn’t inspired a much worse backlash is beyond me.

      • GallusMag Says:

        I would love to see the reaction if Dr. Johanna Olson (who starts her bio off with the statement “I am a proud wife and mother”) stated something like “children who exhibit homosexuality know who they are and that identification does not change in children whose same-sex orientation persists at Tanner stage 2.”

        Or to parents who claimed “I knew my son was gay when he was 18 months old”.

        Lesbian and Gay activists have NEVER supported this sort of thinking, even though some do believe the “born that way” rhetoric. Every Lesbian and Gay I know, when confronted with a kid saying “I’m gay” has said “that’s fine. But you are still a kid, and should not be concerning yourself with locking yourself into any adult sexual identity. Be a kid.”

        I would find it very disturbing if gay activists organized around promoting the idea that sexual orientation IN CHILDREN and teens was a concrete and unchanging thing, much less that healthy minors should opt for lifetime sterility and self-inflicted lifetime medical disability as is done to “trans” children.


      • Right, I agree. A child being declared and labelled trans has no bearing at all on the child’s future sexual orientation. So I guess there is no basis for gay men to intervene in what is happening to trans children.

        I’m just trying to wrap my head around the whole idea of surgery and puberty blockers. I made the link between trans and homophobia because when I’ve seen parents’ attitudes towards their “trans” child, I get the feeling that when they see their son behaving in a girly way they conclude they would rather have a mutilated “girl” than a “queer” boy. If it’s not shame that they feel about the fact that their boy is so girly, then why else would they intervene? (I’ve only listened to the parents of boys speaking on the subject of surgery for their child)

    • born free & female Says:

      I think most radfems feel men and women should be free behave in ways that are considered culturally male or female. So the politics themselves aren’t inconsistent with being male and, for example, wearing dresses.

      As for how radfems might behave towards you in person … I’m sure there are a range of reactions. You might certainly be interepreted as a trans woman (though I think radfems might be more likely to avoid you than target you). I think it’d depend a lot on how you acted, though. If you seemed to be parodying femininity, I think you’d be treated differently than if you just said “I’m a man but this is how I like to dress.”

      • Motherhood Says:

        Kesher the gay menace is totaly different reaction. Parents that fall for the T would be screaming gay menace. T gives them and escape hatch and all the autogyephilics running the show retain their male authority and people trust that. And I think all men are a menace gay, straight, bi–male is a menace to women and children in many different ways–no exceptions. T will use anyone and anything for attention and legitimacy–parasites.There will be backlash when the kids realize they were used.

    • Lizzy Shaw Says:

      Thanks for sharing. I would just say I agree with cherryblossomlife. I don’t really care how individual men dress as long as they’re not trying to parody or mock women. I don’t cater to men’s delusions that they were always female and that wearing hyper-feminine clothes somehow makes them a woman and you bet I’m calling the cops if someone who looks like Danny Devito in a wig follows me into the bathroom.

      I also recommend dissociating from MTTs both socially and politically. I used to be on the trans bandwagon in college (it helped that the group I hung out with was college kids, so no late-transitioning autogynophiles). But then I started seeing the way they acted online and met a few in real life when I moved to a different city. I also read some books by real feminists and it made much more sense than third-wave feminism, which never really criticizes anything in a meaningful way and buys into the ridiculous post-modern idea that “woman” is whatever men want it to mean. (I am a woman and I say it means adult human female, but that’s twanzphobic.)

      As usual, I say that Sheila Jeffreys’ book “Gender Hurts” is a good resource on this topic. If you can’t afford the book, there’s probably a free download circulating somewhere, but you should really buy it if you can.

      • andrea Says:

        Thanks for the recommendation! What kind of things did you notice online from them? I’m curious if you’ve seen the types of things I have…

      • Dorothy Mantooth Says:

        Or you could ask your local library to get it. That way you’re not stealing, the author is paid for her hard work, and everyone is happy.

      • Lizzy Shaw Says:

        @andrea

        Overall, the most crazy shit I’ve seen is homophobic, particularly lebophobic bullshit under the flimsy disguise of “calling out transphobia”. You know, the crap where they harass lesbians for not being into their “lady” penis. If homosexuality, particularly lesbianism is “transphobic” then maybe the heterosexual male autogynophiles should stop riding on the coattails of gay and lesbian groups. It’s so fucked up that it’s “progressive” nowadays to harass a lesbian (bonus points if she’s underage, because these dudes and their supporters are often pedophiles or pedophile-apologists) online for not liking dick. (Interestingly they don’t harass straight people that often.) I’ve also been told that I have a vagina fetish or that I’m a “pussy-sexual” by MTTs or their handmaidens, which is hilarious because the MTTS who say that are raging fetishists themselves.

        There’s also a serious effort to deny that the female sex caste even exists and to dissociate pregnancy from being female. No really, these people are claiming that pro-choice movements are “transphobic” for saying pregnancy is a woman’s issue. I’ve also seen them complain that pro-choice movements don’t focus enough attention on MTTs (because the MTTs need to freeze their sperm before they get SRS and it’s expensive and how dare NARAL not offer to pay for it!) On tumblr, if you make a reference to pregnant women, or some other health issue that only applies to women, you will be told to use an extreme PC term like “people who can get pregnant”, “people with uteruses” and “fertile people with vaginas.” That’s another thing too, there’s “1984” thought-policing climate going on. Reblog a post from a “terf”, even if it’s some shit like Batman fanart and prepare for the hatemail. Speaking of censorship, there was an effort to get Jeffreys’ publisher to drop Gender Hurts even before she finished writing it. Kind of reminds me of the religious fundies who wanted to ban Harry Potter. This is why I quite tumblr.

        There are trans people and their supporters who use intersex people (aka people with disorders as sexual development) as a political football to deny that sexual dimorphism in humans exists. (This is in spite of the fact that the intersex community has repeatedly asked trans people to stop doing that and to stop claiming they are intersex when they are not. Also, most intersex people are opposed to SRS because of the medical abuse many of them experienced as children.) There’s a return to 1950s neurosexism with the obsession with female and male brains. I’ve actually had these people say that I have a “masculine brain” because I don’t wear makeup, am a lesbian, and I have a job in the sciences. Talk about backwards thinking.

        There are some trans people who don’t follow the main dogma. People who say that you need to have sex or gender dysphoria to be trans often get harassed by people who want some glittery gender identity to feel special or by autogynophiles and they get called “truscum”. Many of the people claiming that dysphoria is some kind of medical condition you need to have to be trans are FTTs. Sometimes trans people who don’t go along with the main dogma like snowflakeespecial for example get accused of not really being trans, meanwhile gender non-conforming people, often women, who criticize it get accused of being “trans-in-denial”. One particularly vile comment I saw was an MTT who wished that all butch lesbians would just transition already to cure them of their “transphobia”.

        I would also say my other problem is when I see people go “oh poor babies” to violent men who have raped or killed women in most cases (though sometimes the victims are children and other men) and say that the state should fund the SRS for these men while they are in jail and let them go to the women’s prison.

        I could probably go on, but this is still a lot of stuff. Have you seen this online or in real life?

      • andrea Says:

        Yes I have Lizzy, and it is why I want to dissociate myself from trans politics and community even though I still very much live with a trans condition. I see a bit less of the ridiculousness in real life, as it seems like its the crazier ones who seem to be more fond of tumblr social justice.

        I don’t know if its because I have the privilege to hang out with amazing feminist friends, as well having genuine curiosity in learning about these discourses, but I am aghast at how little some of my fellow transitioners know about ANYTHING. I once had to get into an argument with a friend because they were upset I told them they were biologically male, because its like telling them they’re not a woman. Like, I’m trans we’re entitled to feel how we want about ourselves but that doesn’t overwrite biological history (they said “hmmm I’m gonna have to look up that chromosome thing, I don’t know about that”). It’s like the discourse gets so wrapped up in becoming a comfort blanket for dysphoria. All of the claims you outlined are simply that, affirmations. I used to buy into some of that shit in moments of despair.

        The pedophile thing is weird, but is also a very small minority. I have only run into one, and I can’t stand this person, wraps up their desire in political correctness. The whole paraphilia thing, in some people I’ve noticed its just a terrible coping mechanism, but in others it literally defines their transness. It’s hard to sort that out… This guy though, he’s so oblivious to anyones boundaries, I’m still in disbelief. I was relieved to hear that he is being monitored by professionals and manages to avoid the wrong spaces.

        I am worried for everyone’s safety (as idiots continue to pull stunts) and for my own safety as the backlash grows.

        I’ll probably be staying off gendertrender for a bit, while I pick up the pieces, and deal with stabilizing my mental health, but I wanted to leave a note about the autism correlation before I go.

        This is something I obsessively researched since I began transitioning, I am on the spectrum and I can spot people on it very well. It’s unmistakenly there, and this must be further researched. I feel like the gender non-conformity in neuroatypicals should be encouraged, since it seems we are prone to that, but the trans ideology garbage has got to go. These are the perfect conditions for the sort of obliviousness you see. We are often hyper-literal. I score a bit better than most autists in empathic abilities, and that earned me a diagnosis of “aspergers-like symptoms” rather than ASD. I think it is what allowed me to be redeemable…But when the empathy is lacking, we get the bullshit.

      • GallusMag Says:

        @andrea – I encourage you to connect with other male detransitioners who are/have gone through the same thing. You can find some of them on the GenderCritical site linked on the right side of this blog. Retransition.Org is an especially good resource.

      • Lizzy Shaw Says:

        @andrea

        Good luck with getting everything sorted out. I do agree with the “truscum” folk that dysphoria exists, but I don’t think SRS is the best way to deal with a psychological issue. I also think that if there was less sexism and homophobia, dysphoria might be easier to deal with.

      • Elin Says:

        @andrea
        The autism correlation is not weird at all, it’s actually quite logical. Autists are less prone to socialization and therefore less prone to incorporate specific gender traits as well as suppressing non-designated gender traits.

        This is, however, an uncomfortable truth to deal with for both neurotypicals (because it proves they’re more influenceable than autists) and gender-believers (because it proves gender is a social construct), and therefore not likely to be researched soon.

        Additionally, they have quite rigid thinking and this, paired with knowing *something* is wrong, may lead them to believe they’re better of with a mutilated body in another social role, because stating the above is taboo, and thus neither they themselves nor social workers will lead them in the direction of accepting the gender-carelessness part of autism.

        I found some wise words about it here, though: http://psychcentral.com/news/2014/03/13/kids-with-adhd-autism-more-likely-to-have-gender-identity-issues/67048.html

        I have the same experiences as you in that respect; I can spot others on the spectrum too quite well (also I work in an environment that attracts them) and yes the gender-nonconformity is often noticeable. Also the reverse; I saw a F2T once who totally was an aspie female. I also heard second-hand from another transgender that many transgenders are autistic. Can’t believe those doctors who let them go through with it, it only requires basic common sense why auties would be both gender-nonconforming and yearning for another identity construct. And then of course inevitably stay just as unhappy since the autism itself is not learnt to deal with, let alone accepted or taken pride in. It’s definitely such that besides lesbians/gays and fetishists, the autists (with normal to higher intelligence), confused and vulnerable as they are, are a solid part of the transgender ideology target group.

    • Dorothy Mantooth Says:

      Honestly, this is one of the things that most irritates me about the “trans movement,” is that they’re preying on unhappy people who need help. Real, genuine help, not “Well, we’ll just surgically mutilate you.” GallusMag posted my story the other day, about my stepfather-in-law who “became a woman.” While I can’t forgive him for what he did to my MIL, my husband, and his/our family, I’m also very angry that he was never given proper help to find out what was really wrong. The media and activists present “transitioning” as some completely normal, joy-filled process that will leave you as exactly the person you want to be, indistinguishable from a genetic female/male, instead of telling the truth: you’ll be the exact same person you were before, but surgically mutilated, with impaired or no fertility, with a string of damaged or broken friendships/relationships, with problems forming new ones, and with a body/face that likely doesn’t “pass” anyway. It’s being presented as a magic pill, a cure for any body image issue or unhappiness, and that’s terrifying.

      A medical establishment less devoted to media hype and placating the trans lobby would, when someone comes in claiming they feel like they’re in the wrong body, do things to make that person feel happier with their body as it is: extensive therapy, perhaps medication, or a combination of those or some other therapy/ies I’m not aware of. To truly *heal* that person, in other words, rather than just chopping bits off of them and calling it a cure.

      Andrea, I am so glad you realized the truth before irreversible damage was done to you, and I sincerely hope that it has given you some peace (it seems to have, which is great).

      • andrea Says:

        Thanks Dorothy. I have some clarity, but why I wouldn’t say I’ve found peace. Dysphoria is still there and worsening since the realization, not to mention I am dreading the effects of stopping hormones. Please correct me if this problematic, but due to body issues, could it not be said that in some cases it is okay to take a low dose of hormones(minus surgeries) therapeutically, as long as this person makes no claims on womanhood, pronouns, and spaces? I know from the writings of this site that that might still be perceived as appropriate of female biology, but if I am not doing it to become female but to relieve my pathology it may mean something different.

        Patriarchally constructed maleness got me into this mess, to the point that testosterone and my body feel toxic…

      • Dorothy Mantooth Says:

        Andrea, I honestly can’t say much about the appropriateness or not of taking small amounts of hormones therapeutically (I don’t think, though, as a layperson, that it’s necessarily a good way to treat dysphoria; it seems to me it could be just masking or prolonging the issue, but I am NOT a medical professional and do not know your history), but I can say that going cold turkey on most medications is a bad idea. I can also say that I’m a firm believer in medication for depression or mental/psychological issues if the doctor and patient agree, so do look into those as well, and of course therapy.

        Have you looked for an online forum or group for people who regret “transitioning?” I know there are people out there who do and have created websites, and there are some also from people who have “retransitioned.” Google it, and reach out, please. I am willing to bet that at least one of them can really help you, even if it’s just being an understanding listening ear or recommending a doctor. For that matter, contact the Gender Identity Clinic at Johns Hopkins, where they have studied such disorders for forty years and decided surgery is not the answer; I imagine they’ll at least be able to refer you to someone local or offer you some resources if you’re unable to visit the clinic:

        http://www.hopkinsmedicine.org/psychiatry/specialty_areas/sexual_behaviors/

        I truly, sincerely wish you the best and hope that you’ll find the help you need. I’m sorry you’re having and have had such a difficult time. But you are not alone and you do not have to be alone, and you don’t have to suffer or be surgically mutilated in order to be happy–and you do deserve to be happy, friend. Please take care of yourself.

    • Hilda Sweck Says:

      The point of feminism is equality between the sexes. A man who wears a dress/’acts in a feminine manner’ is no less a man.

    • jdmarsh89 Says:

      Good for you. I don’t really care what people wear or do, with the exception of the often clumsy caricature of stereotypically “female” behavior that I see perpetuated by some gay men and most trans men. Just be sure you’re not caricaturing and appropriating the more problematic aspects of hegemonic femininity. For example: In college, there was a gay man in one of my classes that was so femme he would freak out in this shrill, histrionic way about getting a little charcoal on his jeans or whatever the latest drama was, and would pretend to be really weak even though he was quite physically capable at probably 180lbs and 5’8. I had to lift a lithography stone for him even though I am smaller than him because he was just too dainty to do it. UUUUGHhhhhhhh… any behavior like that is off-limits in my book, but you seem to be self-aware so I doubt you’re like that. Like I said… I have a problem with histrionic displays of “feminine” behaviors, but not men wearing lipstick or pink or whatever.

      I feel like simply not being stereotypically masculine and liking some feminine things, is really fine. Great, even. I rarely see truly gender nonconforming males that don’t call themselves trans (or are perceived as trans and don’t bother correcting people). There is more leeway with girls, especially when they are young, to be tomboyish than there is with boys to be perceived as more feminine. This is because in the gender hierarchy, masculine > feminine and a girl being more like boys is represented as a move up the social ladder, whereas a boy behaving in a feminine way would cause him to be called negative things like “sissy” or “pussy”. Being a girl is socially the worst thing ever, and a boy being like a girl is the second worst thing ever. I was a very tomboyish and capable girl, but did not fully reject all aspects of hegemonic femininity. Outwardly, I appear very gender conforming, but my behavior is not. I grew up on a farm and am very capable and strong, I don’t like it when anyone pretends to be less capable than they really are, and that type of behavior is very stereotypically feminine. Women all the time pretend to be weak and take a back seat so insecure men can prove their masculinity. This is because the gender hierarchy is inherently fragile. Masculinity must be constantly proven and is never fully achieved. Femininity trains women to be neurotic, histrionic, insecure harpies that exist in the context of making males appear and feel more masculine. It’s all very messed up. Because masculinity is so exhausting, I don’t know why more men don’t check out of it entirely.


      • I had to smile at your depiction of a gay man behaving OTT and screeching at a bit of dirt because it is apt. They do go over the top like that.
        The thing is, if femininity is a patriarchal construct, which I believe it is, then it is most likely a projection onto women of male traits. So the screechy, wimpy behavior that you describe, although usually attributed to women, is probably a male trait. It could be that men are just like that. But people think women are.

        Reminds me of Valerie Solanas and what she said about gender:

        “Being an incomplete female, the male spends his life attempting to complete himself, to become female. He attempts to do this by constantly seeking out, fraternizing with and trying to live through an fuse with the female, and by claiming as his own all female characteristics — emotional strength and independence, forcefulness, dynamism, decisiveness, coolness, objectivity, assertiveness, courage, integrity, vitality, intensity, depth of character, grooviness, etc — and projecting onto women all male traits — vanity, frivolity, triviality, weakness, etc. ”

        lol

      • andrea Says:

        I agree, masculinity is a treadmill. You have to constantly measure up and put others down to achieve that.

        I never understood it.

        Thanks for pointing out what you considered clumsy caricatures, I’ll be sure to avoid such things.

      • jdmarsh89 Says:

        @cherryblossomlife

        I’ve felt the same way about those types of histrionic behaviors. They come across more as an affectation in women than they do in men. They are unattractive in either case, though. I will thoroughly shame a woman for pretending to be weak when I see it happen. I’ve made friends that way, and I’ve made enemies that way. Women are tough as shit. They’re completely marginalized worldwide in this pervasive and insidiously mundane way, yet they keep showing up every freaking day for work or school or life in general with the idea that things maybe might not be better for them in their lifetime but they’re not going to just roll over and take it like a good girl. That’s INSANE. Men could not handle it at all. They are so emotionally fragile and deeply insecure that they need every booboo kissed. They could not handle the kind of everyday sexism that women deal with on the reg like it ain’t no thang (and if you mention it out loud, people accuse you of being too sensitive and not having a sense of humor).

        My three favorite books: Fear of Women, The Gendered Object, and Gender Hurts

      • lin Says:

        Calling that behavior feminine really irks me. It’s CHILDISH, not feminine, and you see it in childish men and women.

      • hegelsghost Says:

        @lin, I’m not saying these behaviors are not childish, but rather that if you list the behaviors and then asked the average person to which group those behaviors belong and they will invariably answer “women”. Nurturing: women. Emotional: women. Shrill/dramatic/hysterical: women. Weak: women. Most of the traits associated with femininity are either obviously negative, devised to keep women quiet beneath the boot of patriarchy, or in place so women will continue to be visually pleasing and accommodating to men. It’s not that women usually behave this way. Generally they do not… It’s that these behaviors are associated with womanhood whether or not women behave in these ways. Female politicians are routinely referred to as “shrill” “hysterical” “demanding” “bitchy”, even when they are speaking calmly in an even tone and being drowned out by all the men in the room. Yes, the stereotypical behaviors are indeed childish. That’s because women are infantalized by our culture.

  15. Lizzy Shaw Says:

    I just agree with Motherhood. It’s an incredibly moronic decision to get your breasts cut off for this sort of thing. Plus, neither of them is very old, so they couldn’t just wait for people to be more accepting of same-sex marriage? People are a lot more accepting of same-sex marriage than they were 10 years ago. Also, there’s the nice thing called a will that you could use too. Seriously though, if you have any assets you should make a will even if you’re young because shit goes to hell if there’s no will and the state gets involved.

    The whole thing creeps me out. Imagine if earlier feminist movements had women who got their breasts cut off and said that that meant they were men now and should have rights. Cutting off your breasts so you can change your sex so you can legally get married is extremely fucking regressive and it is not challenging the system.

    When I was in college there was a guest speaker who was talking about same-sex marriage. I went to it, and it was super creepy, conservative, and assimilationist. The guy doing the event kept going on about how homosexuality could fit in line with Christianity (which I really did not care about because I am not and have never been a Christian. I’m pretty much agnostic.) The speaker gushed positively about two gay men he meant who were in a relationship for 20 YEARS and never had sex because get this, same-sex marriage was not legal in their state. These two men were not asexuals in a homoromantic (is that the right word?) relationship together. In fact the speaker talked about how these two men “resisted the temptation” to have sex.

    Now, I don’t like to throw around the phrase “sexually repressed” because the MTTs, kinkshits, and third-wave “feminists” use it to shame and harass lesbians and other women for daring not to revolve their lives around “examining their preferences” and forcing themselves to like dick and the depraved kinks men come up with. But, those dudes were sexually repressed. The attitude at that seminar is just like the attitude behind “I’ll chop off my healthy breasts and legally change my sex so I can marry my girlfriend.” Both cases involve a form of hyper-conformity to the system. I mean really, most straight people are off having sex outside of marriage or foregoing it all together. Why should homosexuals have to be into an ancient marriage ideal with so many straight people are rejecting that.

    • LC Says:

      As a Christian, I find that idea pretty ridiculous too. I chose celibacy because regardless of what the church says about sex, I’m uncomfortable with the whole idea of it and was tired of the sex-positive “feminists” accusations. But no one should be forced into celibacy to appease church policy… especially when, in the case of those “non-sexual” gay men, they’re only doing so superficially. We know that there are plenty of good Christian heterosexuals who don’t wait until marriage, so why it is always seen as worse for homosexuals? (Rhetorical, of course, I know the answer)

      The other thing, though, is that same-sex marriage was only illegal in their STATE. If their church so chose, they should still be able to be married in the eyes of God, in which case, who cares what the state says(at least as far as whether they’re “allowed” to have a sexual relationship)? Since the church apparently won’t, it must view their relationship as wrong… and abstaining from sex doesn’t really make it more acceptable. If they truly believed that God approved of it, and their church was wrong, then switch to a church that does perform same-sex marriages. Bureaucracy has nothing to do with morality.

      Regardless, the whole thing sounds disturbing and makes me sad.

      • Leo Says:

        Yup, that’s the right word : ) And yeah, surely internalised homophobia, and the influence of Christianity’s attitudes to sexuality, would have to be the explanation there, agreed. It can be pretty hard to reject that, if it’s how someone was brought up.

        What kind of thing did the sex pozzis say, LC? I really can’t stand them either.

        It does seem to make sense that the idea of marriage might become even more important to some gay people than to straight people. Society accepts, indeed tends to enforce, heterosexual relationships, while there’s still hostility to homosexual ones. So marriage might provide a sense of validation for homosexual couples, that the relationship itself is accepted and recognised. Shocking that a couple would feel they had to go to such lengths. Although it was extreme, I sympathise still, I don’t think it would have happened if society treated them fairly to begin with. That self-hatred didn’t come from nowhere. Maybe Jacki felt a bit insecure in her relationship, since she sounds kind of amazed that ‘pretty’ Christine would be a lesbian. Our society already associates love with sacrifice, and Christine seems to have seen it in that light. I just can’t imagine allowing someone you cared about to go through with that, I’d want to do anything to stop them, myself. What a messed-up situation. Really sad, what striving for acceptance on heteropatriachy’s terms can end up doing to people.

      • Lizzy Shaw Says:

        The whole thing really disturbed me too. There weren’t two asexual dudes who were in a relationship together, they were two homosexual dudes who were clearly following some weird version of Christianity. I can’t really imagine a church telling gay men that God was okay with their relationship if they remained celibate until people in their state became more socially liberal and legalized same-sex marriage. I really think that those two men must have had parents who were fundies and that because they couldn’t “pray the gay away” like Rick Perry suggests they just came up with this illogical idea of “God wants celibacy until the state allows same-sex marriage” on their own. (Also, Rick Perry cannot cure himself of his dumb, no matter how much he prays and how many pairs of glasses he buys. Zing!)

        As for the sex-pozzies, I used to like them when I first started hearing about them and meeting them as a teenager. I live in a red state where it was abstinence-only education, homosexuals were subtly condemned, and women were too stupid to remember to take the Pill (I’ve been taking it since I was 15; bite me) and condoms have a one million percent failure rate. So, I did like the sex-positive people back when I was a teen because they weren’t telling me that I was a bad person for being a lesbian and a lot of them were around my age and they went around teaching other teens real sex-ed. There was a pretty good attitude of respecting other’s boundaries and encouraging people not to rush into sexual relationships.

        I do think that some sections of this movement started off as a good thing. Unfortunately rat bastards (mostly dudes and handmaidens) had to ruin everything and now it’s “examine your sexuality until you like dick”, and “how dare you be creeped out by my Nazi rapist fetish you kink-shamer!” and of course, “if you want to be celibate you’re just a prude who needs to get laid.” Oh and for that matter, watching porn is mandatory if you don’t want to be a prude now and criticizing it makes you evil.

        @Leo

        I do think some homosexuals view marriage as a mean of legitimizing their relationship. I don’t, but I had socially liberal parents who were never religious, so we never had any church stuff condemning homosexuality in my house. . Also, my parents are not the type who insist that my brother and I must give them grandchildren. In fact, my mom already said that she was not a baby-sitter if that happened.

        When someone has a teenage child, they say “don’t get pregnant or get someone pregnant”. When said teenager comes out as gay or lesbian, oftentimes the parent suddenly wants to know right now if they’re ever going to have a grandchild. I’ve met people with parents like that. So, I guess I can see how sometimes homosexuals might put more stock into the value of marriage than heterosexuals or why sometimes they adopt some weird-ass contradictory conservative values. I don’t think it’s a good thing though.

      • LC Says:

        @Leo, I agree, and since it’s usually the female that’s expected to sacrifice, Jackie seems to have chosen a very traditionally feminine way to become male. In part I think it’s the internalized homophobia, but also misogyny and the prominence transgenderism has gotten in the past few decades. Why be lesbians when you can be heterosexually married and ‘unique’? Some might pay a lot more than the price of two breasts just to be on television, sadly. The whole practice preys on consumerist thinking.

        As for the sex-pozzies, it’s in part their demand that everyone define their sexuality(and thus, availability). Being abstinent and asexual is acceptable(so long as you don’t speak ill of other people having sex), but being abstinent for religious reasons, or because you just aren’t interested(but don’t call yourself asexual) is “obviously” a sign of being sexually repressed, and you need to work on that. Also, they take no responsibility for the tacit permission they give to “liberal, feminist” men to harass women about sex, as they did to me. “Are you SURE you don’t want to? Maybe you should try to enjoy it.”

        …No, actually. Psychological manipulation is just as much rape, and it sure as heck has nothing to do with sexuality. Since I’m not interested in marriage, celibacy was a logical conclusion, and an easier way to say no. I’m cynical enough to recognize that promises to God carry far more weight to men(even atheists) than anything a woman has ever said.

      • Lizzy Shaw Says:

        @LC

        Yeah, those would be some of my problems with sex positivity as it is. Libfems have given “feminist” men to harass women about sex and I completely agree that physiologically manipulating someone into sex is rape. It does annoy me that in sex-pozzie circles, you can’t question or even just be grossed out by some of the really wack kinks (like sadomasochism or Nazi fetishes) but once a woman says that she wants to be celibate then let the shamming begin. I don’t think it’s a good thing to be like the two gay men I mentioned, but I sure as hell don’t trust any man who tries to “liberate” a religious woman by talking her into having sex with him or does the same thing to a woman who is celibate but not because of religious reasons.

        Also, unlike the people I met as a teen sex-pozzies seem to be against education. Now I see people making up statistics about condom failure to encourage them not to use it because it feels better (for the man). I saw a thing arguing that two gay guys, one being HIV+ could totally have anal sex without a condom and not spread the virus, but if they did HIV wasn’t a big deal. To any gay guys reading it: yes HIV is a big deal. Don’t let someone guilt-trip you into thinking that not having sex with an HIV+ man is bigotry. HIV may not be a death sentence anymore, but it is a chronic condition and having to take expensive drugs for the rest of your life that have nasty side-effects isn’t fun. I don’t have HIV but I have several other chronic conditions. You think I like spending a ton of money on prescription drugs? No, I don’t. So be careful and remember that HIV sucks and also it isn’t the only STD out there. Don’t get sucked into toxic masculinity; read “Unpacking Queer Politics” by Sheila Jeffreys.

        There’s not a lot of information about healthy relationships either in most sex-pozzie circles because that information would make it way harder to groom girls into BDSM.

      • lin Says:

        I’m not religious at all anymore but I don’t see any shame in postponing sex for religious reasons or just becuz. Heck, I would have been a lot better off if I had stuck to my principles instead of giving in to sex at 16 just to keep my bf. I would have been perfectly happy limited to just kissing and fooling around.

        People may say it’s repressed or puritanical. Puritans strove for virtue over instant gratification, and they are vilfied? Everything can be taken too far but sometimes delaying gratification is a good thing.

  16. blackmetalvalkyrie Says:

    Hey if anyone has statistics or anything else on violence against women by trans males please link me to it because I am debating with a liberal guy and I actually changed his mind and tells me he felt in his gut that what they are doing (taking away women’s spaces) is wrong, he just wants to see statistics on it. I’m not sure they exist due to the power of the trans movement but please link me if you have them.

    • ibleedpurple Says:

      According to the ECHR’s own press release the ruling is based on the following:

      “The case concerned the complaint of a male-to-female transsexual that she could only obtain full official recognition of her new gender by having her marriage turned into a civil partnership.

      The Court found that it was not disproportionate to require the conversion of a marriage into a registered partnership as a precondition to legal recognition of an acquired gender as that was a genuine option which provided legal protection for same-sex couples that was almost identical to that of marriage. The minor differences between these two legal concepts were not capable of rendering the current Finnish system deficient from the point of view of the State’s positive obligation under Article 8. In addition, such a conversion would not have any implications for the applicant’s family life as it would not affect the paternity of the applicant’s daughter or the responsibility for the care, custody, or maintenance of the child.”

      “State’s positive obligation” means that the ECHR won’t impose an obligation for allowing same-sex marriage on EU member states. Basically, Hämäläinen should try to campaign for legal equality of marriage and civ partnership (which would make a differentiation obsolete).

      The wording is very interesting. It seems to be the case that the (Heli) Hämäläinen makes being a woman conditional on being married. This is deeply sexist and I suspect there might be some underlying homophobia involved – Hämäläinen wants to cling to the heterosexual institution of marriage instead of “downgrading” to a partnership.

      Wikipedia tells me that the only differences between marriage and civ partnership in Finland are in adoption rights and name change. Amnesty says that joint adoption is not possible. This is some moralizing bullshit and seeks to uphold heterosexuality (the ideal of genetic parenthood within marriage) as an institution. But I agree with the court: it has nothing to with Hämäläinen’s case. He simply wants to keep some of that straight privilege and couldn’t give less of a fuck about gay & lesbian people’s rights to adoption and choosing a shared name.

      Now to the very interesting part:

      “If the spouse’s consent was received, it provided both for legal recognition of the new gender and legal protection of the relationship. The Court found that this consent was an elementary requirement designed to protect each spouse from the effect of unilateral decisions taken by the other.”

      And then:

      “Leaving aside those of maintaining the status quo or divorcing, the complaint in question was primarily directed at the possibility to convert marriage into a civil partnership, with the consent of the applicant’s wife. According to the Government, the aim of the relevant legislation was to unify the varying practices applied in different parts of the country and to establish coherent requirements for legal gender recognition. If the spouse’s consent was received, it provided both for legal recognition of the new gender and legal protection of the relationship. The Court found that this consent was an elementary requirement designed to protect each spouse from the effect of unilateral decisions taken by the other.”

      Uhhm. So basically he didn’t talk to his wife? Am I reading this correctly? He wants to keep being married without talking to his wife, without her having a say?They didn’t include this paragraph for shits and giggles, I’m sure.

    • Dorothy Mantooth Says:

      Yeah, that guy, uh, really passes…

  17. Motherhood Says:

    GM, did not know where to put this–the reviewer calls himself “trans” a cross dresser–he is a very powerful prof at Harvard–Stephen Burke(?). He id as male–and only does the girl thing when he wants–he kinda explodes the narrative–maybe he only has a lady brain when he at home

    http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/books/2014/07/trans-literature-for-the-masses.html?utm_source=tny&utm_campaign=generalsocial&utm_medium=facebook&mbid=social_facebook

  18. Tobysgirl Says:

    John Waters: Whatever happened to the good things about being gay? No military service and no marriage!

  19. shediogenes Says:

    for the social security? really? take the price of psych visits to get the diagnosis plus the cost of mastectomy, pain pills, recovery, lost work, roll it into a T-bill (*snort* T-bill) or a monthly premium for life insurance and, ta-da! keep your body whole. there is so much more going on here. internalized homophobia, desperate need for the appearance of heteronormativity (until Oprah comes calling). No marriage benefits are worth THIS.

  20. SmokeyBirdie Says:

    If you fell in love with a man and had two children with him, then are you really a lesbian? Same goes for men.


  21. More trans insanity here:


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: