Jaqueline Sephora Andrews : Not to Be Forgotten

October 4, 2016

Gender Apostates, Then...

Gender Apostates, Then…

The following are re-posts of the writing of black transwoman Jaqueline Andrews. Andrews was a contributor to the “Gender Apostates’ website. Gender Apostates was a project undertaken by heterosexual white women “Sass” and Rebecca Reilly Cooper in support of the medicalization of “transgender women”. Their intention was to draw a distinction between males who merely self-define as “female” and males who are willing to undergo medical and surgical procedures to reduce their reproductive anatomy, which they proposed granted more authenticity to their ‘identities’. Site co-author was Miranda Yardley. Male contributors included Aoife Assumpta Hart, Jaqueline Andrews, and others.

Andrews’ work was deleted from Gender Apostates and he was erased as a contributor. I reprint the works that can be recovered here. Andrews last work ‘A Misogynist is a Misogynist by Any Other Name’ renounced the actions of co-contributor Aoife Assumpta Hart, and the concept of “gender critical transwomen’ that the site promoted.

And Now.

And Now.


Essays are reprinted because Jaqueline wanted to be heard and NOT erased. GenderTrender objects to the erasure of Jaqueline Andrews after his death by Gender Apostates.

Inquiries to Gender Apostates co-owner Miranda Yardley about the reasoning behind erasing all of Andrews’ work after his death were not responded to at the time of this post. 

UPDATE/CORRECTION: Miranda Yardley claimed in a tweet that Andrew’s removed his own essays. Apparently Jaqueline Andrews had archived his own work on a WordPress site in the weeks before his death (see discussion in comments). That site is here:



June 2015


Liberation for whom?

by Jaqueline Sephora Andrews

I long for the day when Gender is abolished. I believe that once Gender is abolished, we can truly be free to live life the way we want to live it, without being forced into boxes, forced to perform. This sounds wonderful, but is freedom really possible? I have been here before, a movement predominantly white, talking about freedom. It really doesn’t lead to universal freedom. Therefore, any liberation movement that I am involved with must center the voices and ideas of black women, and other minorities. I believe that it is only when their voices are centered, that there can be true liberation.


Some people might say that they care about the black struggle, yet say that I am colonizing women by calling myself a transwomen and living a socially constructed form of womanhood. This is really offensive because I don’t colonize; I am a descendent of the colonized, with my great great grandmother being that last person in my family tree born into slavery. It was my ancestors who were taken from their homeland and brought here to this land in chains, with many dying along the way. My people, along with the indigenous peoples, and Mexican Americans, who are descendents of the southwestern annexation, are the colonized here in the United States of America; it is an appropriation for a white person to claim this term for themselves. There can’t be true liberation until we recognize the harm that has been done to the colonized. Black people suffered through years of chattel slavery, and are still feeling the effects 150 years later. My entire race is oppressed by this US government. The people of African descent, along the diaspora, are oppressed in their various countries and territories. Within the Black race, it is black women who have suffered the most oppression, from white people and also black men; it is their voices that we need to hear and listen to, in order for there to be true liberation.

However, oppressions do intersect so black men do benefit from male privilege while still continuing to be oppressed because of their race. This male privilege has caused many to use black women’s struggles as an excuse to attack women. It is important to note that women, including white middle to upper class women, are also oppressed. Men, including black men, have also attempted to “teach” women about “womanhood,” which is why it is also important to acknowledge the biological reality of transwomen. We might call ourselves women, but we are biologically male; it is not our duty to teach women about “womanhood.” We haven’t had the lived experience of being female in this patriarchal society. It is the patriarchy that has sought to use controlling images to oppress women, especially black women.

One image is the sexualized black woman. Bell Hooks gives a wonderful critique of Solomon’s sexualization of a black woman in the “Song of Songs.” She tells us that the woman’s point of view is never expressed. How would the story read, if it was told by the woman? Would she have consented to the many love interests of Solomon? The truth is that even the texts we hold as sacred are told from a male point of view. We seem to elevate the biblical writers to the level of God, without realizing that they were human and were subject to bias. In ignoring the voices of black women, the story is told by white men who have had a history of trying to justify their sexual violence against black women. They constructed this image of a sexualized black woman that many black men have internalized, and now black men are responsible for the majority of sexual violence against black women. Patricia Hill Collins speaks of this in her book, Black Feminist Thought. Certain forms of music also promote this sexualized image.

For many transwomen, beauty is an expression of “womanhood.” Of course, this idea is from a male point of view. There is nothing wrong with self-definition, which is spoken of by Patricia Hill Collins. It is important for black people to define ourselves. I define myself as a transwoman, because I am biological male, but I have suffered through dysphoria, which caused depression. Even though I am biologically male, I live socially and am recognized as a woman. Janet Mock is not wrong when she defines herself, even when she says that for her, “Glamour is a source of power.” This is based on her self-definition. What is troubling is when she is held as an example of womanhood. This is when the message becomes an attack against women, especially black women.

In an interview with Afrobella, Janet Mock was asked, “What do you love about ‘traditional’ trappings of femininity. Are there any that annoy you?” To which Mock answered, “I hate walking to work in heels, but I have to have a complete outfit with the right proportions so I tend to walk to work in heels. I hate tweezing my eyebrows, but I have to in order to achieve my most enhancing arch so I pluck my brows.” These preparations for Mock were “the beautiful inconveniences that help make up the sum of my womanhood.” Mock adheres to the patriarchal standards of beauty, which have been used to oppress women, especially black women. So, what is the message? That women have to harm themselves in order to be beautiful? This wouldn’t matter at all if Mock wasn’t held as an example of womanhood. I want people, including Janet Mock, to be able to live their lives and yes even define themselves, but we also have to be realistic. Mock’s example is not of womanhood, but of a male’s fantasy of womanhood.

In talking with Bell Hooks about Beyonce’s Time Magazine shoot, Mock said that it is “freeing having Beyonce showing her ass, owning her body, and claiming that space.” Once again we see the male socialization of Mock. Bell Hooks mentions how Beyonce was made to look younger, for the male gaze, by “imperialists, white supremacy, patriarchy, capitalists.” Bell Hooks then told Mock that “you are not going to destroy this imperialist, white supremacist, capitalist patriarchy by creating your own version of it.” Regardless of the packaging, Mock is an example of how the patriarchy will use anyone to “keep black women in their place.” The concept of womanhood that Mock promotes should not be celebrated because it is what is used to harm and oppress black women.

Laverne Cox is another trans activist that the patriarchy uses to oppress black women. In her discussions with Bell Hooks, Cox says that her style (including her blond wig) is because she wants “great visibility.” Is Laverne Cox saying that in order to have visibility, she needs to adhere to the patriarchal standards for white women? There is a message behind this statement. Laverne Cox also claimed that posing nude for Allure was empowering, which is another message from the patriarchy. They can’t legally enslave black people, so they sell images to keep us in bondage. The image they want black women to aspire to be is the degrading sexualized image. It doesn’t matter to me if Cox poses nude or not; it matters that Cox views this oppressive symbol as empowering. It is another example of how white supremacists have used black men to attack black women.

Gender needs to be completely abolished, but abolishing gender will not end race-based oppression. Black women are oppressed because of gender, but are also oppressed for being black. Will there be true freedom for black people, in particular black women, once gender is abolished? It is time for society to listen to the colonized, especially colonized women. We cannot be free until our voices are heard. The movement that I take part in understands the importance of black voices, as well as other minorities. Together, we work to end the patriarchy, white supremacy, and to completely abolish gender.


July 2015


Liberate Your Mind

by Jaqueline Sephora Andrews

What else do I have, if I don’t have my mind? Whoever controls your mind controls you. It has been a real struggle these past two days, which has confirmed my decision to focus my analyses on “Black Feminist Thought.” Some have claimed that the idea of black and white feminists came from men, whose goal was to divide women. However, it was black women who formed black feminist groups because of racism in the women’s liberation movement in the 1960’s (bell hooks, ‘Ain’t I a Woman’). It is this history that some “white feminists” continue to deny. If your movement is predominantly white, then it will in all likelihood be racist. I saw this racism yesterday, among a few radical feminists, who referred to me as a token and also talked down to me. They did not understand they were speaking from their white privilege. They also showed misogyny by assuming that a male should tell a woman what to do. I have noticed among the most extreme, they say they hate men until they want to tell other women what to do, then it is necessary to consult a man. I realized that I needed to step back and re-evaluate my analysis, which is what led me to “Black Feminist Thought.”

This is not about Black against White, as I have many friends who are “white feminists,” whom I love dearly. I also acknowledge that there are many wonderful radical feminists, but I am not going to pretend that there is not an extreme sect. I am not going to pretend that there are not women attempting to control other women, and blaming men for it. I will not take ownership of their bullying; the division among them did not come from me. The past two days has come down to one thing, people who claim to be “pro-women” being upset because I believe that women should be free to express themselves, as they choose. My advocacy is based in freedom; I believe that people should be free to be who they are, whether they are a radical feminist or a transwoman/transman. It is white privilege that leads some to believe they can control other people. There are no tokens in the movement that I am a part of. We are all valued, regardless of if you are female or male. Everyone’s thoughts are valued, whether we agree or not. Mind control is a product of this imperialistic and patriarchal society.

For true liberation, there needs to be liberation of the mind. How can you liberate your mind? First, you have to value your own thoughts and ideas. I love to read, and I am inspired by feminists, such as bell hooks, Patricia Hill Collins and others, but my thoughts are still my thoughts. Don’t let anyone tell you how to think. This is why I love “Black Feminist Thought.” There is a necessity for us, black people, to be able to define who we are. This is what I want to share with others, regardless of race. I am critical of the transgender political movement because it also seeks to control people’s thoughts, but I still believe a transgender person can choose to identify how they like. It doesn’t change their biology, but their thoughts belong to them. I understand that community is important, but once they take away your ability to think, then what do you have left? I still love many radical feminists, but I won’t give them my mind.

I would also suggest you read, and read critically. No matter where or how you further your education, please, remember there is always a chance to fall into groupthink if you are not careful. Learning is your responsibility. You need to be able to understand that a book written in 1980 should be understood in the context of its time. The world is forever changing, so it is dangerous to read a book from 1980 like it was written for this time. My inspiration comes from feminists, but I still understand that 1980 is not 2015. It is still, however, important to read the writings of the past. There is a lot of wisdom in them that is necessary for today.

You can’t be free until your mind is free. Your mind will never be free, as long as you chase after purity sects. You will essentially become a slave.

How could we ever destroy the patriarchy? I refer to bell hooks, during her interview with Janet Mock, where she says that, “you are not going to destroy this imperialist, white supremacist, capitalist, patriarchy, by creating your own version of it.” How can you say that you’re for the liberation of women if you want to control women? How can you say that you want to destroy the patriarchy if you want men to control women’s speech? The patriarchy is about control; the patriarchy wants men to control women, and it also convinces women to control other women. The patriarchy will not be destroyed through patriarchal means. The patriarchy cannot be destroyed until people reject what the patriarchy is selling. The patriarchy will not be destroyed until people learn to think for themselves; it is your mind that needs to be liberated.

The patriarchy wants to control your mind. My ancestors suffered, while they dreamed about my freedom. I am not going to disrespect their memory by becoming a mental slave.


July 2015


Liberation from the Imperialist Patriarchy of the Bible

By Jaqueline Sephora Andrews

How can I still be a Christian?  It is no secret to those who know me that feminism, in particular Black feminist thought, is the basis of my analysis.  How could I possibly reconcile being a Christian with a feminist analysis?  This is an important question, as women are oppressed under a biblical patriarchy.  The Bible has been used to abuse women and others who are on the margins of society.  The belief that woman are supposed to be “submissive” while men are the heads of their households are attributed to God.  How could I ever justify being a Christian, while maintaining a feminist analyses?  It seems antithetical, right?  The first thing I need to do, and I encourage all Christians who are faced with these questions to do, is to call the Bible into question.


We talk about the Bible as if it is one book, but the Bible is a collection of books.  It is important to note that these books were written by men.  They wrote at specific times for specific audiences.  It is also important to note that they did not have all the answers to life, as has been evident through further research.  Many Christians take what a Biblical writer says at face value, without first understanding who they were writing to and their reasons for writing.  Much of the intended audiences were illiterate, so they relied on the words of the theologians of their day.  We are not living in the first-century Greco-Roman world; we don’t have to accept the words of anyone, even people who claim that their words came directly from God.  When dealing with oppression, the Bible needs to be called into question.

The words of the Bible were influenced by the Greco-Roman culture, as were other religions and writings during this period.  We say that the Bible is misogynistic, but it is the culture that produced the Bible that was misogynistic; the Bible was a reflection of the culture.  In this misogynistic culture, there was one, Jesus, who attempted to change the mindset.  He was different; one of the things that was different about him was that he valued women, so much that he had women as prominent disciples. He also trusted women to give the gospel message.  Women were faithful and were the ones who stayed with Jesus until the end.  It was the men who left Jesus to die, while they ran and hid for fear of their lives.  The women were the ones who weren’t afraid, so Jesus trusted them to give the message.  In a misogynistic world, Christianity was liberating and egalitarian, which frightened the men who wrote the books and letters of the Bible.

The writers did not want to upset the imperialist patriarchy; Christians were often blamed when crisis occurred, due to being “different,” so it was important for them to not “upset the empire.”  In the Greco-Roman world, there were “household codes” (Campbell-Reed, 2001), which were influenced by the teachings of Aristotle.  The idea that a woman should submit did not come from God, but from a Greco-Roman culture that believed a woman’s duty was to submit to a man.  In this misogynistic culture, women were to remain silent in the company of men, which was against the teachings and practices of Jesus.  When Paul wrote his letters, he did not have the benefit of Jesus’ documented teachings, so he taught as he thought Jesus would, in this Greco-Roman culture.

Christianity was a religion where women exercised authority, even over men.  This troubled the writer of the letters to Timothy, who desired to appease the Roman Empire.  This writer didn’t understand Hebrew, and didn’t understand the creation story.  Eve was considered Adam’s “helper.”  The word for helper is ezer.  It is the same term that is used for God, in the various places in the Bible, such as Psalm 121.  The “helper” was the self-sufficient one; the helper was the one who others depended on for their survival.  So, if the creation story is taken literally then Eve was the self-sufficient one, whereas Adam needed Eve for his survival.  This writer did not understand this and probably was teaching the traditions that were handed to him.  This writer was living under the fear of the Roman Empire, and felt that the empire might be suspicious if they saw women openly teaching and even having authority over men, so he wrote, “I do not permit a woman to teach or to assume authority over a man; she must be quiet” (1 Timothy 2:12 NIV).  Many have taken these words as the gospel, but when did “I” become synonymous with God?  Why are many Christians so afraid to question the words of a man?

First, there is Imperialism.  In our liberation efforts, we cannot discount imperialism and its effects on men and women, especially here in the United States.  Bell hooks, in her book ‘Feminist Theory: From Margin to Center,’ talks about Imperialism and its effect on culture.  Men and women have supported and have been educated under imperialism, so if the focus is solely on overthrowing the patriarchy, then we will still have a society where people feel that it is necessary to dominate others; it will just be different people in control.  Imperialism heavily influenced the writers of the Christian Scriptures and also the way the scriptures have been interpreted throughout the years.  Jesus was considered a threat because he opposed the empire, and people followed him.  Why would a Roman empire crucify him?  They crucified “rebels.”  Jesus was a pacifist, but imperialism caused people to interpret his teachings as supporting the wars of the empire.  Early Christians followed his teachings of peace, but when the Roman emperor Constantine converted to Christianity, their peaceful faith became imperialistic.  The empire, rather it was the Roman Empire or the American Empire, loves Christians because the “rulers” know that Christians will serve them faithfully, rather it is support of the wars or the subordination of women.  Jesus, however, died because he opposed the empire.

And then, there is the patriarchy.  The patriarchy was used as a means to control households.  The patriarchy assured that the imperialists would stay in power.  The patriarchy also gave men, who were and are exploited in an imperialistic culture, the opportunity to have a position of power in their homes.  It is imperialism that taught men to dominate, but it is through the patriarchy that this domination is realized.  If men were content with their positions of power in their homes then there would be no need for them to rebel.  Just as men feared the empire, the empire feared them.  The empire feared rebellion, and Jesus was a “rebel.”  He stood against imperialism and the patriarchy, which cause a paranoid governor to consider him a threat.

How can I still be a Christian?  Jesus opposed the imperialist patriarchy.  The empire lived by war and destruction, but Jesus taught love.  The empire believed that women were naturally subordinate to men, but Jesus had women disciples who carried the message to men.  I became a Christian because I believed the message of Christ, which was given before there ever was a Bible.  It is Jesus, who taught me to love everyone and to accept differences.  It is Jesus who led me to build relationships with people who I was taught to hate.  The message of Jesus is not one of oppression but of liberation.  The liberation that  is needed is liberation from the imperialist patriarchy which controls the interpretation of the Bible.  I hold to the message of Jesus because it is a message of love.


September 2015


Trans Activism And The Promotion Of Sex

by Jaqueline Sephora Andrews

The horror I have faced.  I hear the trans community talk about doxxing, even accusing certain radical feminists, but there is no one who doxxes like trans activists.  I have experienced their doxxing because I stood up to a bully who had threatened a woman and her children.  I then stood up to him again as he was tweeting about feminists, saying some very disgusting things.  I did not know that he was a professional hacker, and how my life would change because of his stalking and hacking.  But it happened.  It was his hate for women which led him to doxx me, in order to shame me.  This has had such an effect on me that the sight of his name in my twitter mentions always make me nervous.  I am afraid to talk about relationships or who I might be interested in, for fear of being watched.  He says he doesn’t care anything about me, but yet he manages to find his way into my twitter mentions.  He tries to use the information he has of me as proof that I am a hypocrite, even though the information he has is before I was gender critical.  This has caused me pain, but it also taught me something about trans activism.  If you are labeled as a TERF or TERF token, then you are not considered human; they treat you as they see fit.


The first doxx and shaming attempt had to do with my sexuality, and the kind of man I tend to be attracted to.  What this has to do with this particular man threatening women, I do not know.  The new shaming attempt that has arisen is that I am an aspiring Shemale porn star, who is taking divinity classes.  In actuality, Divinity is my master’s program, and I never has aspired to be a shemale porn star.  The shemales who also harass me because of my stances, usually targeting my looks, could tell you that much.  I don’t even use this term, but it doesn’t mean that I have never had conversations about a career in pornography, or prostitution for that matter.  What my harassers/doxxers won’t mention, is the hardship I have had since I came out.  I have suffered rejection from family and friends.  I have struggled to find employment in spite of being able to complete my degree, in Sociology.  I have been homeless, sleeping in my car.  I have suffered from depression and loneliness, which has had an effect on my decisions.  Trans activism believes in “agency,” so surely every act that I have done was based on my freedom to choose.  Pornography and prostitution are awful, and I have never done either.  However, I was still not spared the harm of a “sex positive culture.”

My sexual horror began when I met a man who was very in to Bondage, Domination, and Sadomasochism (BDSM).  I was his submissive.  I never called myself his slave, but he thought of himself as my master.  I could not call him by his name, but had to refer to him as “Sir” or “Daddy.”  He sought to control every aspect of my life.  He would give me assignments and a book to read that would “help” me in my development as a submissive.  I was always afraid to talk to him because I never knew what mood he would be in.  Sometimes he was nice, but that could all change if I said something that he deemed wrong.  He loved to drink beer, which made him unbearably mean.  I hated those times when he was drunk; I could never do anything right, and he was very critical of me.  He would beat me, but of course it’s all a part of BDSM.  They tell us to use safe words, when the pain is unbearable.  However, he would sometimes beat me ten to fifteen times after I had used a safe word.  In his face, I could see anger sometimes as he beat me.  This was quite normal and BDSM is a loving act between consenting adults, right?  I often said yes to him, but my mind and my emotions were saying no.  I absolutely hated this life.

But my horror did not end here.  It was a span of about three days.  My brother had just been killed, so I was having a really difficult time.  My dom came over to “comfort” me, but this time he brought someone, a mutual friend.  He was there to videotape us having sex.  My dom was very much into pornography and had aspirations of making movies.  At this point, other than the videotaping, everything was how it always was.  After our “friend” left, then my dom in his drunken state began to humiliate me.  I videotaped cleaning in nothing but pantyhose and high heels.  This was such an awful feeling that I began to cry.  I was allowed to put clothes on to take out the trash, but I was forced to wear heels.  It was a long walk, as the trash was at the other end of the apartment complex.  I remember as I was walking back, with tears in my eyes, a woman saying “I don’t know how you do it girl, walking in those heels!”  I said “oh yes” with the fakest smile I have ever had.  And after this humiliation, I had more sex to look forward to.

The next day, my dom called our friend over again to do what they call a “drive by,” which meant that they would both have sex with me.  As the submissive, I was to let them do whatever they felt like doing to me.  This was the roughest sex I have ever experienced, and afterword I was in pain.  I still remember the feeling like it was yesterday.  The pain was greatest when I used the bathroom.  I was actually afraid of using the bathroom because of the pain I felt.  That night, I needed to recover.  I knew that my dom would understand and respect my wishes.  After all, I was told that “the submissive is the one with the real power.”  Did he respect my wishes?  Please, take a guess.  All he ever cared about was sex and he often demanded it.  This time was no different.  When he began to demand sex, I told him about my condition.  I thought he would at least care about me and my body.  He became so forceful, that I gave in to his demands.  Again, I remember it like it was yesterday.  I felt pain the moment he entered me, and I repeatedly told him that I couldn’t handle this pain and to please stop.  It hurt so bad that all I could do was cry.  How was this me exercising my agency?  Why would someone accept BDSM as a “normal” way of affection?  To the submissive: you were not meant to be beaten; there is value to your life and body.  To the dominant: why do you feel the need to beat the one you supposedly care about and even love?  The answer should not be to glorify this abusive act, but to seek professional help to be able to deal with internal issues that might cause someone to justify this abuse.

I truly love everyone who may read these words.  I wish the very best for you, and I want you to know that trans activism is harmful to women.  Within trans activism there is a deep hatred for women, which is expressed through the promotion of pornography, prostitution, BDSM and other sexual acts that glorify the objectification of women.  If you stand up to their misogyny and abuse of women then they will target you with harassment and doxxing.

To transwomen: you might feel like this is a wonderful community, but they only accept you if you heed to their ideology.  The moment you begin to challenge their dogma, then the very same lifestyle that they promoted is what they’ll use against you.  In their mind, it is all about agency; the sex industry is always a choice, which enables them to blame the victim.  Your life will be better if you leave them and become a part of a community that will value you for the beautiful person that you are.



October 2015


A Movement Based In White Supremacy

By Jaqueline Sephora Andrews

I have been accused of being a token for white feminism.  I have even been labeled, by some, Uncle Tom, Uncle Ruckus; I have been called a “kneegrow sellout” for speaking out against Fallon Fox fighting women and Monica Roberts bullying of women.  Let’s forget that my analysis is based in Black Feminist Thought, and it is inspired by Patricia Hill Collins, bell hooks, Audre Lorde and other black feminists.  Because I don’t give in to trans activists’ attacks on women, I am a “sell out,” a “quisling” and these “evil” women are my “TERF masters.”  Women are accused of being racist for being radical feminists, but who are the real racists?  If you look deep within the trans political movement, then you’ll find that it is a movement based in white supremacy.


The trans political movement hides its racism by appropriating the struggles of black people and projecting their racism on to “white feminists.”  Trans activists will say #translivesmatter, however, the social media focus is disproportionately on trans lives; there is no need for a special hash tag.  This appears to be an attempt at appropriation, with trans activists trying to link the oppression of black people to the “oppression” of trans individuals.  Mainstream trans activists try to strip us of the language we use to shed light on our oppression; as soon as society begins to pay attention, here comes white males in disguise, switching the focus to themselves.  This is the height of white supremacy.  There’s the hash tag, #flyingwhiletrans, which is another attempt to link to our oppression, as we have talked about the dangers of walking/driving while black.

Attention transwomen!  You are not oppressed.  Being made fun of for wearing dresses and heels is not oppression.  The majority of transwomen are privileged white males.  It is transwomen of color who are being murdered by homophobic men who don’t know how to deal with their own attractions for men.  The transwomen murdered are almost always poor and/or in prostitution; Rather than focus on this, trans activists want to keep the focus on white males. Many are too lost in white supremacy to realize the attempts of trans activists to replace our struggle with their “history.”  Let’s no longer talk about the history and the real oppression of black people; let’s focus on being inclusive of transwomen, so we don’t have to face the horror of being accused of practicing “white feminism.”

Yes, you’ve heard correct…  I was informed by a white man that white feminism is “feminism that doesn’t include transwomen,” making it possible for a black woman to also be referred to as a “white feminist.”  Transwomen are now the “victims” and black women are the “oppressors.”  How could this be?  White males have sold images which I call “repackaged slavery,” and many black people have fallen for it.  I am called an “Uncle Tom” because I don’t fit this scripted image.  Maybe, slavery was never really abolished.  It was on the surface, but has seeped into the deep levels of the heart and mind.  This is evident in the worship of trans politics, and their image of who we are as black people.  Trans politics allows for white men to have control over your mind; they can’t keep you in chains, but they can control you through your mind.  Once they control  your mind, they can force you to worship at their feet, believing that it is your choice.

After they control your mind, they aim to control  your heart.  Once they have your heart, they’ll have you saying that “cissexism is even worse” than a man who “stores 21 pieces of female genitalia in his freezer.”  This is an example of the brainwashing of trans allies.  To many white males, black people are considered ignorant.  White men feel as though we need to lead us, and they found one they could exploit.  You may believe that you are a wonderful ally, but they are mocking your lack of critical thought.  You are what they have been saying about our people for 450 years.

In white supremacy, there is Monica Roberts who also wrote a hate piece because I confronted her about trying to bully Ronda Rousey into fighting Fallon Fox.  Monica Roberts then wrote about me that, “If you wanted my attention, you self hating rhymes with itch, now your cookie chomping sellout ass has got it, sir,” and then, “I’m going WMMA on your clueless Uncle Ruckus wannabe behind.”  Monica Roberts is playing the role that trans activists want her to play.  She is the “n****r for them.  The only way to abolish white supremacy is to completely reject the image that they have for us.

White Supremacy is our culture; we have to acknowledge it’s existence, so we can completely abolish it.  If you fail to acknowledge that it’s there, then you will live within its confines.  The failure to acknowledge white supremacy within trans activism has allowed it to reign supreme, making the trans political movement a white supremacist movement.  It is with love that I tell you, as a black person, you are not a slave.  Please reject white males who appropriate our struggle, even if they “identify” as women.



November 2015


The Value In People

by Jaqueline Sephora Andrews

People matter and are more important than any movement could ever be.  It is very dangerous to become so taken by the movement that you fail to see the value in people.  My analysis is based in Black Feminist Thought, and I am critical of the system of gender with the aim of completely abolishing it.  Of course, one would call me a hypocrite for being a transsexual, but I survive in a gendered world; I don’t need gender to survive.  I do, however, feel that the term “gender critical” is sometimes abused by transgenderists who are seeking to be validated by radical feminists.  Do you really believe that being gender critical is a luxury? If you really want to be “gender critical” then please understand that you will be hated by people from different sides.  People who even hate each other, will join together in their hatred of you.  When radical feminists didn’t fall for their schemes, some transgenderists became really violent, with one stalking and threatening a woman and her children.  The issue wasn’t participating in the movement, but it was in not valuing a person’s life.  People are more important than any movement.  It is not about attracting feminists, but fighting oppression, and how can you fight oppression at the expense of other people?  It defeats the purpose.  No movement will become more important than the people within it.

People are important.  When you value life, you can honor and respect opposing view points.  Some might not like that I’m a transsexual, or feel that I too appropriate other realities. I can disagree with other opinions, but their lives matter regardless of how their comments make me feel.  The world doesn’t revolve around my feelings.  The lack of respect for people, especially women, is why it was necessary for me to leave the trans movement.  I saw that it was a misogynistic movement that expected women to be obedient.  Women who don’t obey are labelled Trans Exclusionary Radical Feminist (TERF) and targeted with abuse.  Regardless of how you feel, transwomen, radical feminists are people and entitled to their analysis.  If what they are saying isn’t true, then why do you work so hard to try to silence their voices?  You have fallen for your political agenda that you fail to see the value in people.  People deserve safety.  Women are entitled to their safe spaces.

What is safety? For me, I had never really been in a place of safety.  I respect safe spaces for women, but I myself had never really felt safe in any space I was in.  I live a life always on guard feeling like I need to keep a protective shield around me.  It wasn’t until I spent time with a dear friend that I could truly say I felt safe.  It was so wonderful; for the first time, I could truly be me.  I could finally pour out my heart, without any fear.  It was even a time of healing for me.  Even though my dear friend is a friend for life, this time is a memory that I will always keep in my heart.  For me, safe spaces are in relationships because how could you truly be safe if you’re not safe with the people in your “safe space.”  I thank the Lord for my “safe space.”

And how awful would it be if someone would dare call my friend a TERF?  A person who has shown me all the love I could ever hope for in a friend?  A person who I love, dearly?  Think about my reaction; it wouldn’t be a wonderful place for you to be.  Why?  Because she matters to me.  It is in relationships where you find safety.  For the sake of a movement, some will seek to take people away from the people who love them and in many cases will abuse the people they have isolated.  This is the danger in valuing a movement over the people within the movement.  If you would attempt to attack my friends then you should know that you are not attempting to attack an isolated person.  My friends matter to me.  When are you going to stop using people for your political agendas?  I am not anyone’s puppet; I am not seeking anyone’s validation.  I believe that true friendships are worth cherishing and defending.  I believe that if you call someone a friend then you should really be their friend.  Friendship is a bond that no movement can break.  How can you call someone your friend if you turn your head when they are being attacked?  I could not see my dear friend, who I love like she was my actual sister, hurt and turn my head; it is not in me to turn away, even if the ones attacking her just happened to be feminists.  My sister comes first before any movement, and the love is such that I would be there in her support and defense at any time.  Why?  Because she matters to me.  How she feels matters to me.  I don’t listen too well when I hear someone say that I shouldn’t take sides.  When it comes to my sister, I will always take sides.  Why would I even call someone my friend and sister if I wasn’t going to be real?  I don’t need anyone’s validation or approval.  I just know that friendships, especially concerning my sister, are bonds that can’t be broken.  When are you going to stop using people for your political agendas?

Then I have other people who come to me with an issue of who I have in my life and who I consider my close friends.  They will say that “feminism is for white women; you need to focus on black liberation.”  Black liberation sounds nice, but who is really being liberated?  Who would really be liberated in a black liberation movement, in a misogynistic society?  Black liberation would really be black male liberation.  My analysis is based in Black Feminist Thought.  There is no common oppression among black and white, so to address the needs and concerns of black women, you need to acknowledge that there is a reality for black women that white women have not experienced.  It is also necessary to acknowledge the historical oppression of black women, and that even white women have also been oppressors of black women.  I believe that black liberationists will agree with me on this, but here is where we differ.  Black men have also been oppressors of black women, mostly because many black men have been chasing after their slave masters since before anyone can remember, but they also have been denied their “rightful” entry into the patriarchal hierarchy.  The only place where they were allowed dominance was in the home.  Why is this so important for me to say?  Because I am sick and tired of misogyny in the black community.  Who is going to stand up and say enough is enough.  I will, right here, right now.  My analysis is Black FEMINIST Thought.  If you really supported black liberation, then you would support black feminism.  In black feminism, men are considered “Comrades in the Struggle” (bell hooks).  The issue is that you haven’t broken your masters chain.  In order to be free, you need to reject your master and his “way of life.”  As with other movements, black liberationists who value the movement over people’s lives have taken people away from the ones who love them and care for them.  No movement will ever come before someone I love, regardless of their race.

Why say you love someone, if you are going to throw them under the bus the first chance you get?  I don’t need your praise.  I don’t need your cookies.  I know that when I say that I am your friend then I am going to be your friend.  And even deeper than friendship, is someone I call my sister.  When are you going to stop using people for your political agendas?  People are real, and their lives matter.  The movement is important, and I will defend the movement.  However, the movement will never come before the people I hold close to my heart.



December 2015


The Hidden Patriarchy

By Jaqueline Sephora Andrews

Being black in the United States of America is really difficult; we have been oppressed by a white supremacist culture which has been used to enslave black people for about 450 years. We are still oppressed as a race, so it is necessary to work toward completely abolishing white supremacy. However, if the focus is solely on race then we ignore a patriarchal structure which has been here for thousands of years and has infected the black community, where black men have chased after the “ideal man” which has been presented to them by their slave masters. In chasing after their masters, black men have also become oppressors. Black men who are oppressed because of race have found their dominance through sex. The patriarchy has denied black men the highest status within the patriarchal hierarchy, so many black men have held to the power they could obtain in order to dominate anyone they deemed as weaker. Therefore, I am left to admit a painful truth, that there are a few black men who I am afraid of; it’s not because they’re black but because they are misogynistic and in many cases homophobic. This was the case as I was told, “you shouldn’t be afraid because you’re both guys,” when I was faced with a man who charged me in full homophobic rage. They claimed that I was an abomination because of the “Word of God,” but the reality is that to them I represented the “emasculated.”

It is one of the conspiracy theories that some black people have chosen to believe, the emasculation of black men. Marque-Anthony writes about emasculation; he states that, “according to the Merriam Webster dictionary, emasculation is ‘to make a man feel less masculine, to deprive a man of his male strength, role etc.’”  Clearly, Marque-Anthony is speaking of the black man’s role in the patriarchal hierarchy.  Marque-Anthony then adds that, “Demoralizing African American men by having them wear dresses has become ‘funny’ and all too acceptable.”  My question is, who has determined that dresses are for women?  When faced with these questions, someone will quote the scripture which says that, “Women must not wear men’s clothes, and men must not wear women’s clothes. Everyone who does such things is detestable to the Lord your God” (Deuteronomy 22:5 CEB).  But what are women’s and men’s clothes?  Many Christians let a patriarchal capitalist society determine what are considered men’s and women’s clothes, and claim that these beliefs come from God.  The truth is that clothes are clothes no matter who wears them, and the perception of what is considered for men or for women changes over time.  This belief that it is demoralizing for a black man to wear a dress is not based in reality but based in a system which has helped to keep black people in bondage.

Marque-Anthony further adds that, “They laugh and gain satisfaction from seeing and knowing that African American men can be bought off to the point of humiliation.”  Marque-Anthony is showing his misogyny as he has determined that dresses are for women and that it is humiliating for a man to dress like a woman.  Why is that?  Could it be that if a black man is “dressed like a woman” then he isn’t being the “man’s man” that his slave masters have taught him to be?  Marque-Anthony also talks of the black actors who have worn “women’s clothes,” saying that, “These are not men, they are compromising cowards who will drop the values and morals they were raised with in order to make a dollar. They are not examples for real African American boys to become men.”  So African American manhood is based in what one wears?  Wouldn’t that make African American masculinity fragile?  I am not understanding this logic.  Maybe African American men should look within themselves to find inner strength and not rely so much on the opinions of the patriarchal overlords.  Now that we know that real men are men who don’t wear dresses, Marque-Anthony further says that, “we must require our women to respect us or we must go elsewhere.”  Here is the call for black men to establish their patriarchal authority, which has caused some black men to become terrors in their homes.

After the misogyny is established, Marque-Anthony then adds an “important requirement.”  He says that, “He must not be a homosexual because such perversion distorts roles in the family, goes against God, presents an awful example, confuses the young male children, decreases reproduction within our ‘race’ and plays directly into the hands of those who want to take our manhood through emasculation.”  What does sexuality have to do with “emasculation?”  There are many “masculine” men who are still homosexual.  There is a belief among some that a man must be attracted to women to be considered a “real man.”  There is also the “preservation of the race” which is at stake, but honestly what does this entail?  The belief that we need to preserve our race has caused many abuses within the black community.  The belief that our race needs to be preserved has caused many black men to try to control who we date or marry, where we live, or who we associate with.  If we have this belief that our race needs preservation then how can we truly be free to be ourselves?  If our race needs to be preserved then I am one of the biggest violators for being attracted to men.  Race was created to establish an oppressed exploitable class.  We are not truly free until race is completely abolished.  I am not saying that we are to be “color blind,” but I am saying that we can’t be free while we still live within the structures which were design to oppress us.  The belief that our race needs to be preserved leads to homophobia, where homosexuals are considered a threat to the race.  Rather than worry about preservation, we need to learn to love and accept each other regardless of who we are or who we love.  We need to reject the patriarchy.

It is absolutely necessary to fight against white supremacy, but we can’t afford to fall into the trap of the black liberation movement.  Solely focusing our attention on black liberation will allow the patriarchal aspirations within the black community to go unnoticed.  It is important to speak out against the abuses of black people, but it is also important to speak out against the abuse that many black men have inflicted on others within our community as they have sought status in the patriarchal hierarchy.  It is imperative that we work toward abolishing the patriarchy.  Even among some black families, where women have held families together, there has been a desire to return to a patriarchal structure.  It was established, through slavery, that this is the “will of God.”  To be free, we have to break our master’s chain which can only be broken by completely rejecting the patriarchy.  It is only until then, when we can say we are truly free from the chains of slavery.  It is time to be free.


March 2016


A Misogynist will be a Misogynist

March 28, 2016Uncategorized

By Jaqueline Sephora Andrews

Aoife is someone who I once considered a friend, even though it was against my better judgement.  I knew that Aoife was a trans activist, but I was hoping that she had made a change and was willing to stand in support of women.  I was hopeful because there weren’t very many transwoman who were willing to support women.  Aoife played the part, an expert manipulator who targeted women.  Aoife is a person who knows how to flatter, and did convince women to support her even at the expense of their own security.  I honestly always had mixed feelings about Aoife.  I wanted to support her because I felt that she needed support, and I was going to do my best to be a true friend.  Of course, I was also deceived.  Maybe I just wanted to believe that Aoife was different?  I wanted to believe that she was truthful, so I took Aoife at her word.  The reality was that everything in me was telling me to be cautious.  And now I am left with one of my biggest regrets, that I was ever friends with Aoife.

I remember my conversation on Twitter with a radical feminist, when I was first told of Aoife’s actions. She asked me, “did you peep the racist white TG try to sneak in racism to undermine the rights of women?”  I was surprised when she said that she was talking about Aoife.  Our conversation continued in a private message, where we could both talk honestly and openly. It was the first time where I really began to become skeptical of Aoife.  I was trying to be her friend, but I did take notice every time I saw something about her.  I might have responded to a few tweets, where I thought people were lying (I now believe every tweet about her), there were tweets from radical feminists that I took notice of and they did make me more cautious about Aoife.  The radical feminists who warned about Aoife were vilified, but the truth is that they were right all along.

I always try to be a loyal friend, even to Aoife.  But what Aoife did not understand is that I would never turn on radical feminists; there was never an us versus them.  The truth is that the person who I trust more than anyone, who I love dearly and consider family, is a radical feminist; I am and will always be on her side, and I will always stand with her.  About 90% of people who I communicate with regularly on social media are radical feminists.  Aoife might have thought I was on her side, but I would never let anything or anyone come between my sister or radical feminists who I also communicate with.  And please make no mistake, I am also completely against the trans movement, of which Aoife is a part of.  I believe that Aoife was an infiltrator, who was also seeking validation from radical feminists.  However, I did not know that Aoife was actually declaring herself to be a radical feminist; I also did not know that Aoife tweeted about being into a convent, which is a boundary violation.  Honestly, I was always uncomfortable with her nun fetish.  And now, knowing that Aoife did violate boundaries; it makes the fetish even more creepy.

Aoife was also considered a “gender critical transwoman,” and one of the main reasons why I became skeptical of some transwomen who identified as “gender critical.”  So, in an article where I wrote that safety is within relationships, I also critiqued the concept of a transwoman being gender critical.  It wasn’t that I distrust transwomen who claim to be gender critical, it ‘s just that I know that there are some who will use the label “gender critical” as an attempt to be validated by radical feminists.  I am critical of the system of gender, but I am skepital of “gender critical” as an identity.  It is the seeking of validation which can make a “gender critical” transwoman a threat to the safety of relationships.  Aoife was given a platform because she claimed to be “gender critical.”  There seems to be a belief among these validation seeking “gender critical” transwomen that radical feminists hate transwomen, so if they could prove to be zealous in their hate, radical feminists will acknowledge them as women. However, I haven’t met a radical feminist who hates transwomen.  Being against a movement does not equal hatred toward individual people within the movement.  But for these transgenderists in disguise, radical feminists are so awful because they won’t declare that these males are women; it is the typical misogyny and bullying that so many transwomen have shown.  Aoife also used her platform to bully liberal feminists.  Agree or disagree with ideology, liberal feminists are still people and did not deserve to be bullied by Aoife.

Aoife caused division, which I did not want to be a part of, so I took a break from twitter believing that it was the people Aoife was fighting who were causing division; I was still under the impression that they were lying.  I was really nervous about reengaging on twitter, and I still did not engage even after I reactivated.  And then it was, on a night where I could not sleep that I logged onto Twitter and saw Aoife calling women Trans Exclusionary Radical Feminists (TERFs).  I also saw that Aoife befriended abusive transwomen.  Like other transgenderists, Aoife plays the victim, saying that “TERFs are so scarry,” but Aoife is the one who is the misogynistic bully.

You claim “TERFs are scarry,” Aoife, but you would friend a sick and perverted man who would dare name his body parts after a woman?  You want people to sympathize with you, but you would friend a man who is either a rapist or potential rapist, who believes that “TERFs want to be plowed,” and you want to play the victim?  You are the misogynist.  You want to be the innocent delicate victim, but you not only friend a rapist, but imply that you both would doxx women?  You are not the victim, but you are a bully.  Even for me, the problem with Twitter was Aoife, and before I could reengage, I had to unfriend/unfollow Aoife.  And shortly after I unfriended, every thing came to light; I believe everything that was said about Aoife is the truth.

It is completely disgusting that Aoife would garner sympathy, when it was Aoife who targeted women. Was this how you got your kicks Aoife?  You would use flattering words seeking to gain the trust of women. Was it fun for you to see women defending you against those “scarry TERFs,” until they too became “scarry TERFs?”  But let’s all play your game, you’re the victim, right?  No, you are a misogynistic bully who demanded to be validated by feminists.  You caused division and demanded that women come to your defense to prove their worth to you, but do you understand what it means to be a friend?  There were radical feminists who did support you, but if you were a true friend then you would not demand that they be caught in the middle of your attempts to divide women.  If you were a true friend then you would have cared as much about their safety and well-being, as you expected them to care about your’s; you would have not made fighting in your Twitter battle a requirement for friendship.  Aoife, you are a liar!  Even to the women you flattered, who did defend you at a risk to their own well-being. You promised them that you would always be their friend, but when you had no use for them you disposed of them.  Aoife, you are a user!  Did you enjoy seeing women fight over you?  We spent a day on twitter talking about you and the hurt you caused.  There were women who were hurt because of you, and you want to play the victim?  You want to associate with your violent friends, while you blame the women who trusted you?  Aoife, you are a bully and a misogynist.

It is absolutely necessary to support women.  As much as Aoife demands to be validated, she will never be an actual woman.  If we say we are for women, then there is no need to coddle a misgoynist like Aoife.  I don’t have time to play the let’s validate Aoife game.  The “gender critical” transwoman who is seeking validation is a threat to the safety of relationships.  This may seem like a rather harsh critique, but I have to be true to what I stand for.  I was a friend to Aoife, but I will not be a friend to someone who would threaten the security of people I care about.  I will not be a friend to a misogynist, who has no regard for the women she hurt.  How can anyone say that they support women, if they support a misogynistic bully like Aoife?

Male "Nunnabe" crazy-ass Aoife Assumpta Hart

Male “Nunnabe” crazy-ass Aoife Assumpta Hart



36 Responses to “Jaqueline Sephora Andrews : Not to Be Forgotten”

  1. Hedda Gabler Says:

    Thank you for preserving these posts. I find it very poignant that it in the end it fell to you and your blog to preserve the authentic voice of somebody who identified as a transwoman. R.I.P.

    • GallusMag Says:

      Apparently Jaqueline had archived his own posts on a wordpress site within weeks of his death- see Artemesia’s comment below! I suppose I will leave this post up to mark his history as a two-year contributor to the Gender Apostates site and ‘gender critical transwoman’ movement.

  2. Artemisia Says:

    A few weeks before his death Jaqueline Sephora Andrews transferred all his posts on the Gender Apostates site to a separate wordpress site at https://jaquelineandrews.wordpress.com/. This is still online. Besides Andrews’ posts from Gender Apostates it includes a short statement of his political position vis-a-vis the transgender movement.

    I do not know what took place within the Gender Apostates group before Andrews took this step but it is not the case that the remaining members removed his posts after his sudden and unexpected death.

    All posts by Aoife Assumpta Hart disappeared from the Gender Apostates site at some point before Andrews moved his own posts.

    The above statements are based on my clear recollections as a regular visitor to that site, backed up with checks on the dates of some of the pages archived on the Internet Archive. I am not connected with the Gender Apostates group. In the interests of transparency, I will say that on one occasion recently I met Miranda Yardley. He struck me as a very honest, open and compassionate person.

    With respect to Andrews’ decision to move his posts to a site of his own: I wondered at the time whether those directly responsible for the Gender Apostates site might have feared repercussions from Hart over Andrews’ final post. It is, I know, difficult for Americans to understand the chilling effect of English libel laws. However, this is pure speculation on my part.

    I greatly respected Andrews and like many feminists was sad to hear of his death. In the past I have seen some sneers on the web about his second name, Sephora. Apparently there is a brand of cosmetics with that name. However, Andrews was a student of Divinity. In the Latin Vulgate Bible and also in French translations of the Bible Sephora is the name of the wife of Moses (Zipporah in English translations; see Exodus 2.21). There is an old tradition that Sephora/Zipporah was a black woman from Ethiopia.

    • GallusMag Says:

      WOW! I wasn’t aware that Jaqueline had archived his own posts before his death. Thank you so much! That would have saved me the trouble of posting them here!!!! He must have seen the writing on the wall so to speak at Gender Apostates. That was very wise.

      According to Google he posted his Aoife essay to wordpress a few days after it was posted on Gender Apostates, where, if my memory serves me, it remained after his death. The last archive at the Wayback Machine is pictured above, March 24, so I can’t confirm it. Perhaps Miranda Yardley (whom I asked) will shed some light. Maybe, as you imply, Andrews wished to be scrubbed from the site- although there is no evidence of that.

      At any rate, I suppose I will leave this up. Jaqueline was one firey son of a gun, and quite sweet. Rest in Peace.

      • GallusMag Says:

        Added an Update/Correction to the post. Thank you.

      • Artemisia Says:

        I see that Miranda Yardley has responded to you on Twitter: ‘@GallusMag the essays were removed by Jaqueline and republished here https://jaquelineandrews.wordpress.com‘.

        So Jaqueline removed the posts himself at the time he set up his own blog. This confirms my recollection that his posts disappeared from the Gender Apostates site several weeks before his unexpected death.

        As you suggest, he may have seen the writing on the wall at Gender Apostates once Hart stripped off his mask of feminist ally and ‘gender critic’.

        To the best of my knowledge, Jaqueline had no idea that he had only a short time to live. I would imagine he was intending to add more posts to his blog as time went on. It is a sad loss that he wasn’t able to do this.

      • GallusMag Says:

        Ah! Thank you. I’ll leave it at that then. Sad.

      • Artemisia Says:

        I hope that you will add a correction to your post. It still states that ‘After Andrews’ death, Gender Apostates deleted all his work and erased him as a contributor.’ But that’s based on a misunderstanding; it isn’t what happened at all.

      • GallusMag Says:

        I’m actually not convinced of that. But I am willing to leave it there. I will update the post to add Miranda Yardley’s statement when I get a chance (on a computer). Thanks again!

        [ETA: I have updated the post and correction to reflect Miranda’s statement. I have also changed the statement “After Andrews’ death, Gender Apostates deleted all his work and erased him as a contributor” to “Andrews’ work was deleted from Gender Apostates and he was erased as a contributor.”

        I’m not convinced that Jaqueline removed himself from Gender Apostates voluntarily, or that he was removed as contributor before his death. But as I said, barring further evidence, I’m willing to leave it there. Certainly the fact that he wisely archived his own work lends the matter less urgency. I do appreciate your help and input – and that of other commenters- very much and I am grateful for it.]

  3. A different anon male Says:

    One of the things that the Trans movement has revealed is the shallow falsehood of platitudes like “the truth always wins out in the end” and “the long arc of history bends towards justice” and all the rest. There is no natural and inevitable process through which these lies will automatically be exposed and defeated.

    This situation of Jacqueline Sephora Andrews’ writings is the perfect example. This organization that attempted to scrub these writings, and the bullies, rapists, and perverts that are being protected, simply make it disappear. Obviously Gallus Mag is doing excellent, admirable work in preserving and publishing all this, but bloggers working on their own time and their own dime can’t compete with a massive organized campaign, backed by the media and the government (see the HUD post of a few days ago) to sanitize the trans movement. To make it seem like something fun, progressive, exciting, and modern. How many other lies and erasures and con-jobs will Gallus Mag NOT be able to point out?

    There is no natural “long arc of history” that will magically expose this movement of violence for what it is. Hell, young people are more on board with it than anyone. Aoife Assumpta Hart is cool. “She” is hip and edgy, and if you point out the truth about “her,” well, then you’re just a hater. Hate crime!

    The only people willing to say “these are just creepy men looking to perv on women in the bathroom” are old people and devout Christians. And they aren’t cool. Who listens to old people? Ewww, they have, like, wrinkles!

    Sorry for the rambling post, GM, and thank you for all you. Everyone, just remember – our real enemies are the ones who control what comes on your TV screen and computer monitor. Everything else is just a red cape they’re waving to distract you.

    • donesoverydone Says:

      Dude, feminists have been talking about the problems that arise with transgenderism, like it’s a medical model for enforcing sexism and homophobia on vulnerable people for decades and we are still talking about it. You are just ignorant.

      • A different anon male Says:

        Ignorant I may be. But I don’t think you can claim feminism as a meaningful and widely-accepted movement has been opposing the trans lunacy, except by use of No-True-Scotsman “define away the problem” arguments.

        Come up with a list of the 100 most influential and famous feminists of the past twenty years. Probably at least 80 of them – if not 90 or more – are in full support of trans “women” and their right to bring their dicks into your bathroom. Not just “well, live and let live,” but active hostility to anyone opposing trans “women.”

        Now, you might say “well, those people aren’t REAL feminists, it’s scholars like Gallus Mag and Germaine Greer who are demomstrating true feminist thought.” And that may be true. But a teenage girl who’s legitimately terrified of the man in a skirt in her bathroom is going to search for feminist takes on the trans movement. What’s she going to find? Probably 90 percent of them in full support of the guy in the skirt, and telling her she’s wrong and wicked for feeling scared of him.

        But, to the extent that my statement above didn’t reflect my respect for the hard work being done by serious feminist thinkers and writers such as the proprietor of this site, fine:

        The only people opposing trans idiocy are old people, devout Christians, and a very small slice of the feminist movement that – despite its hard work and intellectual rigor – has very little exposure and basically no power to stop the trans worship demanded by the majority of self-defined feminists.

    • brandi1986 Says:

      A different anon male is right. Most of the feminist who are against transgenderism are second wave feminist or radical feminist who have little to no media influence. Radical feminist who are against transgenderism will be rejected by third wave feminist and the sjw.

      Mainstream feminist today are on board with transgenderism and fully support transgender “women”.

  4. donesoverydone Says:

    Reblogged this on stop trans chauvinism.

  5. Prozac Says:

    Thanks for posting. My heart aches for Jacqueline as someone who truly got it and paid the price. I was so shocked when i heard she passed, and was totally disgusted when i read Aoife’s response to Jacqueline’s last post.

    “People matter and are more important than any movement could ever be. It is very dangerous to become so taken by the movement that you fail to see the value in people.”

    Thanks again for posting, Gallus! Reading them all shows the heart, courage, unrelenting consistency and clarity of thought Jacqueline possessed. Rest In Peace.

    • rheapdx1 Says:

      @Prozac The censorship does not surprise me. That level of hypocrisy is par for the course in the community.

      Also Jacqueline made the rather ( shudders) critical error of calling into question the motives and veracity of two persons of color the trans cult holds up as ‘positive examples’. No need to repeat the names…but the points made…in detail ….were and are dead on. While these facts will be posted while the writer is still alive, upon death…it is an issue of removal, erasure and the steamroller of the propaganda machine rolls on. Damn…..and RIP Jacqueline.

  6. donesoverydone Says:

    Odd Yardley would take down JSA’s writing, wonder why. Legal issues? Don’t know. RIP Jaqueline Andrews, my condolences to your family and friends.

  7. I’m hoping I can find out some explanation on why Jaqueline’s work was removed. I don’t understand that.

  8. Oak and Ash Says:

    Andrews is brilliant in “A Movement Based in White Supremacy” when he says trans activists are not merely trying to appropriate the struggles of black people–often using similar terms–but that, by calling themselves trans women, white men can claim they’re the victims of black, female oppressors! (As in much the same way these straight men believe they’re being oppressed by lesbian women.)

    Even where I disagree with Andrews, I could respect his viewpoint. It’s very interesting how he talks about wanting a world without gender but needing to present as a woman in this gendered–and, of course, homophobic–culture. In a better world, women would be seen as full human beings rather than fetish objects and “Jack” Andrews might have lived a good life as a gay man and excellent sociologist.

    Gallus Mag, thanks for making sure his writing wasn’t completely erased.

  9. Oak and Ash Says:

    That image of Aiofe Assumpta Hart in a white lace veil–good Lord! Does he think that expression makes him look saintly? Just when I thought transwomen couldn’t get any scarier . . .

    • GallusMag Says:

      The image is the one Aoife chose to represent him as his current blog avatar. (Lest anyone think I went searching for the cray cray).

      • Oak and Ash Says:

        I didn’t assume you’d “curated” the choice of image to make him look crazier–he’s doing a good enough job of that without your help.

      • GallusMag Says:

        lol it’s a common accusation of the transgender community. One time Autumn “Stalker” Sandeen accused me of actually photoshopping a picture of Natacha Kennedy/Mark Hellen (sporting a leopard skin get-up in a painful looking “come hither” pose). Stalker Sandeen claimed I did so to make Mark look “ridiculous”. Imagine his embarrassment when I pointed out the photo was Mark’s self-selected blog avatar and was how he wanted to be represented. LOL.

    • Prozac Says:

      IMO, Aoife looks REALLY high in that picture, though I’m not saying that is the case.

    • brandi1986 Says:

      He looks completely stupid. I’m sure he wants everyone to think he’s a godly saint. He reminds me of that British guy who put on a hijab and claimed himself to be a Muslim woman.

    • nonny Says:

      In the self-absorbed style typical of transgender males, Aiofe hangs everything on being a poor, put-upon transwoman. Creep everyone out at work with your self-centered, boorish, inappropriate behavior? They must be transphobic! People at church merely tolerate your presence instead of constantly affirming you? Transphobia! The bit about the Pope’s words on transsexuals- that Christians should “walk with” them (while rejecting gender ideology) is pretty rich. He acts like this statement is some groundbreaking, doctrine-shifting revelation written expressly for himself, rather than, like, the most generic Catholic statement ever.

      His overwrought purple-prose blog posts are so incredibly skeevy and filled with paranoid neurosis. Clearly he knows his stuff when it comes to Catholic theology, which must lull some people into staying on the ride when it veers into crackpot. All I see him saying, in various florid iterations, is this:
      “1. males can’t be females
      2. the Church recognizes this
      3. I agree! I’m not like other trans activists! Doesn’t that blow your mind?
      4. (mumbo-jumbo academic word salad)
      5. …..and that’s why I’m the exception!! Stay tuned for my book about it.”

      Even a trad-leaning Catholic would side-eye a moon-eyed “look at me, veiled, in front of Mary, I’m sooooo Catholic!!” selfie as a main blog pic. (I know, because I am one.) It’s something a 13 year old girl or a new convert would do. But it shouldn’t come as any surprise. After all, if you aren’t going to coerce lesbians into accepting you as female (read: rape) as validation, the next best thing is to try and convince people that you’re the truest true trans exception, so much so that God is on your side about it, lol. It comes with extreme signifiers such as lacey white veils and extremely female spaces to violate (convents, which Aiofe has gone to for retreats).

      • GallusMag Says:

        What you said: ^^^^ see above.

        What Aoife heard: You’re making fun of my lazy eye! [despite no reference to appearance whatsoever] and you’re demanding that I stop lurving the Lerd! [LOL]


        Jesus. Aoife hates women so much. Most ‘transwomen’ do, but they are no different than most men in general. We aren’t even human to them. It’s incredible how men view us- even those with wives and female children. You would think that intimate proximity to us would confer our humanity, but it doesn’t. Like all the guys who are amazed when their wives of twenty-some years flee in horror when their husbands adopt laydee-face in mid-life. She fled because she’s not a lesbian! they’ll say, or because she’s a transphobe! But it’s the horror. The fucking horror. The horror of how you see us. Your grotesque pantomime. Your ghastly selfies. Your falsetto.

        The rest of the men, the “cis” men cheer it on. It all makes terrific sense to them.

        The “Alpha Transitioners”, mostly males, like Sean Somers aka Aoife Assumpta Hart who blast through “Gender Affirmation Surgery” against their better judgement are left in a terrible position. They are subjected to penile reduction and inversion “for their own good”, eliminating their sexual function, including ability to orgasm. As if that wasn’t enough, they are prescribed six hours of self-harm a day for a period of six months (who has time for that?!) jabbing a dildo into their surgically created pelvic hole, for no other purpose than that another dude might want to stick his dick in there someday, pretending it’s a vagina.
        Dildo jabbing into the surgical site is supposed to continue for life. Nurses aides are tasked with jabbing dildos into these guy’s holes to keep it open for potential penetration by other dudes among the nursing home population. Average depth of a ‘neovagina’ pelvic hole after ten years, after all that torture, is less than two inches. So much for those penetration fantasies.

        No wonder these guys seem to really lose it after “treatment” by the psychiatric surgical doods.

      • WeWillWin Says:

        “Jesus. Aoife hates women so much. Most ‘transwomen’ do, but they are no different than most men in general. We aren’t even human to them. It’s incredible how men view us- even those with wives and female children. You would think that intimate proximity to us would confer our humanity, but it doesn’t”

        Thanks for saying this Gallus. What a relief. I’m so tired of people, even feminists, saying over and over that ‘men would never treat their daughters and sisters (fill in atrocity against women) that way, while the rates of incest and familial abuse are sky high.

      • Oak and Ash Says:

        “We aren’t even human to them.”

        The feminist observation that men objectify women has been demonstrated by brain imaging studies. When men view photos of scantily dressed women, the part of their brain that perceives objects lights up rather than the part that perceives people.

        Even when men do treat the women close to them well, they usually strike me as taking care of prized possessions rather than caring about other human beings. This is why women seen as damaged goods for any reason, no matter how slight, can be mistreated with impunity–it’s like that first scratch on a shiny new car that makes it a less valuable object.

      • nonny Says:

        Omfg I just saw this, lol. Even the title of his response is manipulative tripe: “if you are so disgusted with me, why are you reading my blog?” Um, gee, because it’s referenced and linked here, in this post, which you know very well??
        Nice how he posts my response only, but then replies to some imagined composite, and then to arguments that nobody made. Dude, you’re absolutely transparent. Go back to practicing gnosticism and pontificating on whether or not St. Therese will use your preferred pronouns in heaven [[[second-hand embarrassment intensifies]]].

  10. Gallus, thank you for posting this. This is such powerful and insightful writing. Andrews suffered so much, but Jaqueline never lost his humanity. Reading about how he was treated almost made me cry. Does anyone know how Andrews died?

    RIP, a remarkable, kind, and caring human being…

    • prozac Says:

      I read a comment and that said it was a sudden seizure, which was the only detail i found. Not sure how accurate it is though.

  11. Medi Says:

    Assumpta Hart– arf arf— LOL at how stalker Sandeen thought you had photo-shopped someone… even he can’t believe the cray cray. So sorry to hear this man died, and I’m glad his work is being archived. These men are so crazy out there they make your head spin. Most of the guys could have been gay men, but somehow, invading women’s lives was more “hipster cool.”

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: