Confessed arsonist of Rainbow Pride Flag - Brooklyn Marie Fink [CBC]

Confessed arsonist of Rainbow Pride Flag – Brooklyn Marie Fink [CBC]

On Friday, February 5th the Pride Collective at the University of British Columbia raised the Rainbow Pride Flag on the campus flagpole in the opening ceremony marking the start of LGBT OutWeek 2016 festivities. On Monday they discovered that someone had lowered the flag to the base of the pole and incinerated it while still attached, leaving nothing but the scorched rope and brass grommets. This was investigated as a hate crime by university and local authorities. The Pride Collective cancelled the transgender pride march “Fuck the Cis-Stem” planned for that week out of concerns for the safety of participants along the route. Vancouver City Hall flew the Pride Flag in support of the Collective, which appeared to be under siege by anti-LGBT arsonists. (1)

“On @MayorGregor‘s request, the #Pride flag will fly today at #Vancouver City Hall in solidarity w/ #UBC. Hate has no place in our community.

  • @VanMayorsOffice” (2)

Turns out the perpetrator was witnessed and identified by a student who later came forth, having initially assumed they had simply witnessed a random campus weirdo doing something benign: “I just assumed they were doing some kind of ritual or it was the end of midterms and they were burning their material – I had no idea,” she said. “It was 2:30 p.m. in the middle of the day, they were just standing there and they were looking at me.” (3)

According to reports (4) , the arsonist is referred to by aliases Wayne Curtis Sartison, Wayne Curtis Fink, Wayne Fink, and (currently) Brooklyn Marie Fink in court proceedings and is 32 years old. He has been charged with criminal mischief (5) and held an impromptu press conference following his court appearance, where he requested that the charges be dropped on the basis that “This is a matter between a student and her school. This isn’t a matter of mischief, so it should just be summarily dismissed.” (6) Proceedings were delayed until May 17 so Fink can confer with counsel.

Social media post alleged to be made by Fink

Social media post alleged to be made by Fink

Fink explained to the press and via social media postings that he was already carrying a grudge because believed he was blacklisted as an artist in Vancouver for “speaking out against the rampant gay nepotism in that industry.” On the morning the Rainbow Pride Flag was raised, a professor referred to him with the gender neutral pronoun “they”, which sent him into an arsonist rage. He went on to explain that increased transgender visibility has made it impossible for him to ‘pass’ as reproductively female among the general public. He told the CBC (7) :

“Ten, 12 years ago I was just a tall woman and nobody thought anything of it, but because these gender nonconformers are being so loud and proud … now everybody looks and they can see oh, that tall woman with a deep voice, maybe she’s a dude.”

Confessed arsonist of Rainbow Pride Flag - Brooklyn Marie Fink [CBC]

Confessed arsonist of Rainbow Pride Flag – Brooklyn Marie Fink [CBC]

(1) http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/ubc-pride-flag-city-response-1.3442800

(2) https://twitter.com/VanMayorsOffice/status/697459487557287936

(3) http://ubyssey.ca/news/rcmp-working-with-witnesses-to-identify-burner-of-pride-flag/

(4) https://www.reddit.com/r/UBC/comments/4fwivd/woman_charged_for_burning_down_ubc_pride_flag/

(5) http://ubyssey.ca/news/woman-charged-for-burning-down-ubc-pride-flag/

(6) http://www.dailyxtra.com/vancouver/news-and-ideas/news/accused-in-ubc-pride-flag-burning-asks-court-drop-charge-191281

(7) http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/brooklyn-fink-ubc-pride-flag-1.3553719

.

Transsexuals should cut it out

It’s never a good idea for those who feel oppressed to start bullying others in turn

Suzanne Moore.

Suzanne Moore, victim of the trans lobby. Photograph: Sarah Lee for the Guardian

From The Observer:

“The brilliant writer Suzanne Moore and I go back a long way. I first met her when she was a young single mother living in a council flat; she took me out to interview me about my novel Ambition (republished by Corvus Books this spring, since you ask) for dear dead City Limits magazine. “I’ve got an entertaining budget of £12.50!” she said proudly. “Sod that, we’re having lobster and champagne at Frederick’s and I’m paying,” I told her. Half a bottle of Bolly later, she looked at me with faraway eyes: “Ooo, I could get to like this…” And so she did.

I have observed her rise to the forefront of this country’s great polemicists with a whole lot of pride – and just a tiny bit of envy. I am godmother to her three brilliant, beautiful daughters. Though we differ on certain issues we will have each other’s backs until the sacred cows come home.

With this in mind, I was incredulous to read that my friend was being monstered on Twitter, to the extent that she had quit it, for supposedly picking on a minority – transsexuals. Though I imagine it to be something akin to being savaged by a dead sheep, as Denis Healey had it of Geoffrey Howe, I nevertheless felt indignant that a woman of such style and substance should be driven from her chosen mode of time-wasting by a bunch of dicks in chicks’ clothing.

To my mind – I have given cool-headed consideration to the matter – a gaggle of transsexuals telling Suzanne Moore how to write looks a lot like how I’d imagine the Black and White Minstrels telling Usain Bolt how to run would look. That rude and ridic.

Here’s what happened. In a book of essays called Red: The Waterstones Anthology, Suzanne contributed a piece about women’s anger. She wrote that, among other things, women were angry about “not having the ideal body shape – that of a Brazilian transsexual”. Rather than join her in decrying the idea that every broad should aim to look like an oven-ready porn star, the very vociferous transsexual lobby and their grim groupies picked on the messenger instead.

I must say that my only experience of the trans lobby thus far was hearing about the vile way they have persecuted another of my friends, the veteran women’s rights and anti-domestic violence activist Julie Bindel – picketing events where she is speaking about such minor issues as the rape of children and the trafficking of women just because she refuses to accept that their relationship with their phantom limb is the most pressing problem that women – real and imagined – are facing right now.

Similarly, Suzanne’s original piece was about the real horror of the bigger picture – how the savagery of a few old Etonians is having real, ruinous effects on the lives of the weakest members of our society, many of whom happen to be women. The reaction of the trans lobby reminded me very much of those wretched inner-city kids who shoot another inner-city kid dead in a fast-food shop for not showing them enough “respect”. Ignore the real enemy – they’re strong and will need real effort and organisation to fight. How much easier to lash out at those who are conveniently close to hand!

But they’d rather argue over semantics. To be fair, after having one’s nuts taken off (see what I did there?) by endless decades in academia, it’s all most of them are fit to do. Educated beyond all common sense and honesty, it was a hoot to see the screaming mimis accuse Suze of white feminist privilege; it may have been this that made her finally respond in the subsequent salty language she employed to answer her Twitter critics: “People can just fuck off really. Cut their dicks off and be more feminist than me. Good for them.”

She, the other JB and I are part of the minority of women of working-class origin to make it in what used to be called Fleet Street and I think this partly contributes to the stand-off with the trannies. (I know that’s a wrong word, but having recently discovered that their lot describe born women as ‘Cis’ – sounds like syph, cyst, cistern; all nasty stuff – they’re lucky I’m not calling them shemales. Or shims.) We know that everything we have we got for ourselves. We have no family money, no safety net. And we are damned if we are going to be accused of being privileged by a bunch of bed-wetters in bad wigs.

It’s been noted before that cyberspace, though supposedly all new and shiny, is plagued by the age-old boredom of men telling women not to talk and threatening them with all kinds of nastiness if they persist in saying what they feel.

The trans lobby is now saying that it wasn’t so much the initial piece as Suzanne’s refusal to apologise when told to that “made” them drive her from Twitter. Presumably she is meant to do this in the name of solidarity and the “struggle”, though I find it very hard to imagine this mob struggling with anything apart from the English language and the concept of free speech.

To have your cock cut off and then plead special privileges as women – above natural-born women, who don’t know the meaning of suffering, apparently – is a bit like the old definition of chutzpah: the boy who killed his parents and then asked the jury for clemency on the grounds he was an orphan.

Shims, shemales, whatever you’re calling yourselves these days – don’t threaten or bully us lowly natural-born women, I warn you. We may not have as many lovely big swinging Phds as you, but we’ve experienced a lifetime of PMT and sexual harassment and many of us are now staring HRT and the menopause straight in the face – and still not flinching. Trust me, you ain’t seen nothing yet. You really won’t like us when we’re angry.”

READ MORE HERE.

Decapitation Wire Killer Robert/Michelle Kosilek

From today’s NPR article “Inmate Sex Change: Should We Pay And Does The Surgery Actually Work?” by award-winning journalist and syndicated health columnist Judy Foreman:

————————————————————————————————

“As the controversy continues to swirl over sex change surgery for convicted murderer Michelle Lynn (formerly Robert) Kosilek (there’s a hearing this month on whether taxpayers should pay for her electrolysis), I got to wondering about some of the questions this case raises.

Certainly, prisoners are entitled to basic health care. But do we really owe her a sex change operation?

Especially if — as some of the evidence I uncovered suggests — it wouldn’t leave her in substantially better mental health than she is in today?

I confess: I’m not sure I would even ask this question if I were sympathetic to her in the slightest. But I’m not. She is a convicted murderer. She is in prison for a reason, and a very good one.

But, that aside, back to my quest for facts: How well does sex reassignment surgery (SRS) work in the first place?

The surgery eases deep unhappiness with one’s biological sex. But it doesn’t seem to help much with other mental health issues, including suicidality.

Here’s some data: There was a major study in 2011 by the Karolinksa Institute.

Using data from Swedish registers, they studied 324 people — 191 male-to-females and 133 female-to-males — who had SRS between 1973 and 2003. For each SRS patient, the researchers randomly selected 10 people from the general population who had not had SRS. From this group, two control subjects were matched to each SRS patient — one with the same sex and age as the patient at birth and the other, with the same age and sex as the patient after SRS.

All-cause mortality was three times higher for people who had SRS and deaths by suicide were also higher. People who had the SRS were also at higher risk for hospitalizations for non-gender related psychiatric problems. It’s not totally clear why people who get the surgery get worse. But the authors conclude,

“Persons with transsexualism, after sex reassignment, have considerably higher risks for mortality, suicidal behavior and psychiatric morbidity than the general population. Our findings suggest that sex reassignment, although alleviating gender dysphoria, may not suffice as treatment for transsexualism…”

So, in other words, the surgery does get rid of “gender dysphoria,” meaning deep unhappiness with one’s biological sex. But it doesn’t seem to help much with other mental health issues, including suicidality.

If that’s true for Kosilek, I wondered, why should taxpayers foot the bill?

The Karolinksa researchers did caution that for SRS patients their findings didn’t necessarily mean the surgery didn’t help at all: “Things might have been even worse without sex reassignment.”

I wouldn’t be so swayed by this pessimistic study except that it’s methodologically much better than previous research, including an oft-cited 2010 Mayo Clinic study.

Researchers performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of 28 studies of hormone therapy and sex reassignment involving 1093 male-to-females and 801 female-to-males.

The studies were observational and most lacked controls. Overall, in the Mayo review, 80 percent of people who had the sex reassignment reported significant improvement in gender dysphoria, as well as significant improvement in psychological symptoms and quality of life.

But, as the Mayo researchers themselves note, all of these conclusions were based on “very low quality evidence due to the serious methodological limitations of included studies.”

In data-speak: garbage in, garbage out.

Ben Klein, senior attorney for Gay and Lesbian Advocates and Defenders, doesn’t see it that way. “All studies have limitations,” he told me, “but if you look at the overwhelming trend of a significant number of studies, all point to the same conclusion – that sex reassignment surgery is the only effective treatment for gender identity disorder.”

But I’m not buying that — pooling a bunch of bad studies doesn’t yield good data.

It makes more sense to wonder why the surgery doesn’t have better long-term results. One reason, suggests Renee Sorrentino, a Harvard Medical School psychiatrist who runs the Institute for Sexual Wellness in Quincy, is that by the time a person seeks sex change surgery, gender dysphoria has usually been a problem for a long time and is often accompanied by significant traumatic experiences, including bullying. Those deep psychological wounds may not be so easily healed.

That said, I know a transsexual woman, Sara Herwig, who has been helped by the surgery and now feels like a “congruent person.” So I called her.

“The thing to remember about SRS or general reconstructive surgery is that it is not a silver bullet,” she said. “You still have to deal with everything in life that everybody has to deal with. It’s not going to have a big impact on clinical depression or other kinds of mental illnesses.”

Fair enough, but did she believe taxpayers should be on the hook for Kosilek’s surgery?

Herwig has mixed feelings, “My initial reaction is that nobody paid for mine. Health insurance doesn’t cover it. I understand her desire to have the surgery, but … vast numbers of other people I know have had to pay for their own. I do think there need to be reforms in health insurance so such surgeries are covered. But I don’t think the taxpayers should pay for someone to have that kind of surgery.”

In the end, I concluded, neither do I.

And as for this month’s hearing regarding hair removal?

Give me a break. I have a couple of eyebrows I’d like taxpayers to have waxed for me.”

————————————————————————————————

Read more here: http://cognoscenti.wbur.org/2012/11/13/kosilek-sex-change-judy-foreman

Transgender activists have successfully lobbied the UK government to fund chemical castration studies on twelve year old lesbian and gay children. In a stunning success for transgender lobbyists the NHS this week approved medical experiments which will chemically castrate gay children in attempt to correct gender-nonconformity. The children have all been referred for psychiatric treatment due to non-compliance with sex-based gender stereotypes. The large majority of these “feminine male” and “masculine female” children are not transgender, but homosexual. The experiment is designed to test the effects of powerful sterilization drugs on gay children, preventing natural puberty from occurring. Trans activists say this is important because it will increase the attractiveness and gender-conformity of a tiny minority of these children who may be transgender, by preventing natural puberty from ever occurring. They claim that the long term physiological and psychological effects on the predominately gay and lesbian kids are acceptable casualties for such an outcome.

From the Mirror: “The controversial treatment halts puberty, stunting sex organs and preventing the growth of facial hair and sperm in boys, and breasts in girls.

The injections, previously available only to over-15s with gender identity disorder, are being made available to younger people under an NHS study after pressure from families and doctors.

Doctors admit most children with the problem do not go on to have a sex change, often turning out to be  gay.”

The experiment will follow the effects of stunted sex organs on gay children. It is expected to cause atrophy of sexual organs and gonads, eliminating hormone production, causing cessation of menstruation, halting sperm production, stopping bone growth (and height/growth spurt), decreasing bone density (leading to possible osteoporosis), preventing normal body fat distribution, interrupting natural insulin resistance and other unknown effects, some of which will not become apparent until years after the gay children are exposed. It will also track the psychological and social effects of preventing children from undergoing natural puberty at the appropriate age and the elimination of the onset of normal adolescent sexual desire. Since the vast majority of children referred with gender compliance issues or GID = Gender Identity Disorder become asymptomatic in adulthood (and largely homosexual) the studies will also test whether GID symptoms will be prolonged with treatment.

Transgender lobbyists claim that male transsexuals have a harder time “passing” as female if they are allowed to undergo natural puberty and then desire sex change surgery as adults, and that 1 to 10% of these children may turn out to be male transsexuals in adulthood. The psychological and health effects of chemical castration on the majority non-transsexual children are considered an acceptable price for the increased future “attractiveness” of the tiny minority of the boy research subjects who may wish to adopt transsexuality and “pass” as female as adults. The tiny minority of females who may grow up to be transsexual will partially “pass better” as male because breast growth will be halted, but aborted bone growth will cause decreased height causing them to be shorter than most females.

Studies on children seeking treatment for GID (a psychiatric diagnosis introduced in 1980) before these chemical castration experiments are scant. According to the overview of research in Current Problems Adolescent Health Care 2009 “GID in Children and Adolescents”:

“The studies clearly show that the majority of children

with gender dysphoria will not remain gender

dysphoric after puberty. Children with extreme gender

dysphoria or GID are more likely to have persistent

GID than children whose behavior and cross-gender

identification is weaker or less persistent. Concerning

sexual orientation, there is a strong linkage between

GID in childhood and later homosexual orientation or

bisexuality, as most children with GID later become

homosexual. It should be noted that there are no

reliable predictors of continuing GID or gender dysphoria.”

“One could argue that,

from the point of view of psychosexual development,

in early adolescence, a teenager’s clarification about

his or her own orientation in sexual desires and

fantasies should precede any fixed identification with a

prospective adult gender role. As puberty-delaying

hormones are suppressing libidinal impulses, this process

of clarification about libidinal object orientation is

likely to be inhibited, too. Other arguments against

early hormone treatment are that the effects of puberty-

delaying hormones on brain development are not

yet known, that the children are too young to make a

decision of such far-reaching consequences, and that

many children with GID have serious comorbidity or

live in extremely adverse life circumstances.

The majority of children outgrow their wish to change sex and gender.”

From “Gender identity disorders in childhood and adolescence: currently debated concepts and treatment strategies” (2008):

” Gender identity disorders (GID) can appear even in early infancy with a variable degree of severity. Their prevalence in childhood and adolescence is below 1%. GID are often associated with emotional and behavioral problems as well as a high rate of psychiatric comorbidity. Their clinical course is highly variable. There is controversy at present over theoretical explanations of the causes of GID and over treatment approaches, particularly with respect to early hormonal intervention strategies.

As there have been no large studies to date on the course of GID, and, in particular, no studies focusing on causal factors for GID, the evidence level for the various etiological models that have been proposed is generally low. Most models of these disorders assume that they result from a complex biopsychosocial interaction. Only 2.5% to 20% of all cases of GID in childhood and adolescence are the initial manifestation of irreversible transsexualism. The current state of research on this subject does not allow any valid diagnostic parameters to be identified with which one could reliably predict whether the manifestations of GID will persist, i.e., whether transsexualism will develop with certainty or, at least, a high degree of probability.

CONCLUSIONS: The types of modulating influences that are known from the fields of developmental psychology and family dynamics have therapeutic implications for GID. As children with GID only rarely go on to have permanent transsexualism, irreversible physical interventions are clearly not indicated until after the individual’s psychosexual development is complete. The identity-creating experiences of this phase of development should not be restricted by the use of LHRH analogues that prevent puberty.”

An upcoming conference of The Royal College of Physicians Lesbian and Gay Interest Group “Transgender:Time To Change” is scheduled to address lesbian, gay, and gender issues in psychiatry. Transgender activists are planning to protest the discussion, another chapter in the increasingly adversarial rift between lesbian/gay and transgender political, social and activist agendas.


image-boxbriefspdmnhead-primary-shsnowatermark

“Boxers rock. Guy’s clothes is comfy and cheap. Being ignored more easily. My friends’ parents no longer question my friendships with their sons. That feeling of being a guy. Being treated like one of the guys. More body strength. Men’s underwear ROCKS! Men’s clothes are cheaper and better quality. Not expected to look pretty. Not expected to have babies. Not expected to go gaga over other people’s babies. Boxer briefs are sooo comfy. Muscle mass increase. Not having to shave. BOXERS. I love them. I’ve never, ever worn briefs, haha. Not having to shave. Not being expected to show emotion all the time by the inflection of my voice. My ma never liked it when she couldn’t tell exactly how I felt about something. Now she has realized that it is the words I use that matter. Men’s underwear. I used to assume that it was impossible to design comfortable underwear, and that everyone put up with it. Then I started wearing briefs. Not being expected to care about other people’s babies and young kids. Men’s clothing is more comfortable, and often cheaper and more functional. Not being expected to be able to relate to other girls as a girl/ not being expected to understand the nuances of what’s happening in a social situation/ being ignored more. Feeling safer when I’m by myself at night. Being treated as one of the guys. Feeling normal. Clothes, girl’s clothes are tight and uncomfortable and too flashy, guy’s clothes are comfortable, simple, and convenient. Less head hair (unless u have long hair for a guy) it’s just simpler, plus more fun to style. Bathrooms, guys don’t go in there to put on makeup and giggle, they go in there to shit and piss, I love it, I always felt weird trying to do my business in the girls room, cause it seemed I was the only one in there using it for what it is, a bathroom. No makeup, most girls are expected to wear makeup, sure guy liner is cool sometimes, but I’m so glad I’m not expected to wear it. I don’t have to look good- I can just roll out of bed and go to class, no one cares if I look grungy. No periods/pms (for guys on t). Don’t have to shave your body. Boxers, I had been wearing men’s underwear before I even knew I was trans, panties are uncomfortable and too thin! Higher pay, they say men get more money.. cha ching. More respect. Getting treated as one of the guys by other guys, there seems to be a silent code of respect between guys (for the most part) Being stronger, not being seen as weak, being expected to pull your weight, and not treated like a wimpy girl. Feeling safer when I’m by myself at night-agree. Being called bud, bro or man by peers. Being called son (I love that term of affection. You never hear anyone say “daughter” as a term of affection). I completely agree with the men’s underwear, although I find briefs the most comfortable. Not being given a hard time about not wearing makeup. Not being assumed to be weak or vulnerable. More comfortable clothing. Boxers. Just being ignored instead of looked at like a weird butch chick. Not being stared at weird for acting immature. Feeling normal. Feeling safer when I’m by myself at night. Being treated as one of the guys. Oh and being called boss by a guy the other day. Being more comfortable. Lack of femininity isn’t questioned. Number 1: Straight chicks checking me out. Being my girlfriend’s man. Being one of the guys, without them having to add “without the dick”. Being chivalrous; men have always held doors for me. Not that I don’t appreciate the consideration, but I’m a door-holder, not taker. Now I get to let the ladies and older persons go ahead of me, or hold a door open, and put a smile on their face. Wearing clothes that suit my personality without people glaring at me or shifting uncomfortably when they see a bug dyke [sic] walking their way. Boxers and boxer-briefs. The drive to work out, the desire to have muscles, the lack of shame about having a more muscular body than most other women because, well, I no longer consider myself a woman. I’m a man, I’m strong, I’m proud, and lifting those weights makes me feel even better about my body. Not feeling like I’m putting on a show.  If anyone’s seen Chicago, I used to always think of my interactions with people as starting with “And now, Ladies and Gentlemen, a tap dance.” Having my woman feel safe in my arms, protected. Looking forward to watching my wife walk down to aisle to me. Feeling proud when my gf ask me to help fix something around the house. Smirking when my gf needs me to open a jar.”   [From a popular online forum for Female-to-Male Transsexuals]

The National Center for Transgender Equality is set to roll out their National Transgender Discrimination Survey Report tomorrow, with all the media fanfare they can muster. Titled “Injustice At Every Turn” the survey of 6,500 trans people tracks the feelings of transgender people and whether they feel discriminated against in areas of healthcare and plastic surgery access, workplace discrimination, public treatment, family approval, ability to obtain fictional legal sex markers, discrimination of criminals being jailed with those of their own sex, etc. The NCTE put out a call months ago for amateur trans activists who can present sympathetic anecdotes of their victimization that the public will easily empathize with. But they’re really doing trans people no favors.

The report’s not yet been released but I already know what it says. I know because I listen to the feelings of trans people, all the time, not just when they are surveyed. And the vast majority of trans people DO FEEL victimized.

Transgender males feel victimized by females who choose to congregate among themselves. http://anarchistnews.org/?q=node/11968

They feel victimized when they are forced to cover up their breast implants in public like females.  http://www.myfoxdc.com/dpp/news/national/police-reportedly-ask-transgender-topless-sunbathers-men-to-put-tops-back-on-060110

Transgender male criminals- including rapists and murderers- feel victimized when they are not incarcerated in women’s prisons.   http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/standard/article-23740460-transsexual-killer-can-go-to-womens-jail.do

They feel victimized by those who don’t want to have sex with them.  http://community.feministing.com/2010/07/18/i-wouldnt-fuck-a-trans-person/

They feel victimized by little girls, “seething with anger” at little girls in public.   http://www.bilerico.com/2011/02/give_me_back_my_girlhood.php

They feel discriminated against when national health insurance won’t pay for their breast implants.  http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-1343025/Transsexuals-fight-implants-lands-taxpayer-18-000.html

They feel discriminated against when they can’t live with teenaged girls in dorm rooms. http://www.dallasvoice.com/watch-transgender-woman-sparks-uproar-moving-allgirls-dorm-texas-1060957.html

They feel discriminated against by journalists that refer to them by pronouns that accurately report their sex   http://transequality.org/media.html

They feel victimized by “male exclusion” at women’s colleges.   https://floodsrollback.wordpress.com/2010/12/10/womens-college-without-boys/

57 year old males feel discriminated against when they want to start a late-in-life professional sports career in female sports   http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qwNMzlp0CJM

I could go on and on of course, but you get the point. If we listen to transgender people we will hear that they feel victimized.

And it’s all totally unnecessary.

99% of the victimized feelings of transgender people are caused by unnecessary, un-scientific, discriminatory laws that were enacted years ago when transgenderism was rare and little understood. These laws were actually enacted in an attempt to help trans people integrate, but they have had quite the opposite effect, and actually CAUSE most of the victimized feelings that trans people suffer with. The laws I refer to are those that enable the government to issue legal false gender markers.

When governments create these sort of institutionalized fictions (“males are female” for example or “blacks are white”) it creates all sorts of disastrous real world results when that fiction bumps up against non-fictional concerns. Such as medicine, statistics, science, minority rights, criminal science, biology, freedom of association, etc. And it undermines the equal rights of all people, including those that are transgender. If the government is going to issue false sex identifications to people who “feel like another sex” then to require individuals to undergo surgeries and hormones to obtain those fictional government papers is a violation of the Americans With Disabilities Act. If the government is going to issue false ID’s they ultimately have to offer them to everyone. Which ultimately renders the purpose of gender identification in government matters (such as medical research funding, statistical data collection, etc) meaningless. These government-created legal fictions are responsible for the vast majority of victimized feelings among transgender people and can easily be reversed by eliminating fictional legal gender markers. It’s a matter of fairness and equality. We know now that there is no such thing as a “sex change” and governments should not be invested in promoting scientific fictions. Not creationism, not religion, not “personhood” for corporations. Government statistical markers should be objective, not imbued with religion or fantasy. When the census tracks how many females are employed in technical fields, let’s see real statistics on women. When governments subsidize women’s health initiatives let’s have those resources go to females. When the government legislates TitleIX funding for female sports, let’s see it’s females that receive that funding. Government funded medical research should be based on science, not fiction.

Government sponsored fiction in legal sex markers is discriminatory against trans people. It forces them into situations where they are discriminated against by scientific fact. It invisibilizes them and denies the reality of their very physiology. It renders them statistically non-existent. It causes discrimination.

It’s time for our government institutions to put an end to this victimization of transgender people by eliminating fictional legal gender markers. Contact your Senators and Representatives today and tell them it’s time to put an end to legalized Fictional Gender Markers.

http://www.senate.gov/general/contact_information/senators_cfm.cfm

https://writerep.house.gov/writerep/welcome.shtml