Thursday, October 13, 2011

The truth about California Bill AB 433

Before I reacted to California Bill AB 433 which according to Autumn Sandeen made surgery unnecessary I decided to contact California Assembly woman Lauren Robinson and Danny Kirchoff in the Transgender Law Center in San Francisco.  I appreciate how quickly they returned my emails in such a rapid manner. I do admit I implied I needed to or wanted to change my birth certificate and identified as a MTF transsexual in order to elicit a response.  I did not feel that an antagonistic query was warranted. I just wanted the truth.

I need to add something. Lauren Robinson claims the bill did not change the existing law but it did in some key ways. This is from the Congresswoman here.

Under existing law, whenever a person born in this state has undergone surgical treatment for the purpose of altering his or her sexual characteristics to those of the opposite sex, a new birth certificate may be prepared reflecting the change of gender and any change of name. A petition for the issuance of a new birth certificate is permitted to be filed in the superior court of the county in which the petitioner resides. Existing law requires the petition to be accompanied by an affidavit of the physician documenting the sex change and allows for the filing of objections by any person who can, in those objections, show good cause against the change in birth certificate.
This bill would instead authorize a person who has undergone clinically appropriate treatment for the purpose of gender transition to file a petition in any superior court to recognize the change in gender and, additionally, if applicable, a name change and request for a new birth certificate. The bill would make the physician’s affidavit conclusive proof of gender change if it contains specified language. The bill would delete the provisions of existing law that authorize the filing of objections, and would require the court to grant the petition if the affidavit shows that the petitioner has undergone clinically appropriate treatment for the purpose of gender transition. The bill would also make related changes.

I agree with the removal of the right of objections. Not even Sandeen should be put through that kind of scrutiny and public nastiness.  I know of parents that would do this to their own child. If a doctor says it is done then it is done.  The law is the law and that is a good change.

The following is a document sent to me by Lauren Robinson.

AB 433, Vital Statistics Modernization Act
Frequently Asked Questions

What is the current law regarding court ordered gender changes and new birth

Since the 1970s California has had a law allowing transgender people to (1) obtain a court order recognizing a change of gender and (2) obtain a new birth certificate reflecting who they truly are. Unfortunately this law contains numerous procedural barriers that make this process onerous and confusing.

What does AB 433, the Vital Statistics Modernization Act do?

The Vital Statistics Modernization Act makes a number of procedural changes to make the process for getting a court order gender change and new birth certificate more accessible. Those changes include:

Clarifying that eligible petitioners living or born in California can submit a gender change petition in the State of California. This codifies a unanimous 2009 California Court of Appeal decision on this issue, Somers v Superior Court. Accordingly, this is not a change in a law, rather it makes the law clear to potential petitioners.

Making clear that the law allows for both a court order recognition of a change of gender for any California resident AND issuance of a new birth certificate for a petition born in California. Again, this is not a change in the law but simply a cleanup of confusing legal language.

Including a sample physician declaration that the individual has undergone “clinically appropriate treatment” to obtain a new birth certificate to reflect their gender. This makes the process more clear and conforms California law to the standards set by the United States Department of State for gender changes on passports.

Why is this bill necessary?

For transgender people, recognition of their gender is a matter of basic human dignity. In order to live as their authentic selves in a safe and stable way, transgender people need identification that is consistent with their gender identity.

The Vital Statistics Modernization Act would alleviate the confusion, anxiety and even danger that transgender people face when they have identity documents that do not reflect who they are.Does this bill eliminate the requirement that one undergo surgery in order to get a new birth certificate or court ordered gender change?

This bill ensures that medical decisions are made by an individual’s doctor, not by the government. The bill requires an attending physician to submit a declaration that a petitionerhas undergone “clinically appropriate treatment.” This is the same standard used by the US Department of State for changes on passports and birth certificates issued to US citizens born abroad. This is also consistent with current medical standards regarding transgender health.

What the intent of the bill is and how it will be used by some could be problematic.  The intent of the bill was NEVER to redefine what F and M mean on a birth certificate from Assembly Woman Robinson's assertions but to leave the decision in the hands of competent physicians which is probably in theory a rational concept.  In reality we will find out and it depends on the moral ethics and medical ethics of a physician.  I do see a cottage industry potential.

Sandeen will still need a physician to provide an affidavit in order to change her birth certificate. I would guess she will use the flawed document her mindless physician from Oregon provided even if he did not intend for it to indicate she has undergone "clinically appropriate treatment". the reason Sandeen is waiting until the new year is quite simple. Nobody can challenge her petition for a new birth certificate after the new year starts and that is quite apparently her primary motivation and in all honesty I do not blame her.

Will some slip through the cracks and get birth certificate changes that should not?  Yes they will but that has been happening for quite a while now. Will there be a cacophony of screaming men in dresses clamoring for new birth certificates?  I do not believe it is possible although there is the chance of it based on the assumption there are unscrupulous physicians out there. I hope not. Does the simple process of feminization through hormones enable on to change a birth certificate. Possibly under extreme conditions but I do prefer medical professionals making the decision over politicians.

Is this the end of the world as we know it?  Not really in my humble opinion. If a physician provides a false affidavit he is still subject to penalty and I would hope they do not. The intent was not malicious so let us all hope it is not abused. Okay, I know it will be abused but by how many?

The simple fact a notarized affidavit is required  provides some control. I do believe part of the motivation was for those transsexuals whose conditions prevented further surgery whether that be an FTM brother or an MTF sister. All in all this bill is not the worst bill although I would have liked some clarification over what attending physician can provide an affidavit.  Other than that I am not going to get involved in some shitstorm over a legal bill passed legally by a State Legislature. It is the Law now and it is what it is.

The following are the emails I received from those I contacted. They speak for themselves and again I appreciate the prompt and courteous response from Lauren Robinson.  I am prohibited from showing the email from The Transgender Law Center. Lawyers will always be lawyers I guess. To prove I received one I will provide the header and trailer information below.

From: Robinson, Lauren []
Sent: Tuesday, October 11, 2011 5:25 PM
To: Elizabeth T
Subject: RE: AB 433

Hello Elizabeth,

I’m not sure if you can get a US passport before treatment is completed.  Under CA state law (including our new provisions in AB 433 that will take effect January 1st, 2012) you would still have to complete “clinically appropriate treatment” before you can petition the court for a new birth certificate.  This will require a doctor’s avadavat to the court stating that you have completed “clinically appropriate treatment.” Depending on the treatment prescribed by the doctor this may not require  an invasive surgery to still receive clinically appropriate treatment. 

I’d like to give you the contact information for the Transgender Law Center, who was one of our sponsors of the bill, they can assist you in the process and walk you through the steps on how to obtain an updated birth certificate.  (415) 865-0176.

I hope this information is helpful. Please let me know if you have any further  questions.

Thank you,

From: Robinson, Lauren []
Sent: Tuesday, October 11, 2011 6:07 PM
To: Elizabeth T
Subject: RE: AB 433

The individual’s treating physician will make the determination as to what qualifies as clinically appropriate treatment and when that person has completed treatment.  I attached a fact sheet from the Transgender law center and a letter from WPATH regarding surgery.  The state is not issuing temporary birth certificates.  I also attached the updated passport policy.  They do still offer the 2 year temporary passport but they do state that they are following the guideline offered by WPATH. 

From: Danny Kirchoff []
Sent: Wednesday, October 12, 2011 5:43 PM
Subject: RE: AB 433

Dear Elizabeth,

Danny Kirchoff
Client Advocate
Transgender Law Center
870 Market Street, STE 400
San Francisco, CA 94102
Fax:     (877) 847-1278
This email message and any attachments are intended only for the use of the addressee named above and contain information that is privileged and confidential.  If you are not the intended recipient, any dissemination, distribution, or copying of this email is unauthorized and strictly prohibited.  If you received this email in error, please immediately notify the sender by replying to this email message.  Thank you. 


Anne said...

It would seem that the devilis in the details which have been left intentional vaugue and subject to the interpretation of what ever unscrupulous physician needs some extra $$$ to cover his malpractice insurance.

I see this as a parallel to the Dr.'s "prescription" for "medical" marijuana.

"Clinically appropriate treatment" INDEED. Pay me $$XXX$$, and you are "appropriately treated". for me, win/win...NOT!

Elizabeth said...

I prefer to remain a little optimistic. I will wait and see but it is the law now and those opposed to it can fight it in California. Good luck on that part.

I do not believe it was a deliberate attempt to redefine what a female. Physicians need to remember they are the ones under the gun if they do something illicit.

JEH said...

Whatever. You can have all of the sour grapes you want, but that does not change that this is now THE LAW.

You should be proud, because you classic transexuals/women born transexual/hBSers love to claim that transexuality is a MEDICAL condition. Since it is a MEDICAL condition then it is up to the doctors not the politicians to determine what is APPROPRIATE TREATMENT.

The best part is that if you are outed as being transexual, then you will be regarded as being in the same boat as women with penises! One of us! One of us!

Fionnuala said...

C'mon, JEH. That's nowhere near the best part. The best part is that you can whip out your neoclit and show the other women how you can pee out of it! They're bound to be jealous. Well, that, or they'll run away in terror.

Anonymous said...

Don't you just LOVED getting screwed by "pricks in panties"!-Fional & JEH

Elizabeth said...


ROFLMAO. Nope the best part is I will always be considered a woman and you and your penis will NEVER be considered either female or a woman. Just another pathetic man in a dress.

I will never be outed as transsexual because I am not a transsexual you stupid man. I was cured but then you never had the medical condition so you and your pathetic wanker can go and jack off in the corner with all the other men in dresses.

By the way you still need a notarized affidavit and that will not be easy to come by. No physician wants to be outed for allowing some beard wearing man in a dress like you to change his birth certificate so he can be the new bearded half man and half woman in the freak circus where you live.

Deena said...

I have never seen the birth certificate of another person. I have not needed to show my own for any purpose for decades. My dl, passport, pilot's license and ss records all reflect F and I never had to show a birth certificate to the state, FAA, state department or ss administration. From my experiences this is all much ado about nothing.

Anonymous said...

I would like to think this law is going to serve a noble purpose, and it may most of the time. Still a fraud is a fraud and someone will find a way around the law.

To quote Martin Luther King.
"Let us realize the arc of the moral universe is long but it bends toward justice.”

This just happens to be one of MY favorite King quotes.

And I know he wouldn't wouldn't want anybody to use the law to commit fraud.

Miz Know-It-All said...

Smack dab in the middle of what Ray Bradbury called the "Dark Tea Time of the Soul." Coffee in hand I sat down and read this and the comments...

Oddly my first, second and even third thoughts were of the exact same song:

It's never going to change is it? The addiction to cross dressing, particularly it's end stage is forever and ever going to be connected to and equated with transsexual... or as "Femulateing's" author Stana's put it after summoning the courage to go to the mall in women's clothing.

"Finally, I realized I was a woman"

I wonder if and when Stana will clue in to what it feels like to see men and realize they are bigger and stronger and represent the risk of rape? I wonder how it will feel for her when a man penetrates her vagina for his pleasure? I wonder if she will feel for the three and a half billion women of the world that know to their bones that every act of sexual congress carries with it the risk of pregnancy? I wonder if Stana will ever see Margret Sanger as the savior she was?


What are you going on about so Miz Know It All? Go get yerself some more coffee! Who cares about all those silly things! Hey look here missy!! Stana knows how to match her purse to her shoes... and that dear ones makes her as female as they come!

Margret Sanger indeed! What has that got to do with being a female who ever the heck she was...

Elizabeth said...


Slipping some wacky weed into the morning oatmeal? You lost me after the line where Stana said he was a woman.

Cross-dressers like Stana are men and have no right to female pronouns but we do not face the chance of pregnancy either so I fail to see the relation to Stana. Stana is a man in a dress and will never be a woman because he emulates one or femulates.

Heck even Transvestite Central has a lead on Stana because he is one of their pals.

Stana is basically harmless until he claims he is a woman and then he is just stupid. It will go to insane if he suddenly decides to transition and claim he was always a girl and has decided to be a transsexual.

I kind of expect that within the next few months since he is at that age.

By the way 99% of genetic women have no clue who Margret Sanger is either.

Stephanie said...

Ah, the 'hidden penis' elitist have spoken. You never consider the trans people who can't have surgery. Be it financial (I'm poor) or medical (I'm allergic to nearly all pain meds.) you would rather I be outed every time I have to show identification. I highly doubt that many cross-dressers or drag queens will want to change their gender status on any documents they have. And if they do, how's it going to hurt you? Shame on you for sitting on your high pedestal. Your fall will be tremendous.

Anne said...


" 'hidden penis' elitist"-STEPH
Is this a "hidden" slur?

"I'm poor" - STEPH

"I'm allergic to nearly all pain meds" STEPH

OK...SO.....Have them use the ones you ARE NOT allergic to

"outed every time I have to show identification" ~STEPH

In narly 65 years on this planet, Ihave had to produce a B/C ONCE!
Can you count that high ONE TIME! And that wasonly when I applied for my SS retirement benifits.

"how's it going to hurt you?" OYE' Must I count the ways? How about,"Your fall will be tremendous" ~STEPH

Thank you for your good wishes you pitifully jealous and envious WHINNER!

Andrea Rosenfield said...

Apologies for interrupting the tit-for-tat insult-fest with an on-topic comment, but I need to break silence for a moment and throw a message to the stakeholders who lurk this place, to finish something I started here:

First, congratulations to the proponents, Rep. Lowenthal, and Gov. Brown on the legislative victory. Those expecting a temper tantrum about this bill's passage will be sadly disappointed. I have no interest in trying to challenge, modify, or repeal anything before it has been given a chance to work, and will not support any such efforts at this time. If any problems or abuses arise, they can be addressed if and when there's objective evidence of them.

Which brings me to a certain self-promoting transgender activist and a certain potential petition: I recall saying earlier on in that controversy, that had the individual in question simply waited for this bill to pass, there would have been no problem. Now the bill has passed, and come 1/1/2012, the legal standard will have been met, and there will be no problem.

Effective immediately, I will no longer concern myself in any way with that particular potential petitioner, or any other such petitioner or petition. Others who may have been watching the docket in a certain reportedly "sunny" California county that may or may not have a really nice zoo in it, are respectfully encouraged to back off as well.

Looking on the bright side, this bill takes the entire "definition" issue out of the political realm, so that's a good thing right there. I have also had the good fortune to have heard from a couple of teachers in the California public schools this week, who expressed that the ability to change paperwork early on is going to be a wonderful thing for the youth, who can start life with a "clean" paper trail even before the medical issues can be fully resolved.

If those teachers are proven right, then I'll be glad my objections were overruled just for that alone. For failing to see the youth angle myself, I wear badge of shame. I let myself become so blinded by the outrageous behavior of certain older exhibitionists, that I forgot to think of the kids. I'm not proud of myself for this. At all.

This leads to my final point: I recently cancelled my gmail account and have been very quiet online for weeks. This is nothing personal, and nobody "got to" me. It's not like that. I did some thinking and came to the realization that trying to make a difference in the world just made me unhappy, and the world wasn't noticeably different for it. Politics is for politicians, activism is for activists, and blogging is for bloggers. I am none of those; those things are not for me. I'm a mother and an aunt. Those things are for me. That's what makes me happy, that's where I *can* make a difference, and that's what I need to concern myself with going forward.

I will see this thread through, but then I am out of this activism/politics thing, and off the blogs, for good. If I get bored during the day between loads of laundry again, maybe I'll try following the daytime soaps, or get to know my neighbors a little better than I already do. Or plant a garden, or take up needlepoint. Or... anything else, really.

-- A.R.

Anonymous said...


Ah did you just loooOOOOOOOSE!?

Your transparent spin doctoring just ... (((FAILS!!!)))

Nice try at repackaging bigotry as integrity.

Not going to buy it from you Elizabeth, Anne, NYF and that dumb dumb Miz Know-it-all.

C. Angel

Anonymous said...

Well Andrea however things go have a good life. You are right in those things were you can make a difference.

I wish you the very best.


Miz Know-It-All said...

NEVER leave comments anywhere at 4:00 AM!

Anyway, what I was trying (poorly) to convey by that seemingly illogical hard left turn in my last were two disparate points.

The first being that females have the female form for a reason! It's not as if we were once a proto human race in some other dimension where we got together and said. "Hey I know, Lets go to earth and divide into sexually dimorphic versions of human just for shits and giggles! That way we can look and act different about pretty much everything! And the really fun part? It will really mess with our heads!

I know shocking isn't it? Female being both form and function? Yeah yeah... shoot me now cause yes, I am a bloody damn gender heretic as well as being a [big ol']dumb dumb but shhhh don't spread it round!

The second thought that was my trying to get woven into that weird left hand turn was the overpowering presence/effect of male privilege in "the community."

Given that we are in fact sexually dimorphic and that one of the two forms is considered by both sides as having different value gives rise to one of them having privilege over the other (I will debate this being biological rather than social as my cats also seem to evidence that same privilege but they also lick their own butts too. So perhaps that debate can wait for another day?)

Maybe once-apon-a-time the privilege was to the female side, but for the last few thousand years of recorded 'his'tory, both in western and eastern social structures. The privilege has gone hands down to the males... A privilege which is given to them in every turn from the moment of their birth to the day of their death... A privilege that is so omnipresent that it becomes interwoven into their being. A privilege that actually allows them to see the other and lesser half of human as "just" a random assortment of parts and acts rather than anything approaching a whole...

Frankly? The rad fems have it dead to rights on this one point... dipping your toe into the MtF community is like taking a bath in testosterone!

Look, The very fact that we don't medicate someone who stands on the street corner metaphorically waving their penis saying "I'm a woman with a dick!" speaks volumes! That we not only don't medicate them, but they become our activists and leaders??? I leave it up to your imagination to fill in that blank!

In fact it is the unspoken recognition of that privilege that makes those of us who have spent decades eliminating it as women cringe so.. While those who would claim their interpretation of female and then hold onto their male privilege with all their strength gibber with glee...

You are right! This is madding, it is relatively pointless and the children really should be the primary focus of all our efforts rather than the spot light falling onto end-stage-transvestic addicts...

But this is far from a perfect world and that is not at all what is happening! So it is with this law. It should be a boon for the children but I fear it really is only a matter of time before someone who was "treated appropriately" bares it all and waves their 7" neo-clit round a locker-room full of women and girls and a veritable shit storm of public ire will result! Sadly it will be the kids who suffer the results of that storm and not the ones with the privilege and natal equipment. They will simply go back to being what they were to begin with... men in dresses!

Anonymous said...

This is maddening but someone needs to inform the public of the lifestyle transvestites who are actively working to invade women's spaces.

As far as medicating the penis packing persons who would use this law fraudulently most of them are already medicated and proudly post about it.
It would occur to me the problem is the medication and good old fashion 1 on 1 psychoanalysis is in order to straighten out the lifestyle transvestites.

Sadly the children are going to be the victims of all this Tee-Gee activism and the invasion of transitional services by the penis packing lifestyle transvestites.

Modern society seems to be degenerating into a collection of freakish lifestyles.

What a mess


Stephanie said...


"Is this a hidden slur"?
Well, in one word 'Yes' You still have it. It's only outside turned inside.

And just where is it free? I live in the U.S. and poor means not even enough money to get to the next state let alone another country. I'm disabled so work is out of the question, after 40years in the construction business.

Meds allergy? The ones I can take would not even begin to ease the pain.

Yes, I've never had to show my B/C. But that is not the only document that needs to be changed and it can start with that on and the rest will be easy.

And when not answering a question, 'How will it hurt you', I find people like you will always attack the messenger.

And yes, I am jealous and envious, but a pitiful whinner I'm not.

Off the subject: Why does it seem that most of you 'self proclaimed elitist' don't put up a recent pic of yourself. Are you hiding or ashamed? And don't give me that bulls*** pic of 'you' on a boat.

My 'whinnying' will stop now.

Anonymous said...

The reason many of us don't put up pictures is because we have no reason to. Have you ever looked at how many facebook pages have no picture of the member who writes on that page?

I find it saddening that a supposed TS who is disabled can't find part time work. I know someone who was and who did and has been post op for a decade or so now. If you want it bad enough you will find a way to get it.
Sitting around and wallowing in self pity won't get you anywhere.

Life isn't suppose to be fair, you are suppose to make the best of the cards you are dealt.

Stephanie said...

@Not your friend

Yes, I know there are a lot of faceless people out there. When I run across one, I automatically discount what they are saying. It might as well be coming from voices in the universe than a real human.

For disabled, I have degenerative arthritis of the spine, and worse, a little known disease called Hiroyama Disease. It effects the nerves and muscles of my hands causing me very little grip and terrible pain.

I'm making the best of what I've been dealt. I see no reason for people like Anne or Elizabeth to complain that their status as women is being destroyed. I ask again. Will it hurt them if trans people who can't have surgery get female recognition?

Thanks for listening.

Anne said...

Look Steph. Lets be frank shall we. If all you claim is true there is no doubt that you are already subsisting off the public dole which is fine. OUR SOCIETY AND ARE CULTURE IS SUCH THAT IT WILL CARRY ITS INDIGENT AND INFIRM.

I have no arguement with that. WHAT i DO PROTEST IS THE de-construction of that culture and the meaning of words in under the FALSE FLAG of "social justice" and "equality".

By your own admission YOU, Steph, have never been ased for a B/C. Yet you claim you "NEED" it to get your other ID's Changed. That is BS and you know, and so does everybody else.

As for posting more pictures of me WHAT IS THE POINT? You and your P-Packin' Pals consider the one picture that did leak out a fraud, or as you so genteeley put it, "Bull****"

Well I am glad you think so. God forbid I be wandering around some beach in the carribean or the adriatic and be recognized by one of your many angry trannies diligently working to out WOMEN, yes Steph, REAL women with our REAL sweet, hot, juicy, funtioning PUSSIES as "just like YOU Penis-Packers". Sorry not if I can help it.

Anne said...

@Andrea...I am sorry that you feel the way you do, but I can certainly understand, and do in fact share, your sentiment.

The sad and IMHO truly tragic thing is that you will be one less voice of reason amidst the cacaphony of sheer MADNESS.

"Women with penises"! What will they think of next, "pregnant men"???

Don't you see This is just a further conditioning and slide down that slippey slope. Just as we have been pushed past the point on no return to Financial Ruin by the clandestine machinations of the Super-Uber Rich like Geo.Soros and his "social justice"/Government Allaince, we are being led by the "fruits and nuts" empowered politicians in California, down that 'pink fog' enshrouded highway to an "EQUALITY" of TOTAL dependance upon "our" government.

I call that slavery. An "equality" of poverty. As we speak, inflation fueled by uncontrolled gov't spending and an eroding dollar is impoverishing and destroying the middle class.
Those "useful idiots" currently camped out OWS and around the world are being used to provide the power to the Uber_Rich who desire TOTAL control. To do this they must simply manipulate the masses and SILENCE those of us who speak out in opposition.

Andrea, I urge you, NO, I beseech you, to contact me privately.


Stephanie said...

Proud of that pussy aren't you? I'd rather be proud of my compassion for my fellow human beings including ALL human beings not just a few elitist ones. I think the name calling illustrates your lack of compassion for anyone who is not 'just like you'. Apparently you've spent too much time opening your 'working pussy' and not your brain.

By the way, in nearly all states, just try and get your D/L changed to read "F" without going through surgery. Ain't going to happen.

Enough's enough......

Anne said...

Ayupp. To each his own.

Deena said...

Stephanie I went to your 2 blogs and spent some time today reading your history and experiences as you present them. I am not concerned in the least with what your documents say, including your BC. From what I could ascertain they all remain M as to sex but perhaps not. But that is not the point.

Let me see if I can elucidate the briar patch that we all find ourselves in. Women (and men) should (IMHO) be able to get identifying documents altered whether pre-op or not but there is no simple way to accomplish that and avoid issuing documents stating F to fetishists. My preferred solution to this whole mess is to take sex off of the BC, DL and every other government issued ID but that is probably wishful thinking. Not likely to happen anytime soon.

There are other options. Perhaps no changes should ever be allowed. Then a woman classified as M on various documents would be in the position of saying oh well, ignore that because it was a mistake when I was born and can't be rectified under existing laws.

Or, laws could require an inspection (in private of course) of genitalia. Judges would not want that because it puts them in a bad spot. FTM's would not want it either (I don't think).

So, you tell me please. What is your preferred comprehensive approach to this problem? I will say that I know a few women who vibe woman and have never changed documents. One of them is even post op. She is retired and transitioned over 30 years ago. In essence she flipped the bird to society and took the approach that if someone couldn't handle it then she didn't need that person in her life. I asked her once what she would do if she was ever arrested. Her response was "I'll undress".

Anonymous said...

You could have your birth condition corrected if you want it bad enough.
Go and read all the narratives of people who have against all odds had their birth condition corrected.

I don't grudge your disabled status and the benefits it has brought you in terms of an income that supports you.
SSDI allows you to work and make up to $1000.00 per month and maybe more since the last figure I was quoted from the SSA pamphlet that covered working while disabled was in 2005.

It's your life, you owe it to yourself to do what you have to or stop complaining that you can't have surgery.
You can there is always a way, women worse off than you have accomplished this task. All it takes is education and dedication and if you are truly TS it will happen.

Anne said...

When I applied to have my B/C changed, I was required by State Law to provide Medical Certification of SURGICAL RE-ASSIGNMENT. NOT "appropriate treatment" which just another intentionally VAGUE term subject to a lawyers wet dream of endless litigatin and interpretation.

"THEY" the TG lawyers an lobbyists INC slipped it by the well meaning, "progressive" bleeding hearts in the California Legislative Process.

I should note that In the 35+ years prior, which constituted almost the entirety of my adult working life, I was never, EVER, asked to produce one.

I persist in myopinion thatthis is just one more step down that slippery slope to get men in dresses into hose private spaces reserved for women.

Dana Marie Andra said...

After reading many of these comments, I feel as though I've walked into a room full of rather unpleasant, nasty people. All the comments about men in dresses and women with penises notwithstanding, I think the discussion basically revolves around changing gender status on identity documents and the concern that this may be done by people who are not transsexuals.

Frankly, it doesn't matter to me if a certain number of non-transsexuals (for lack of a better term) change their ID, if, indeed, they're able to. In California, one can change their name, passport, driver's license, and social security information (not incl. the SS number) prior to having surgery. I know this because I did it, but it was a time-consuming process involving letters from doctors, court documents, and application fees. I suppose one can leave their name unchanged, and remain John Smith with a female gender designation, but that would certainly raise eyebrows and questions, neither of which one generally wants to rise. Most transsexuals just want to pass and blend in and don't relish being asked to explain these things.

So are a lot of non-transsexuals doing this? Is this really the concern? Because what I'm mostly sensing from these comments is resentment from genetic women who don't seem to comprehend that being transgendered is essentially a birth defect. Trans women have penises as a result of genetic miscoding, but it doesn't make them men.

The contention seems to be that we are defined by our genitals as opposed to the far more complex web of things that comprise who we feel ourselves to be. Are you going to tell the legions of us who grew up knowing that our bodies didn't reflect who we really were that all we had to do was look at our genitals for the answer? Do you use terms like "neo-clit" because you no longer corner the market on vaginas, or do you simply think it's unfair that we never had to suffer through monthly cycles?

And by the way, Anne ~ "trannies" is the trans equivalent of the "N" word. Few of us like the word, and using it shows that you know little about this subject.

As for Denna's suggestion that perhaps there be no gender designation on ID, the UK is going to remove gender designation from their passports. Why they've chosen to do this, I don't know, but they are far more open to gay and transgender rights than we are in the United States.

Personally, I like that my various pieces of ID say female. It was part of knowing that my transition was a reality. I am now a post-op woman heading into the next phase of my life. If you chose to feel that I'm not a "real woman" because I only have a "neo-clit," that's up to you, but it seems rather hateful and ignorant. It seems ignorant because you have no idea what it's like to feel that your body is wrong. That it needs to be fixed. The wonderful thing is, despite what any of you think, now that I've entered the post-op phase of my transition, that cloud of dysphoria has lifted completely.

One final thought ~ a "neo-clit" is a fully functional vagina. All we're lacking are the baby-making parts, and there are plenty of women who have had hysterectomies about which you can say the same thing, not to mention women who are infertile.

This level of hate and resentment is truly mystifying, and again, it can only come from ignorance. I realize that it's difficult for some people to accept, and not everyone makes a great, or even convincing looking woman, but that isn't the point. We have to live in these bodies, every day of our lives. Why any of this matters to you is beyond me. If you were curious and wanted to know more, that I could understand. But many of you just seem nasty, and I really don't know why.

Dana Marie Andra

Anne said...

Hmmmm...For another example of TG Duplicity and just plain SELFISH self-serving, "DUMB-FUCKERY", go here...

Elizabeth said...

A first for me. I deleted my own comment. Why? I was sort of angry at a real asshole (Stephanie) but more mad because I had to go to Charlotte Motor Speedway with friends for the Sprint Cup Race which was weird because I had a wonderful time.

I was too harsh IMHO even if it was how I felt so I censored myself.

I will have a post shortly about this entire farce involving the men in dresses who want to keep their penis'.

Anonymous said...

I'm looking forward to it Elizabeth.

Miz Know-It-All said...

Danna Marie Andra?

Uhhh got a News Flash for you honey!...Everyone who has commented on this whom you have labeled as born female has in fact walked the walk and talked the talk! Each of us paid quite dearly, and quite willingly for our womanhood... and the money? That was the least of it!

So I would invite you to step back from the kumbya gender kool aid just for just a second and imagine... How you would feel if having given up everything and I do mean EVERYTHING and then more to secure that womanhood. A bunch of nattering nabobs who've been riding your coattails the whole time start to whine about how tough it is! On no! not to get off your coattails and run the race you've run! But how hard it is to get their lard butts out of their chair just to get to the starting line!

Now how much sympathy would you have for them when you paid for this "privilege" in your own blood while they say to you time and time again. "But we just want to get our blue ribbons without all that fuss and bother!" I mean we shop in the women's section of Walmart most of the time, so we gotta be women right?

No... you're not and you won't be until you have that surgery. This has and always will be as Yoda said "do or no do, there is no try!" Oh btw? Surgery? That's just the starting line of transition and not the finish...Till then you are not and cannot be female!

Look we have been there done that and now as normal men and women we have all heard exactly what the world says after you leave the room... Trust me it ain't pretty and it is getting less so as people are getting their noses rubbed in it by the gender activists! So while those who are actually in transition do need correct documents the fact that there are legions of men in dresses taking full advantage of that means at some point there will be a back lash and when it comes. It will not be they who suffer the publics wrath but the young women and men who's lives depend upon correcting their lives!

That my dear is why we are angry!

Anne said...

"But many of you just seem nasty, and I really don't know why." ~DMA

Hi Dana,

Just a couple of things. This discussion was orininally about the potential consequences of the passage of a California Law, AB433.

As is often the case, it has devolved as a result of certain
"transies", or "trans"-"people", dropping comments denigrating what you so ignorantly refer to as a "neo-clit".

As usual, or as is the transie way, LANGUAGE has devolved to its standard level of BABBLE. Terms are used at random with little or no reference to their ACTUAL MEANING.

Your use of the term "neo-clit", in your recent comment, stands as just ONE of many examples of this "babble". I will try to be "gentle" here in view of your "neophyte" status.

Neo-clit is a MEDICAL TERM, coined by SRS surgeons to describe what was once a glans penis, that is reconfigured and relocated in the newly constructed "neo-vagina" to maintain sensation and function and HOPEFULLY provide an additional avenue to orgasm.

This originally MEDICAL term has been CO-OPTED, and conflated by certain rabidly radical self declared "trans"- activists as a useful conflation for their fully functional MALE PENIS.

So yes, most normal SANE women object to calling fully erect PENIS a "neo-clit"

Stephanie said...

Elizabeth, be mad all you want. Just please don't use words such as Anne uses to attack me. Read my blogs, read what I say. Everything is the truth I assure you. It seems your group forgets that they were girls prior to surgery, as you have said about yourself, and others said about you. Your brain was telling you that, as all of ours has. Why do you now put yourself above those who don't want, or can't have surgery. Under your line of thinking your saying now that you were not female before surgery. I do not understand this.

We all started out with our brain telling us we are female. I've just had trouble getting the cure for my transexuality. My decisions in life may have been bad (transsexual wise)and now I find I can't transition fully. That does not make it right that I be denied that 'F' status on my documents.

All my life I've been able to look and understand the other side of equations. I just don't understand yours.

Thanks for listening.

And on another note...Thank you for publishing your friends diary. Seeing others perspective of how life was for trans people is good for the trans M's&F's of today.

Anne said...

And just to be clear, DMA. You are correct that I know very little about "trans" culture or that particular way of life or "lifestyle".

I trans-formed my physical body to match my neurology more than 40 years ago and have lived, loved and worked as just a woman ever since.

I use the term, "trannie" not as a pejorative or a slur, but as a simple desciptive of those going through that painful process of transition from male to female or visa versa.

That "some" have chosen to stay in that transitory state and make a lifestyle of it does not in my view negate the descriptive value of the term.

That the Gay and Lesbian Association Against Defamation of Gay and Lesbian people have MANDATED that this term along with many others just as "transvestite" be considered an "N" word, matters not to me as I owe no alligence to their definitions of what is right or wrong.

I guess I missed that 'memo' that put them in charge.

Dana Marie Andra said...

Miz Know-It-All ~
"Uhhh got a News Flash for you honey!" Why all the swagger and attitude? That's why I said I felt like I'd walked into a room full of nasty people. If I didn't get to the core of your argument at the outset, it was because I had to work so hard to filter through the venom.

Again, I really don't care if trans women with penises have their documentation changed. I still had my original bits when I changed my documents, because I had to update my license and passport before traveling to Bangkok. It only makes sense. I can't imagine that it's happening in such great numbers that anyone is noticing, anyway. I paid a lot of money and went through a lot of pain and sacrifice to arrive at where I am today, but if someone with a penis wants to have an F on his/her ID, and they can find a doctor to write them the letter, so be it. I don't think it's going to bring the walls crashing in on the rest of us.

Further, Stephanie is right when she says that trans women are indeed women prior to having surgery. As I said, this is a birth defect. I've long gotten passed the idea that I was born into the wrong body. My body is my body, but it had some things wrong with it, no different than if I'd had a cleft pallet. I should never have had a penis, so, for me, that needed to be corrected.

BUT. After years of trying to understand why I felt as I did, I started my journey about 3 years ago, and when I decided to transition, I scoured the internet, joined a support group, started writing a blog and reading many others, met the woman who has become my partner (also trans) and became acquainted with many of her friends and mutual trans friends, and never have I encountered the attitude that if you don't have GRS, you're not a woman. The attitude that I've encountered far and wide is that surgery is a very serious and permanent and personal choice, and that it's not right to judge someone for their decision in this regard. Genital surgery is something one does mostly for themselves, because unlike breasts, few people are going to know what's in your pants. For me, women don't have penises, and that had to corrected. I would never have been able to relax into the my full womanhood as long as I had one. That's not true for everyone, though.

By the same measure, if a man loses his penis in an accident, or an angry wife or girlfriend slices it off, he isn't then a woman. Likewise, if some mad doctor were to saw a penis onto a woman, that would not make her a man. The true gender lives inside, regardless of what's evidenced on the outside.

But what if, like Stephanie, you're allergic to painkillers? Or you're a diabetic? The so-called "penis-packers" really have fewer options, if any, available to them. And even if the inhibiting factors aren't present, it's not easy to gather together the money needed for the surgery. Most of the money for my transition came through selling things on eBay, but I was fortunate to have things worth that kind of money to sell. My surgery cost $14K for GRS and breast enhancements, plus $3K for airfare and hotel. This doesn't include laser, and therapy, and new clothes, etc. I went to one of the top two surgeons in Bangkok, and you can probably find less expensive surgeons, but I personally would not want to go to them. Surgery in the US averages $24K for just GRS. If someone is on disability, and can't work, etc, they're not going to be able to scrape together even $17K. A lot of trans women are in this position, but the fact remains that they are women. Men would not want to have their penises transfigured into vaginas, and maybe that's your point, but I don't think Stephanie and others who either can't afford surgery or have medical conditions that prevent it fall into the category.

Dana Marie Andra

Dana Marie Andra said...

Anne ~
I just googled the term "neo-clit,", and indeed came across a blog that seems to be referring to penises as neo-clits, and I would agree that that's patently absurd. The term I've heard is neo-vagina, which I'm not really bothered by, because it is indeed a NEW vagina. But in the end, it's a vagina.

As for the word "trannie," and "transie," as well ~ some trans folks aren't offended by it, but many are. You can't just say that you don't mean to use it in a pejorative way when, in the vernacular of most humans, it's a pejorative word. If the overall concern is about the perception of transsexuals within society, calling ourselves "trannies" only makes them thinks it's an acceptable word, and NO ONE is speaking in a non-pejorative way when they refer to us as "trannies."

I'm far from a kumbaya person, but it seems like there's plenty of anger, hate and division coming from people who think "freak" when they think of anyone who's transsexual ~ do we really need to be hating each other?

Dana Marie Andra

Deena said...

@ Stephanie. Better than misses the point. I have many close friends who have become pregnant and brought a child into this world. Barring some major advances in the medical fields that is an experience I will never have in this lifetime. They rightfully own the designation as mothers while I do not. I won't quibble about adoptive parents because its not pertinent to the point. When my friends occasionally discuss labor I listen. I never say "I know". I haven't had that experience and I don't know. That does not somehow make me less a person but it is a very distinctive difference.

So Stephanie I will try to put this as gently as I can. You are certainly worthy of all human rights but there are certain realities you can not escape and when you protest that it is unfair you are pissing into the wind.

Est-ce qu’il y a des

Dana Marie Andra said...

Deena ~
How does anything in your comment address what Stephanie said? "Better than misses the point." What does that mean? I take it you're saying genetic woman can have babies, and trans women can't. Is that really your point, and if so, so what? Are you saying trans women aren't really women because they can't have babies? Your comment is so cloaked in sarcasm and condescension -- "So Stephanie I will try to put this as gently as I can." -- that it's hard to tell.

Miz Know-it-all said that everyone who has commented here is a trans woman, so I guess that includes you. So what really are you saying, and why can't you say it without the attitude?

Dana Marie Andra

Elizabeth said...

Many genetic women cannot get pregnant so there is nothing disqualifying about that. I was a stepmother and at least according to her I was a good mom.

I was born transsexual and take offense to anyone that makes the assertion I am a trans woman. I was never trans I was once transsexual. I was cured of that transsexualism in January of 1971 after a long and painful fight.

I find people like Stephanie and others of that ilk that make assertions about the surgery we have gone through that is what can best be described as uninformed to be typical of those of the idiot who originally coined the term transgender or Mr.Virginia Prince. That was his claim back in the 60's when he started transgender to cover his delusion that he was a heterosexual transvestite and not just another pervert.

It is basically impossible for those of us that have worked hard to obtain surgery to understand why any transsexual would not wish surgery and particularly MTF transsexuals because our surgeries are highly successful.

The excuses are amusing but the reality is not. Transvestites keep a their penis and transsexuals so everything to rid themselves of it unless circumstances prevent it but and the big but is they would have surgery tomorrow if it was medically available or they had the money.

Stephanie is a transvestite based on the comments he has made about our surgeries and as far as I am concerned anyone that speaks and acts like her about this issue is a transvestite.

Anne said...

This "discussion" has devolved beyond absurd.

" if someone with a penis wants to have an F on his/her ID, and they can find a doctor to write them the letter, so be it." ~DMA

Right....I mean what does it matter, right? Boys and girls, men, women....why we are all the same...."equal".

I mean whe needs sex Who needs gender? Why bother? Its all to complicated. I mean "Ms". Andra has got hirself a brand spanking new top dollar "neo-clit avec vagina" and by gummit "he" is now officially a "she".

And this all got "decided" after 50 some years of trying to "decide" if DMA was really male or female.

I dunno, DMA. I am glad you have penty of support from your "trans" friends.

Anne said...

Ya see, "ladies", 'trans-women' ain't women. They are something other than.

Transsexualism is a medical condition with a proven protocol resulting in a cure. The "cured" individual is no longer "trans". Their SEX is now 'corrected' to match their neurology.

So just so we are clear. I am not a "trans" woman. SRS will not and did not make you a woman anymore that flipping on a wig and a pair of heels. "WOMAN" is waaaaaayyy more than that. Waaaaayyyyy more.

Anne said...

Have you eve heard the experssion, if it walks, talks and quakes like a duck, most likely, IS A FRIGGEN' DUCK!!?!

Well, when I read your words, look at your image and most likely were I to listen to your voice, I would get a perception. What would that be? My guess, based on the very limited information that you have provided and your less than flattering foto, is that I would clock you as "trans" IE NOT female. Something "other than".

Women do not get clocked. We just don't. We get read, percieved, "clocked" as women. Nothing more nor less. Did his just happen over-night? NO. Did we wake up from SRS, instantly "passable"? NO.

It takes years. For some of us, it was easier than for others. But the one thing that distinguishes women from the pretenders and the wanna-be's is that we never, EVER had any doubt who we were and we simply DID what had to get done, NO MATTER WHAT.

There were no "decisions" to be made, or decades of "finally coming to the 'realization' scenarios. That is just so much "trans" psycho-babble.

Anonymous said...

This truly has devolved into what I don't know. Things are getting screwey neo clits transwomen turning into men to marry and this...

"One of my favorite things to do is to pack and wear a skirt."

Can anybody tell me who said this yesterday on twitter?

I can tell you this this person is NOT a transsexual, but well known in the LGBTee-Gee.

Stephanie said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Stephanie said...


I was first diagnosed transsexual in 1968 at the age of 14. Every therapist I've seen since (about 8) has had the same diagnosis. I tried my best to get the help I needed but I never became financially able to receive the right help. It took me until the age of 52 to stop drinking and drugging myself trying to calm the transsexual thoughts away. Starting hormones helped. Through out those years I would have then and still now would have surgery if I was able to.

On the subject this blog, you have to consider the good that it does and not the bad things that could happen. Just think, if you would have been able to have a B/C that read female when you were in school how easier your life would have been. That's just part of the good. As the saying goes, "Don't throw the baby out with the bathwater".

Elizabeth said...


I have read most of your blog and in your world it was the clothes that was your focus and I never once read "I am a girl" or "I want to be a girl" but let me give you your claim of being diagnosed in 1968 as transsexual although I seriously doubt it.

Why would you make comments about anyone who is post have just an inverted penis and demean those that have had surgery? I feel the law in California is okay because I prefer anyone but politicians should make the decision and I think there will be a lot fewer than many think.

The feeling I came away with after reading your blog is that you are clueless. You said your daddy might have made you transsexual because he did not play ball with you etc. then you are clueless what it means to be transsexual. You also prove it in your words.

You seem not to understand that many of us have cultivated lives that have been productive and we are happy and want to remain in the background and then I look at your photo and wonder quite simply, what fool would put a picture of themselves that makes them look like a bad drag queen.

Sometimes your own actions label you what you are and yours label you.

Stephanie said...


You doubt what I say as truth.

You doubt what all the Drs. say.

You declare me what you think I am, yet you don't know me.

I didn't feel I needed to declare that I was a girl because I already knew I was one.

I did not say my father made me transsexual. I said that his lack of attention may have helped my transsexualism along.

My 'inverted penis' remark is the clinical term used by the medical profession. It was not meant to demean anyone.

My picture does not depict the feelings that are inside of me. All transsexuals are not born beautiful.

And yes, your actions will label you. And your actions and writing shows you are not inclusive. That in itself gives me thought as to what other group you would not accept in this world. I include everyone. We are all of the human race.

I've had fun with the back and forth dialog. I think no worse of you. Your opinions just aren't the same as mine.

Deena said...

@ Dana Marie Andra. If you read an attitude in my comments perhaps I do have one from your perspective. Let me put it this way.

I would never tell a woman who has been through labor that my experiences have been the same as hers. It just isn't true. Likewise I am not a lesbian although I have a few friends who are. My point is that each of us needs to accept differences without labeling one or another group of people better than the other. Is that straight forward enough for you?

Let's take it further. Here's an attitude for you. I enjoy sex with men. There is no transvestite or even pre-op transsexual whose opinion on sex with men is valid. Please understand that I am speaking of man on woman penetrative sex. There are a lot of things in life where my opinion is not valid. I'm not offended by that concept because its simply true. California could write a law allowing me to become a licensed heart surgeon if some doctor testified I had undergone appropriate training but you would be a fool to believe it and ask me to operate on your heart.

Or maybe you can accept this. Elizabeth is a mother although an adoptive parent. I am not. I enjoy reading of her experiences but it would be idiotic of me to come on her blog and spout off about how I am just as much a mother as Liz but somehow just couldn't find the resources to actually marry and adopt. I could concoct a thousand reasons but the bottom line is that I never made it to motherhood. She would be correct to call me a pretend mother and even an asshole for asserting motherhood. Dressing up dolls just doesn't frost the cake.

Elizabeth said...


Inclusive? Does that mean I am required to consider men in dresses with an active penis as women? BULLSHIT!!!!

I have lots of gay friends and lesbian friends and even close lesbian women of history friends. IF you have a penis you are not a woman so end of story. You are not female and you can have a birth certificate changed but that penis marks you. Do I have sympathy for those that medically cannot have surgery? Yes but sometimes I wonder because I have know kids that have taken enormous medical risks when it came to surgery because quite simply death was better than a penis.

You claim poverty but that is the excuse of a 57 year old not even fully transitioned person. Interesting that transition waited until you were 54-55 yet you claim you were diagnosed in 1968 as transsexual. Quite simply if you had saved $5 a week from then til now you would have $22,300+ dollars not counting compound interest. I have know people that saved for 10 years to get surgery. I have know people that walked away from stardom for surgery and left millions on the table.

Your writings describe who and what you are. You blame others or you did early on for "making" you transsexual. One is born transsexual but then you know that I am sure.

I would love to know who diagnosed you in 1968 as transsexual. It is only my opinion and on that you are correct but I have seen a lot of it and I have met more than a few kids like me and you were never one of them.

Of course you meant it to demean someone with the inverted penis statement. At least use the balls you have to stand up for your comments.

Now go away and play dress-up with the wife.

Anonymous said...

I’ve been around the internet for a while now. Not as long as some, maybe not as long many. My first foray was around ten years ago on to what was basically an old style “chat room” The web site gave folks the opportunity to exchange messages instantly and the page that introduced the visitor to the room invited people who believed the were transsexual to offer support to each other by sharing experiences. I am instinctively shy about discussing aspects of my life that I consider personal and private and so for a while, a few weeks to be precise I said nothing. Then one evening someone asked about “stealth”. I had zero, Zip, Nada idea what they were talking about and so with trembling fingers posed the question “What do you mean by stealth?” The responding messages set me back on my heels.

I thought about what had been said and I responded with a brief explanation of my own situation with the intention of encouraging the others contributing to reconsider the necessity to be so open about themselves. From where I stood it seemed like they were simply continually facing something I had long since put behind me.

The comments ranged from incredulity on one extreme and accusations of simply lying, to the belief that what I was doing by keeping my medical past so secret was actually against some law. In my naïveté I opened a can of worms that caused a lot of anger. My intention had simply been to encourage others to seek and find the peace of mind and joy of life that I had found. The reaction from the room was such that it seemed to me the majority were quite happy remaining in the limbo they found themselves and what was more, they were resentful that someone, i.e. me, had been able to escape. The green eyed monster called jealousy borne of envy pervaded almost every comment at least that was how it seemed to me. The comments covered similar issues to those that are being raised here.

During the exchanges, it was explained to me that I had not “become a woman” after my surgery and that I was still male because my birth certificate said I was male and that my chromosomes proved that fact. These points were made with some venom it has to be said. Now remember that at this point all I had said was that it was quite possible to leave transsexuality on the operating table and lead the same life as any other woman without carrying the history forward with you and burdening future partners unnecessarily with a cured medical condition. The very people I had sought to help turned on me with some quite unwarranted venom. As a result I responded with a personal definition of how I saw myself both prior to my surgery and post and also how I was perceived by others. Again the venomous response showered about my ears. I was confused to say the very least
(to be continued)

Anonymous said...

Why would these people turn on me with such vitriol? The answer hit me like an express train. I was actually speaking in a language and about issues that none of the people in those early chat rooms had any knowledge about. They certainly had no real experience of the issues except from a very narrow perspective. I had not made any accusations or assertions towards anyone or about any aspect of whether any of them were genuine transsexuals. Yet the venom came my way. Any hate does not emanate from transsexuals towards transvestites that seems to be the prerogative of the transvestite towards transsexuals. Ironically in my business life I’ve observed the same behaviour from males towards females! Why do you think that is Ii wonder?

Now when you read back over the original essay and the ensuing comments from the protagonists; the anger began when JEH with the grace of a flying hippopotamus joyously declared Elizabeth the same as transvestite. Clearly very well aware of how provocative he was being. Any debate from then on was going to be charged with emotion. Elizabeth however kept cool and simply highlighted what is a clear and distinct difference. Now that is the problem there is a difference and one side of the debate has a vested interest in both denying any difference and also keeping any debate away from highlighting exactly what the difference is.

This legislation in California looks to me as if lawmakers have shied away from making any legal definition preferring to place the responsibility on individual physicians and not on the medical profession as a whole because they cannot come up with a definition either because medical opinion is diverse. Everything that has been tried by way of defining exactly what constitutes transsexuality causes someone or some group to cause controversy. Ironically those who can define what transsexuality is, the transsexuals themselves, are involved in a fight not just with doctors but with groups of people who by most people’s perception would best be described as either homosexual or as transvestites. I expect that comment will further raise the temperature from certain quarters.

This is one of those verbal fights that are bound to continue until someone comes up with irrefutable evidence to provide a clear definition of transsexual. Personally I prefer to let me and those people who are a part of my life make that call. Without exception they all say female. How many of those involved here can say that there is no-one not a single person in their life who knows their history?


Stephanie said...

My Drs. name was Donald Martin. He's the head of the psychiatric group here in Hot Springs, Ark. My Dr. now is Stephanie Carpenter.

Diagnosed transsexuals are who the Cal. bill refers to. As that bill states, you don't have to consider 'ALL' men in dresses women. Only those diagnosed.

I don't consider death as an option to being stuck with a penis.

My transition is as far as it can go. I live a female life, 24/7 if you will.

Who saves $5 a week? People who have the foresight to do so. Quite honestly, if I would not have spent my money on drugs and alcohol to mask my transsexual thoughts, I estimate I would have saved close to $200,000. But then it would have only went to support my family. They came first in my life.

I don't blame others, I was born transsexual. What I say is that things that happened in my life helped to push it along.

I do not play dress-up. Only transvestites and cross-dressers play dress-up. I've never had a sexual urge of that nature, and 'ALL' sex was stopped over 20yrs ago.

And my wife is a saint for loving me and staying with me throughout my problematic life. When I married I took the 'til death do us part' seriously.

Elizabeth said...


Poor Stephanie the martyr. The chances of any doctor or shrink having the slightest clue about what a transsexual is in 1968 Arkansas is slim to none and slim left town a long time ago. Let me guess???? He diagnosed you as a classic Type VI transsexual or even a strong type V. Am I right?

I have read your blog dipshit and I will pull the quotes if you want. A transsexual does not show boys they are wearing panties. An exhibitionist does and that may or may not go with being a transvestite.

We read the same bullshit about my family came first and so forth yet you married and used that thing between your legs to impregnate a woman god knows how many times but now you are asexual.

First off yoy are NOT a female so you cannot live 24/7 as a female. The jury is still out based on your nasty comments about penis' if you are transsexual at all. Only transvestites say what you said.

Based on you posted pictures it is most certainly dress up but then late 50's is such a nice age to live the fantasy.

Your actions and your comments come from a decidedly male point of view but then i kind of figure that is not something you already know like all the rest of the loony late transitioners who believe keeping their penis still makes them women.

Not 1 in 10000 would ever consider you a woman and they are the other loons like you. Only a man would consider themselves female with a penis because it is part of the delusion.

Anne said...


" 'hidden penis' elitist"-STEPH

Is this a "hidden" slur? ~Anne

"Is this a hidden slur"?

Well, in one word 'Yes' You still have it. It's only outside turned inside." ~Steph

Stephanie said...

I give up. I can't make you see what you don't want to. My German stubbornness has kept me here this long. Be happy with your 'I am better attitude'.


Anonymous said...

Comes now the same old trite argument; WBTS/HBSer vs TG arguments again, "I'm better than you" without evidence. Stephanie your being baited by the trolls, you need no validation from them. Find support elsewhere you wont find it here.


Miz Know-It-All said...

I really hate the way this sounds, but darn it Steph! How in the hell can you sit on your ass whining about poor me when you are still capable of moving?... I've seen folks wheel chair bound since birth who manage to work and contribute to the world!

As for the degenerative ostioarthritis? So what? I have it in my spine and my knees and my hips and my elbows and my hands and my shoulders and my fingers... in other words in every single joint in my body! I've also got a real wing ding case of fibromyalgia to boot, but you know what? While I wish I didn't have any of it, I do! So when I figured out why I was in so damned much pain, I also found out exactly what it would take to keep this from ruling my life! Since then I have never NEVER let it, nor the pain stop me from doing the exercises that keep me limber and going. Nor I let it keep me from putting in 10 and 12 hour days, anymore than I let not having the money when I started transition keep me from getting SRS!

You know, the main difference I see between us is that when I see an obstetrical, if I can't move it, or go around it.. I figure out how in the hell to go over it! While by your own words here and on your blog, it seems when you are confronted with adversity you just fold up and say "dearie dearie me oh my! Gosh that thing sure is big. I guess I'll just have to sit here till I die!

Careful what you ask for you might get it!

As for me? I NEVER EVER dare to ask for anything less than the world and more! So if you'll excuse me.. I just put in a 13 hour day traveling the coal fields of three states and now I still have a dance class to get to!


Dana Marie Andra said...

@ Anne (and anyone else with this opinion) ~
Men don't have SRS. Women do. Women with a birth defect that sent differing developmental coding to their brains and their bodies. What you're saying means that prior to surgery, you were men, simply by virtue of having a penis. Then following surgery, viola, you were women. I thought only the ignorant public with no prior exposure to transsexualism had these views.

And Anne, you go even further to say that unless one passes, they're STILL not women. The basic notion one has is of being a woman trapped in a man's body. A woman. But a man's body. Sometimes the body doesn't lend itself well to feminizing, but this doesn't mean the woman isn't in there, or that she shouldn't be allowed to live her life as she sees fit.

What about genetic women who are mistaken for men? Are they not women? I had a friend who looked more than a little masculine, and was often called "sir," and told by women that she was in the wrong bathroom. I worked with a guy who received callbacks asking for "her." Something in his voice came off as feminine to some, even though I could never hear how it would.

You say it takes years after SRS to become passable. So were you still men during this period of years? I was being called "Miss" and "Ma'am" by cashiers long before I became full-time. I wore androgynous clothing to work, although it was women's clothing, and something about me ~ my demeanor, whatever ~ was being perceived as female.

"I mean "Ms". Andra has got hirself a brand spanking new top dollar "neo-clit avec vagina" and by gummit "he" is now officially a "she"." Yes, it is new, still healing, in fact. Top-dollar isn't quite accurate, though, as I went to Thailand for my surgery. But I was a she well before that. As I'm sure you would agree, a vagina alone does not make one a woman. The sense that one should have one, however, does. The fact that it wasn't until my 50s that I figured this all out for myself is immaterial. I've felt this way since I was a young child, but being born in the 50s, I didn't grow up in an era where this kind of thing was very widely understood or talked about. Christine Jorgensen was pretty much all I knew about, and later Jan Morris, and both of these individuals' stories fascinated me. I envied them, but to do this myself, good lord. The idea was just too big -- until it finally swept over me and I could deny it no more.

And forget trans vs trans women vs transgender vs transsexual. There's no denying that we were born with male bodies. That alone makes us transsexuals. The word "transgender" is so disputed as to be rendered meaningless. For me, the word describes the experiencing life as one gender and then as another. "Trans woman" is just convenient short-hand. I consider myself to be a woman, sans prefix. The point of the hormone therapy and the surgery is to cure ones gender dysphoria. It has most certainly done that for me.

You say that this discussion "has devolved beyond absurd." I think it was pretty absurd from the outset. I just think it's very sad that women of similar experience should be so hostile and hateful and essential wrong-headed.

Dana Marie Andra

Dana Marie Andra said...

@ Deena
Your hypotheticals hold little if any water, because few things really compare with being born with this condition. The mother example is especially specious. If you what mean to say is that a male transitioning to female is akin to pretending you're a mother when you've never been a mother, there's no comparing the two.

As I've said before, and as I believe most transsexual women will agree with, a man would not change his gender, not unless he believed he wasn't a man. Transvestites just like to dress up. Transsexuals are driven to make right what went wrong at birth, resources allowing.

"There is no transvestite or even pre-op transsexual whose opinion on sex with men is valid." That's just a ludicrous thing to say. Do I really need to say that gender and sexuality are not implicitly connected? I feel stupid saying that there are gay and straight transsexuals just as there are gay and straight people who aren't transsexuals. Calpernia Addams is a well-known example of a transsexual woman who, prior to transition, thought she was gay before realizing there was more to it than that, and that she was, in fact, a heterosexual women. You can't just make these half-baked, black-&-white statements when discussing a topic this complex.

I like that you say that "each of us needs to accept differences without labeling one or another group of people better than the other," but I have to wonder why everything else you say seems to fly in the face of that.

Dana Marie Andra

Elizabeth said...


You said what you said so stick by it. Because I disagree with you and your opinions and because I criticize you comments does not mean I hate you or wish any harm on you. You are the one that got nasty first and basically highjacked this thread.

@She Said

Well look what crawled out of its San Diego sewer. Our fake PhD and doctor who studies transsexuals but is a butch dyke lesbian that has bizarre treatment plans for TS kids.

Enjoy that post cause it is the last one you will ever get on my blog.

Anne said...

"The fact that it wasn't until my 50s that I figured this all out for myself is immaterial". ~DMA

"I've felt this way since I was a young child, but being born in the 50s, I didn't grow up in an era where this kind of thing was very widely understood or talked about." ~DMA

Ah NO, DMA, this fact is NOT immaterial. In fact, it is just one of just many salient "tells", lending credence to the fact that you are not, and never have been a woman.

Several of the women who have commented on this thread were born in the 40's. We knew who we were from DAY ONE of our sentient awareness of SELF as opposed to other.

I will not go into the price we paid or the travails we suffered, but let me just say that there were no "decisions", no "figuring things out". There was just, "HOW do I fix this."

"Men don't have SRS" ~DMA

Well...Yes sadly, many men do. They are deluded by their fantasies and fetish, and enabled by 'pink fog" spewing psuedo-social/psycho gender-babblers, and kook-aid intoxicated professional activists that make a lucrative living off their trade of "fulfilling" fantasies and "supporting" useful idiots with absolutely NO CARES as to tha damage that they do.

Mike Penner/Christine Daniels is just one example that comes to mind, but if you care to take the time you might go to any of the following links.

Deena said...

@ DMA. I concede the point that I am not an eloquent writer so it doesn't shock me that you can't comprehend some of the points I have tried to convey.

Thank you for sharing your picture, part of your life story and telling us "I was being called "Miss" and "Ma'am" by cashiers long before I became full-time. I wore androgynous clothing to work, although it was women's clothing, and something about me ~ my demeanor, whatever ~ was being perceived as female." Fascinating but irrelevant or should I say specious.

Yes I know Calpernia. When I want her opinion I'll call her.

Anonymous said...


Whom comments about her "juicy pussy" trailer park Jerry Springer trash--oh yeah that's just classy and we should listen to that as authority?


Given the facts about you being transsexual in your reference to Stephanie not receiving any hypothetical votes from society how many in that 1000, in your example to Stephanie, would not consider you female at all due to the fact you were born male? Your attack on Stephanie has a negative correlative doesn't it?


Anonymous said...

I thought S-Said had left our little circle and put us out of her misery.

I guess not.

I'm enjoying the dialogue, this thread has taken some interesting turns.


Elizabeth said...

@Black Swan

Until you asshole transgender loons showed up supporting your pervert transvestite and cross-dreseer friends as "the same" most if they met me woul probably have said girl and maybe 15-20% not.

This one I have lots of experience on. I would suggest you read Stephanie's blog but that would require a little energy on your part and I realize all that activism supporting perverts takes a lot out of you and besides we are required by Black Swan logic that if some idiot says I am a transsexual then they are or basically if they claim to be a horse they are a horse.

Lost in the lunacy brought about by some fruitloop in Hot Springs Arkansas is the fact I ACTUALLY SUPPORT AB433 because I would rather have doctors make the decision rather than politicians.

Elizabeth said...

She Said is trying to post as Brenda Borgue so she can get it comments on my blog. She is moderated and not allowed to comment. Maybe she can get her pal Black Swan to help her.

Stephanie has managed to kind of hijack the thread but Stephanie has a rationale. Stephanie was born in Chester, CA although that might be the incorrect town name. Her first therapist was an alcohol and drug counselor and a simple google will show that.

Stephanie is also suffering from both depression and Schizophrenia based on the medication she said she is taking on her own blog.

In her own words she said her father might have had some blame in her "becoming trans" and these are her words from her blog.

Was it a series of events?
by Stephanie

We all say we were born this way. In my case, there probably is some
truth to that, but I think had my environment been different, I may not
have turned out as trans. And so, here it is, I blame my father some -
what. He was there though out the 16 years that I lived at home, but he
might as well not have been. The only time he paid attention to me
was to punish me. Other than that, nothing. No baseball throwing, no
fishing with me, (we had a 6 acre pond), in fact, I can't remember doing anything together, until I was 13. (more later) My sisters got the attention, I felt non-existent in his eyes. So did that make me think 'girls good, boys bad'? ....
The first memory I have of me and girls clothes has my father involved too. I can remember him yelling at my mother, " You can't let him wear that anymore!" I was, 6 maybe 7 years old. I was wearing what was called a 'sun-suit'. It was a blue and white checked, one piece, bib type, ruffled bottomed, ...sun-suit. My sister had one just like it but it was pink and white. (Pink for girls, blue for boys.) Why couldn't I wear mine? She gets to wear hers. Granted, I was way too old to be wearing it still, but I do know that I loved wearing it, it was about worn out! So, having become the forbidden fruit, (clothes) did that push this trans thing along? I 'd say, it probably did. ....

Stephanie's words speak for Stephanie.

Dana Marie Andra said...

@ Anne ~
Who are you to decide who is and who isn't a women? You seem to have made it your mission in life to deter people from making a wrong decision, and on the surface of it, that would be a noble thing, but you've set yourself up as the last word on who qualifies and who doesn't. It's quite easy to cherry-pick from my comments to arrive at your weak conclusions. By your standards, you either transition early in life, or you're not really a transsexual. There are so many reasons why a person might not transition earlier in life without being disqualified as a transsexual.

"We knew who we were from DAY ONE of our sentient awareness of SELF as opposed to other." This is just hyperbole. No one knows anything from "DAY ONE," because that would mean as soon as you popped out of the womb, you had awareness of self, which isn't possible.

I checked out the links your provided. The "Physician" who woke up screaming after surgery, realizing he'd made a huge mistake, and that he was "maimed." Come on, really? That wasn't me, and that's not me. My treatment and surgery ended my dysphoria in an instant. My body was corrected and I felt at peace. The woman who talked about how it's not worth it to just be able to wear women's clothes. It's not ABOUT wearing women's clothes for me. It NEVER was. The person who looked into her son's eyes and just wanted things to be back the way they were. Sure, I see fathers & sons out and about and feel a sense of nostalgia for that, but my son hasn't rejected me. Things haven't changed between us, and I feel I'm lucky in that regard.

One person wrote:
"What really drove the point home for me was the realization that it required eight hours on an operating table to make my genitalia appear to be female. That pretty much tells me that I’m NOT female at all. If I were female, why wasn’t I born with female genitalia? Sure, there are some intersexed people with ambiguous genitals, but I’m not at all intersexed. My chromosomes are the normal male XY, with absolutely no abnormalities. The reality is that I’m male, and no amount of surgery changes that fact."

I've never heard anything so mixed up. The surgery is about correcting a problem. That this person could get so far only to base her conclusions upon how long she was in surgery is not something I can even begin to relate to. Of course the surgery takes hours. They're transfiguring your penis into a vagina. So if it had taken only 2 hours, would she have felt differently? It just seems that many of the people who regret transitioning simply haven't gone into fully understanding either who they really were, or what the process would entail, or what the costs would be.

And in a youtube interview, Walt Heyer says, "Surgery does not change your gender," that it's only cosmetic. Of course it doesn't, because gender is on the inside. SRS is only corrective surgery that makes ones body congruent with who they feel themselves to be.


Dana Marie Andra

Dana Marie Andra said...

@ Anne ~


The Mike Penner/Christine Daniels story is a sad one, indeed, and it's difficult to say what happened there. I don't think anyone really knows. Did she feel like an outcast among her fellow sports writers?
For whatever reason, he felt his life was working out the way he'd hoped. It seems that some choose to detransition because they feel the cost has been too high -- losing their children, spouses, employment, etc. I've been lucky that my family has been accepting and supportive. The one exception is my ex-wife -- who was my ex well before I decided to transition. She just can't wrap her head around any of it, but our post-divorce relationship remains intact; she just insists upon still using my male name, which really isn't worth fighting over. I haven't lost any friends, either, but even if my friends and family had turned their backs on me, I would still have transitioned, and the on-going pain of having lost them would not make me want to turn back. Besides the physical impossibility of returning to my male persona, the mental and emotional impossibility is even stronger. The idea of be a man again, and dying as a man, is simply unthinkable.

I am a woman, whether you think so or not. And I agree that the "juicy pussy" remark says more about you than anything else. If you think you're performing a service, you're not. You're just spewing venom into an already emotional atmosphere, and while it's good to know that some people regret their decision to transition, it's fair to say that they are in the minority.

Dana Marie Andra

Dana Marie Andra said...

@ Deena ~
You concede that you're not an eloquent writer, but somehow it's my fault that I "can't comprehend some of the points (you) have tried to convey?"

You're obviously not interested in debate or an exchange of ideas, because you're very locked into your tiny box notions of what it means to be transsexual. I think you all found a nice little corner for yourselves where you can preach to a rather insular choir and feel very special about yourselves.

I also doubt very much that you know Calpernia Addams personally. You probably know OF her, but if you knew her, you wouldn't speak so dismissively of her.

Dana Marie Andra

Anne said...

@DMA...Like ALL men, you are smarter than ALL women. It is more than obvious, that YOU in all your "trans"-wisdom know MUCH MORE about being a woman than I do, (I being a mere woman).

Therefore i will defer to your dominant wisdom (gleaned from, how many months post-op?), and concede that your "trans"-wisdom far exceed my 40+ years of lived experience. NOT!!!

TRY learning to read what I write before you build a case on your awkward mis-interpretations.

Anonymous said...

There is more than enough material to be found around the internet concerning Calpernia Addams. Some of it written by Calpernia herself and some of it by others. In forming an opinion about her for good or ill this information is quite adequate as far as I am concerned.

Speaking of internet information there is quite sufficient contained in what you write here yourself Dana Marie Android as well as your picture to form an opinion about you. I do not wish to know further so please do not attempt to foist additional BS on me.

What you people fail to grasp is that we do not speak to you or for you but too those who arrive looking for kindred spirits. What does the fact that you do not find a kindred spirit here tell you? Yep that's right, you are not a kindred spirit. Yet you come and you read and you comment. Why? Is it to change our opinions of people like you or is it to attempt to mix it with those you fantasise about? Women who have indeed completed a change you have failed to get past first base with?

Feeling angry now? Well perhaps now you begin to grasp how we feel when fake transsexuals parade themselves around the media and public arena's claiming conditions they clearly do not have and have never experienced.

I do not hate you, we do not hate you and were you all to adopt a different attitude and be honest with yourselves and to the rest of the world you would certainly get a different reaction from most if not all of us who have indeed endured and moved past transition. Maybe that is a part of the issue, You cannot move any further forward than you have so far.


Miz Know-It-All said...

@Dana Marie Andra,

Step back from the vitrol for a second if you will...

What I and others here have been saying, and that you are not hearing is that the bar to living successfully is not just high... It's damn high!

So ignoring the whole lived till you were 50 as a man and your body shows it, while you may feel yourself to be female, while you may have a shiny brand new innie, it really counts for less than naught if the real world doesn't agree with you in that 20th of a second it takes anyone to sex you.

This post started out about the CA law rewrite and it still is believe it or not! Women are held to a different scale than men and when you step foot out that door it really doesn't matter one iota at all what "your papers say" it's what the world says back to you...

That is why we, well me, I'm pissed... I did what it took to clear that bar no matter how high the price to me, and I'm NOT talking about money though there was a lot of that too! Yet even now I still work at bettering it every single day! The world of women is a harsh one one of nuance and rules and I have yet to meet man one who has the tinyest clue about it...

Yet right now in Providence Town there are close to a thousand balding fat middle aged men in dresses prancing round the town thinking because for one week the folks in that one town are willing to smile while they take their money hand over fist. So the rest of the world must also be all sugar and lace and "accepts" them as women! In fact I can say with assuredy. At this "convention" without even checking the program there are at least a half a dozen of if not more 401 K deleting doctors who for the price of a new condo will gladly sew a twat boobs or face on a watermelon and call it miss if given the chance!

So believe what you will it matters not to me... But let me ask you this?

When YOU walk into a room, are the men undressing you with their eyes or are they trying to put more clothes onto you!


Oh btw, can't speak for Deena but a very dear friend of mine knows Cal far better than she wishes she did and she says Cal is gutter trash...

Miz Know-It-All said...

@ Liz

Hey! Just for fun what's say we actually talk about the original post! Should be fun if for no other reason than to derail this bizarr comments stream...

Doctors VS Politicos...

You know it's not often that I disagree with you Liz but on this one I think I do... and here is the reason... Maybe once upon a time there were other doctors such as Benjamin who looked at both the parts and the sum of "the community" with open and compassionate eyes but I fear that they are becoming rather rare... At least in my experience the nonsensical dogma of Doctor Julie Serano has become the scale that we are all measured upon! So now any damn fool who walks in the door and says they are a woman... well they are! That they lived for 50-60 years with no problem being a man matters not! That they started by crossdressing and that they are in the middle of some personal crisis that trips the trigger but which could be treated is now told to "go for it!" That matters not. All that matters is they show up at least once in a skirt and say they want to be called Francine and poof (pun quite intended) they are a woman and here are your papers to prove it!

It seems that Autumn had no problem getting the paper that says she is a girl even if the doctor says that they were sent by "accident" and there will be others, lots and lots of others! How long do you think it will take for word to spread in "the community" about which doctors to go see to get your paperwork without any surgery or even thoughts of surgery!

A week? a day? Ten minutes ago?

Now don't get me wrong... the politicos are damn near as bad! If it gets them votes as it does in Texas, Tennessee, Ohio and Idaho, then even if you walk on water and heal the sick you can't possibly be a woman if you were not born with an innie!

But on the other hand, politicos when they are functioning correctly do tend to reflect their constituents which is why the laws on paperwork were changed in 47 states but with caveots such as surgery... proof if you will that one is seriously headed towards a real correction and not some gender limbo...

Hummmm Darn it! See? I'm no fun! Seems I can and do make a case for and against both...So Liz, tell me why do you think the doctors better guardians of the door than politicos?


Anne said...

Thank YOU, Miz M'KIA!

Deena said...

@ Dana Marie Andra. I seem to recall that it was you who brought Calpernia into the conversation. All I said was that if I wanted her opinion I would call her. That is not dismissive, its a fact.

You are obviously very intelligent because you picked up on the fact that I am not interested in debating with you. Your world of Tattoo's and patting yourself on the back when someone says ma'am to you is indeed foreign territory to me. Has it ever occurred to you that women expect to be addressed as miss or ma'am and do not see it as something noteworthy?

But we could talk about the topic of this thread which is California law and not your agenda. I used to live in California but I don't live there now. As a former citizen of that state I agree with Liz that licensed physicians should be the determining authority on correcting birth certificates even though it may be occasionally abused and lead to certain absurdities.

In my opinion it really doesn't matter if someone obtains a fraudulent bc. It doesn't matter simple because in their daily life the people they come in contact with recognize what they are and don't ever ask to see a legal document. If you don't believe me then I suggest you spend some time watching all the youtube videos where self promoting freaks get immediately clocked. You know, the ones with male mannerisms, gravely voices praising themselves for their womanly accomplishments.

@ MKIA. Please don't trash Calpernia. I have great respect for her efforts on behalf of both transsexual people and the GLBT crowd. I don't always agree with her perspectives but she is a very fair-minded and forthright person. And she didn't ask to be brought into this thread. DMA did that in a typical tactic of appeal to a higher authority.

Stephanie said...

I said I wasn't coming back here, but it seems I'm still attacked even once I leave. To those of you who read Elizabeth's re-posting of the start of one of my blogs, 'The Prequel', please read the rest and the other one 'Just Stephanie'. Then and only then should there be comments about me.

Elizabeth said...


I totally agree with you. They should read it all like I have and make their own mind up. It is a very interesting read filled with quite clear examples of your overall depression and schizophrenia.

Do I have reservations about my own perceptions? Actually I always do but denying any need for surgery or any desire for surgery and then making the same claim that despite your penis and balls you are female and a women like many sisters on here is well troublesome and removes reservations.

Transvestites like their penis and well to be blunt I have never met a transsexual that wanted their penis. It may be the only black and white issue I believe in other than a possible medical exemption.

Simply put you first post is something that would make pathetic little John Money have an orgasm. We do not "learn" to be transsexual. We are not "pushed" into transsexualism". We do not "decide" to become transsexual." We just are and it is because we are simply born that way.

Regardless of what you say after that first post you have labeled yourself a fetish transvestite. In your world it was the cloths. In a transsexuals world it is the pain of the dichotomy of what is between our legs and our brain sex.

Personally I do not care if you want to keep your penis and live as a woman and I pray you stay safe but without that vagina you will always be a man because after all the mental gymnastics it really does come down to the simple concept of penetration.

Stephanie said...

I never denied my need for surgery. In fact I state my need over and over again. Starting when I was maybe 10 or so with tying my penis to a doorknob and slamming the door, I tried many times to try and rid myself of it. I hated it then and always will.
Transvestites do love their penis and would never take hormones and risk loosing erections. If I would have wanted to keep mine, I never would have started on hormone therapy.

You can find fault with me no matter what I say or what anyone says disagreeing with you. That makes you look like you put yourself above others, nobody is above others.

If as you claim you are and always have been a true woman, why is your blog named, Notes from the 'T' side?

You see, I can be just like you in finding fault with you by using your own words.

Elizabeth said...


Why is my blog named as it is? You actually think that is finding fault?

ROFLMAO. I explained that a long time ago but here goes again. My blog was about my early experiences in life as a child and well "Notes from the Sea Side" seemed not to fit and neither did "Notes from the Tee Side" since I do love the sea and I was an accomplished golfer so choosing T verses "Notes from the Transsexual Side" which did not have a ring to it.

I just point at your own words in your prequel and what you said on this blog post where you denigrated those who have had surgery as having nothing more than well you know what you said.

Now do me a favor and leave. Please just go away.

Anonymous said...

@Elizabeth (part 1),

There isn’t a “c” in my name but your close. I love your blog so addictive and full of conflict theory. I got a five down for this thread exceeding 200 posts.

I don’t know if your aware but most interface handheld device systems ( computers laptops, notepads and PDAs) I know of in So. California are wireless now and all wireless device signals i.e. Verizon are going out from a single server farm. Would that mean the ISP code is going to be the same? You may be confusing me with someone else again.

I’m going to speak to this post topic not from the point of view of should it pass or not (it has already) but my focus will be legislative intent and unpredictable consequence and predictable benefits. Now my history as a lowly little (pun not intended) paralegel I could clearly see how AB433 would benefit the children, yet your legal commentator(s) Andrea Rosenfield, “Get your calls letters in opposition to AB-433 in to the Governor's office, like YESTERDAY, urging a VETO” Followed by a long queue of letter writing support, and even if you didn’t oppose what Andrea and the rest said in opposition to AB433 it equates to agreement to VETO the bill.

In equity the new law creates a stream lined process for changing your BC, with a doctors letter only needed, which the younger TS/TG children can benefit from making it easier on insurance and ID documentation. Yet because of your blinded anger and myopic vitriol against the those of whom you consider do not pass (pun intended) muster, vis. Autumn Sandeen, to your high standard of womanhood you rallied against unwittingly to the effect of almost shooting their future in the foot. You don’t get a PASS for your cowardly crawfish backstopping. For civility sake Andrea should know better as a lawyer in her analysis of the bill, but earns points for her retract.

You all may need to review your shameful conversations here:


Anonymous said...

@Elizabeth (part 2),
Now for convenience you have to take a couple ideas under advisement that are parallel to our civil advancement legislatively, with race and gender rights; the feminist movement “in fact, the high standing of women in our civilization not only long predates feminist ideology but it logically incompatible with it. You’ll have to take that under faith less I hijack the thread in another direction. I’m not a radical feminist, and feel men are an integral part of society sans the unintended outcome of misandry from the feminist movement to render men obsolete. In reviewing it I know feminism doesn’t like opposition or contrary authority at all; the male point of view is kryptonite. Anything we argue here legislatively has to take into account the male point of view, vis. F2M reality because the law effects them as well.

I’ve see from their writings that the young and beautiful transsexual woman is a threat to feminist ideological power, not being able to bare children, have only love, respect and affection to offer a man as a bargaining chip--I could be wrong, but note that modern genetic woman have used sexual extortion and their ability to conceive to shackle men, bankrupting them in divorce court with a no fault system. That love, respect and affection would be welcome in light of the way men have been treated by women. To my mind, the most remarkable feature of this revolution we have undergone is the time lag between the changes in woman’s behavior and changes in men’s attitudes toward them. Men still believe, or have an emotional need to believe in the inherent virtue or innocence of women, and many of us are all to eager to cater to that patriarchal desire, denied from it ourselves, that no wonder feminism sees this as a threat to the point in the 1970‘s a movement to declare transsexual women “men invading a women‘s spaces“ vis. The writings of Janise Raymond and the genocide effect. Suzan of Woman Born Transsexual is soon to begrudgingly admit her silent complicity, as she watched the mainstream feminist then, now minority and reactionary radfem groups, exclude and marginalize women born transsexual in an conference that can only be characterized with righteous indignation and “Mein Kampf” like vitriol. Feminism will not get a PASS for that either.

As usual your too busy calling for the barn door to be shut long after the horse has run off. To effectuate the rescue of the young transsexuals your going to have to allow those horses to be run amuck. Please tell me you see this!? Society will take care of the unwanted behaviors outside of Halloween. THIS IS A RESCUE MISSION--Not a war.

This in turn involves relative independence, action, and competition in the larger impersonal society outside the family, cooperation between the two groups are needed or we will parish.


Anonymous said...

@Elizabeth (part 3),

Sadly, there however is a conflating factor that has to be looked at. Envy. Both Early Transitioners (ET) and Late Transitioners (LT) sense that the ET has a natural primacy over the LT. Relative Transition (RT) is a huge contention between the two groups; RT = age of awareness, opportunity and recourses versus opposition to task. One sign of ET primacy is that envy of the LT position is virtually nonexistent -- even, so far as I know, even amongst the cisgender.

The LT response to the primacy of the ET advantages, the LT covets the external rewards attached to the ET’s successful performance; social status, recognition, power, wealth, and the chance to control their destiny directly (rather than be supported and subsidized). The ET tends not to give much thought to RT as an issue of luck, yet instead conflates their position as that of “special” or “privileged” or “more authentic” thereby derivation speaking the speech but with righteous indignation proffering their entitlement to and a priori standard of “I’m better than you.” Even to the point of myopia to the sadness and suffering of the LT who receives no compassion nor sympathy from the ET, yet condemnation such as “Untermenshen.” That is what leads the LT into the spiritual cul de sac of envy.

Let us consider next what envy is. First, it involves a painful awareness of something good or desirable in another person. This much it has in common with emulation. The emulator, however, is primarily concerned with self-improvement. Envy has a fundamentally negative character; it wants to bring the other down rather than raise itself up. The envier usually does not admit that explicitly but rather claims to have been cheated, whether by the envied party or by the surrounding society: he disguises his envy as a zeal for justice. Often she claims to want to compete on a level playing field, but maintains that competition has been "fixed."

Envy, however, is distinct from the sense of justice in being fundamentally unappeasable. The righteously indignant person genuinely wants to come to a settlement. By contrast, if the envied party grants what the envier demands, it merely further demonstrates his superiority and provokes more envy. One reason the LT (TG’s if you will) have gotten as far as they have is that many ET are untroubled by envy themselves. These ET cannot understand the psychology behind the suffering LT. With a lack of sincere caring about the LT and wishing to promote their welfare, they waste effort on futile attempts to reason (judgments and unprofessional diagnosis, vis. CasandraSpeaks/Evengelina Carters) your “not authentic” or compromise to find a common ground. Instead we have a feud that keeps fanning the flames, holding the entire movement back because the ET cannon imagine even a limited concessions, which might persuade the cisgender to conflate them as equal to you because of RT.

Now these are huge generalities of thought but I’m really speaking to you Liz. In practice, since the LT/TG can never be the equal, in your mind, to an authentic (ET) female role, LT/TG concentrates their efforts upon sabotaging that role. In other words, because LTs cannot level up, she contents herself as best she can with leveling down. So the practical consequence, in your mind, of the TG political power is to make it impossible for women of transsexual history to "do their thing" (fulfill their role). Yet you offer zero evidence to this effect, relying on emotionalism and name calling (the lowest form of argumentation), to this effect in practice and at the same time, unaware your sabotaging the future of the young TS/TG children.

Your intentions are in the right place but useless with your inflated ego on your high horse. If you believe in equality for some and not others you don’t believe in equality at all.


Dana Marie Andra said...

I'm not going to spend anymore energy here. What compelled me to step into this discussion was the vehemence with which the bulk of you tend to dismiss so many transsexuals as delusional fetishists and fakers. Never in all my research and reading had I ever encountered such a body of bitterly elitist

"Step back from the vitrol for a second if you will..."

Me? Really? I've kept my remarks calm and civil, merely countering what I believe to be half-baked and poor sussed arguments. I've intentionally refrained from indulging any degree of genuine vitriol. I've left that to the rest of you.

"But let me ask you this? When YOU walk into a room, are the men undressing you with their eyes or are they trying to put more clothes onto you!"

Again, is it really about how hot one looks? How attractive one is? This is the mark of being a true woman? How can I take anything you say seriously when you believe that the test of being a real woman is whether or not men want to see her naked?

I did not come here seeking kindred spirits. From the very beginning I knew that would be difficult to find here.

and Anne ~
I never claimed to be smarter than you, or to have a greater wisdom, but 40 years of experience don't necessarily bestow one with genuine wisdom, either.
If it did, you would know that your extremely short and strange list of criteria that you believe entitles one to consider themselves a true woman betrays you as a very small-minded person. Wisdom is supposed to broaden the mind. It has not done that for you.

Dana Marie Andra

Elizabeth said...


Reading comprehension as usual is not your strong point. Let me set you straight.

1. I support AB 433 and streamlining the process.

2. I support the removal of anyone having the right to prevent someone from having their BC changed if they have a notarized letter from a doctor.

What you consider shameful comments about Sandeen I consider a statement of fact. Anyone that claims they would not want SRS because they prefer the lower maintenance of a penis is not on my radar as a positive influence for anyone. But then that is my opinion.

Unlike you I actually read a persons blog before making a comment about them. If I am incorrect I will amend comments. You and I will always disagree about some things such as transgender including transsexual because it only benefits the transgender crowd not the transsexuals.

I realize you need to keep on good terms with the transgender crowd to keep business flowing to the Dominatrix part of your existence so I understand.

What you fail to realize and continue to ignore is that quite simply I support most late transitioners. My issues are usually the late transitioners that arrive and know everything about transsexualism and what it means to be a female and a woman. They are clueless as I was when i was pre-operative but I admit it.

If I criticize one it is based on their writings or comments. When someone describes themselves as a transvestite then well I take them at their initial word. One does not "learn" to be transsexual.

It may be a personal weakness but when people take shots at me I am not one to verbally turn the cheek and if that bothers you then start your own blog. For some reason you think that because I confront one person it means I confront all of that ilk. That is the great weakness of ideologues like you and those that believe the mantra "we are all the same" which is folly.

In part 2 your comments about women etc. are highly misinformed at least when it comes to divorce and issues women in general deal with. If you have issues with the WBT transsexual blog take it up with her and leave it off my blog. Susan can handle someone like you in her sleep. I am not a lesbian nor do I have any issues or care one bit about what happens in that realm.

I have stated many times I am not better than anyone. I was born transsexual and I was cured. At first i was a little girl after SRS and I grew into a woman from my life experiences.

You think that having a penis does not exclude one from being a woman. I do if SRS is not the goal. Unfortunately for you the jury has been in on that for quite a long time. I am correct and you are wrong.

Yes, I am sick of reading of some clown that puts on a dress and claims they understand what it means to be a woman. They do not although you seem to think they do.

As for the LT that you seem to believe I hate universally well you might want to rethink that one. I do have issues with fools of any ilk that spout some blind dogma that is really meant to support cross-dressers and transvestites and not help transsexuals.

You might want to run down to the WPATH site and scream at then. Since they got rid of the previous asshole WPATH now uses transsexual, transgender, and gender diverse and not just transgender. It does seem the real world is coming to grips with the fact transsexuals are different than the transgender crowd. Even the gender variant want nothing to do with the transgender crowd.

I disagree with you but I do respect your right to your opinion of me even if it is wrong. Please do me the favor of not posting comments that are your personal rants about things other than what the current post is about.

Elizabeth said...


Actually the first thing needed to be considered a woman is a vagina unless it is medically impossible. If there are no comments or blogs where they contradict what they claim then I have no issue with them.

Anyone that instantly claims womanhood just because they have transitioned is a fool. Learning the role of women in society is part of the process of becoming a woman. That role may be diverse and in many ways is a cultural phenomenon.

I do find the irony that only men with a penis think they are entitled to be called a woman because they are perceived as one by some. Sorry but the female/women's club is closed to anyone with a penis that medially could get rid of it. After all to a MTF transsexual it is something none of us asked for or wanted.

I do find it weird how any woman other than an FTM would want a penis but then men do like to get their own way.

I do wish you happiness and honestly I have no idea whether you have or have not had surgery because I find your comments uninformative so I guess I will need to painfully read your comments.

Just remember one simple truth. It was your decision to read and comment.

Elizabeth said...

@All of you

Please keep your screeds to yourself. I can be boring enough myself but I do not enjoy being bored by others on my own blog. BlackSwan has a penchant for this.

Anonymous said...


Point for point, on topic of your post “The truth About California Bill AB433” I assume this discussion is THE (key term) not YOUR truth about the bill. If we are being intellectually honest--the bill has past already and arguments are closed to the subject matter. Given this I will refute some of your statements.

“I support AB 433 and streamlining the process.” Your lying if you feel that Autumn Sandeen isn’t allowed to change her birth certificate. Look at the 209 comments. What do yours say?

“What you consider shameful comments about Sandeen I consider a statement of fact. Anyone that claims they would not want SRS because they prefer the lower maintenance of a penis is not on my radar as a positive influence for anyone. But then that is my opinion.” AB433 makes not one statements of operative status or genital configuration only that “clinically appropriate treatment.” administered by a doctor (NOT YOU) if Ms. Sandeen has meet these requirements she is entitled to the benefit of changing her BC. If you disagree with Autumn Sandeen, by proxy you disagree with the law.

“…business flowing to the Dominatrix part of your existence so I understand.” Irrelevant! An Ad Hominem completely off topic and immaterial to the subject matter. I’m not a Dominatrix, please stop bringing my personal life here.

“What you fail to realize and continue to ignore is that quite simply I support most late transition.” You need to qualify this to “late transition[ers]“ that you approve of. Since your not an MD your invalidating the Dx of other MDs to posters (i.e. Stephanie) in this thread--do not diagnose unless you have the credentials to do so. Do you?

“WBT transsexual blog” it was only used as a reference in light of my argument for the possible reasons way others are so myopic not to see the outcome.

“I have stated many times I am not better than anyone.” BUSTED!! “ I may be blunt yes a transsexual is both different and better than a transvestite because we have and can be cured.” Now if you being honest you didn’t say your better directly to someone else, but it carries the same weight if you’re a white person talking about a black person saying “White” is better than “Black” because…. Your also implying that a transvestite is sick or a fetish is a disease. Are you diagnosing again without a license?

Crash and burn again!


Anonymous said...


“You think that having a penis does not exclude one from being a woman. I do if SRS is not the goal.” You can change the phrase to You think that having a vagina does not exclude one from being a men. I do if SRS is not the goal. Your lack intellectual discipline (and honesty) when I clearly stated that you must view AB433 in light of the M2F reality. The form of your genitals is not relevant in the context of AB433 if your being intellectually honest and not inserting your opinion of the validity of a doctors diagnosis.

“"[To Dana] ]Actually the first thing needed to be considered a woman is a vagina unless it is medically impossible. If there are no comments or blogs where they contradict what they claim then I have no issue with them." Again you can change the same phrase to the M2F reality. Blog history isn’t relevant nor reliable to diagnosis. Are you playing doctor again?


Elizabeth said...


I have said I am not better than any other transsexual. When it comes to matters involving a transvestite I am better and I stand by that because I can be and have been cured. They have a fetish according to all medical professionals and they ARE NOT my equal nor any transsexuals equal in anything involving rights except in matters of safety. If that bothers you then may I suggest you stop reading this blog.

Transsexuals ARE NOT the same as transvestites and cross-dressers and any claim but some nitwit like you does not change the facts.

As a human being I have no more intrinsic value that any other human being but when it comes to gender issues there is a dramatic difference between transsexuals and the transgender crowd representing your transvestite friends.

Your problem is you see equality and not difference between transsexuals and transvestites. You seem to think that gives you high ground but it does not. It just makes you a tool of the transvestites.

As for Sandeen she may or may not be able to have her birth certificate changed under the new California Law. If it happens then good for her but she will still have a penis and lesbians will deny her and the only men that would care are tranny chasers so that is not much of a life. In my eyes the penis makes her questionable.

The term "late transition" is correct in the context of its usage because the sentence construct implies plurality.

I do need to say I am appalled by your White Black analogy which is a classic reductio ad absurdum which is a form of argument in which a proposition is disproved by following its implications logically to an absurd consequence.

As for transvestism it is considered a fetish rather you want to admit to it or not. Whether I fully agree with that statement, even though I made it, is open to some conjecture on my part but the simple truth is there is NO CURE for transvestism and some in an attempt to cure themselves trend into believing they are transsexual and thus we have "we are equals" loons like yourself.

We are neither the same, equal, nor alike and other safety in public we have not one single legal need in common. This is your failing. You wish to drag transsexuals down to the level of acceptance that transvestites have in society. I find that offensive.

I do judge those that have self identified as transvestites in their own words and if you find that an issue then I suggest you stop reading this blog and take your bullshit elsewhere.

If you believe that young transsexuals are benefited by being equated with transvestites then you are morally bankrupt but then your own words speak don't they? You seem to enjoy comparing apples and oranges and then claiming they are the same and equal. That is absurd as in reductio ad absurdum.

Anne said...

@Black Swan...Huh?

@DMA...Like I said, your wisdom is only exceeded by your good looks. I stand duly chastized for being such a " very small-minded person", and truly dwarfed and shamed by your overwhelming and feminine magnificense....NOT!

Dana Marie Andra said...

@ Elizabeth ~
I'm glad to know that you support late transition, as it would seem some of the others commenting here do not.

For the record, I am post-op, and very happily so. As you say, I am cured of my dysphoria. I consider my body to be congruent inside and out ... finally.

I personally can't relate to someone who is transsexual yet willingly chooses not to have SRS, but that's their decision.

Dana Marie Andra

Anonymous said...



In a jury trial you just lost, using your own words. Since your don’t have the fear of being judged by anyone I’ll will not take advantage of it.

For the argument reductio ad absurdum there is a requirement for you to show a false dichotomy. If you don’t the mirror image rule applies to my example and since there isn‘t a relationship analysis Post hoc ergo propter hoc cannot be used either. Again you fail--don’t think I’m going to let you slither out of that one. The term “Better Than” was used by you. Your absurd comment is very clear by inference.

True what you actually said was an absolute statement, “I have stated many times I am not better than anyone.” Anyone? it’s a word like never and always. Again you have lost all credibility. You identify as that which you claim is “better than” TG, TV or CD. Again you fail.

Liz don’t confuse the term Equity which means fairness to equals “=“ sign. In the context of my statement it means fairness. The differences between a transsexual and TG (some refer to as full-time transvestites) whether they are equal or not has nothing to do with fairness. You understand don’t you or are your relying on your short feathers, I riled up for calling you on your obvious lie, to make your decisions for you.

You rely more on the psychological impact of the term “fetish” than what it actually means to make an even more absurd comment, illuminated in a moment. Its merely the opposite of a phobia; its not abnormal. You want the reader to believe it equates to criminal or ne'er-do-well when it actually is part of the human condition. Your exculpatory reasoning falls flat to show nefarious intent.


Anonymous said...


Your absurd comment, “You wish to drag transsexuals down to the level of acceptance that transvestites have in society,” which I have never said nor done. What makes you believe your above (up) someone else? What does this mean other than pure elitism, "I'm better than them?" by inference. I literally physically look down on 99% of society, it grants me a lot of power and celebrity just being this way, yet I don’t look down on people the way you do--it doesn't make more righteous, superior, or better than.

All that you need do to find the morally bankrupt is look in the mirror--the person that feels morally superior is morally bankrupt. It falls into a place of humility not with smug hubris in the way your using it. “As a human being I have no more intrinsic value than any other human being,” yet you use value driven terms and you did say your “better than” a transvestite didn’t you?

Nothing I have said places me in a position of high ground “You seem to think that gives you high ground but it does not.” We are talking about fairness. I’m the first to say that transsexual are different from the transgender, intersexed, transvestite, cross-dresser. Their medical needs are different, we have different clothing sizes, take different types of hormones, have different surgeries and different, different, different, different everything ad absurdum. However, the law we’re talking about and what I’m talking about refers fairness. Not equals.


Anne said...


Anne said...

" How long do you think it will take for word to spread in "the community" about which doctors to go see to get your paperwork without any surgery or even thoughts of surgery!" ~M'KIA

Well...Perhaps this might answer your question....

"I nervously told her I was a male to female transgender person and had been referred to the doctor by my psychologist.
She was great. She calmly asked me if my interest was in hormones and how far along was I in my transition process. I calmed down and told her all I could.
As she asked about how I was planning to pay and other questions, she mentioned an appointment was in limbo for a short time as the doctor's whole practice was changing.
It turns out the practice is changing from family based care to one totally based on transgender, gay and lesbian health care. In fact the doctor has been so busy he is adding a partner.
Once again I witnessed how different I'm not. The transgendered population is opening the door and exploring life in their chosen gender!" ~Chrysti's Condo

Elizabeth said...


I said “ I may be blunt yes a transsexual is both different and better than a transvestite because we have and can be cured.”

You then made the analogy that what I said was similar to a white person saying they are better than a black person which is what I said it was.

I am referencing the simple fact we are better because we can be cured. The implication is that in some ways it is actually harder to be a transvestite. I realize reading comprehension was never high on you "to do" list when your mind was already made up but you should try it some time.

I am rather amused because you feel I and other transsexuals have a duty and a moral obligation to fight for equal rights and the equality of transvestites. Just what rights and what equality and fairness or whatever is this for.

It is a right in the USA to be safe from harm so I believe nobody should face discrimination because they are a transvestite or cross-dresser at home or go out publicly and trouble ensues.

Where else do we have anything in common? Transvestites are certainly not women and do not have any right to be addressed using female pronouns.

Transvestites should not have the right to work en-femme when they feel like and thus should not have on the job protection.

Transvestites should not be able to change their birth certificates nor any other documents because they have no intention permanently living as such.

We could go on and on I am sure. In all honesty I have no hate for transvestites although if you have read this blog you know I was hurt badly by one when lied to. Transvestites are really good at using people and particularly women. They like to play the part but not pay the dues.

My opinions of people such as Sandeen are based off her remarks and positions and my opinion is more valid on my blog than that of someone like you because well it is my blog. "I want to keep my penis for ease of maintenance" is possibly the funniest and must ludicrous comment ever by anyone claiming to be transsexual. That was also the other irony which you ignore. Sandeen is transsexual when she wants to change her birth certificate but "transgender forever" otherwise.

Not only to assholes like you want to redefine what constitutes the sexual characteristics of a female but you are attempting to equate your transvestite friends with transsexuals in some perverse belief that "fairness" requires transsexuals to somehow support sameness for transvestites.

Now in your case I truly understand why you would prefer the company of transvestites and you and I both know why that is as you look down on all of us with your sense of power as you say. Other than the fact I know you could beat the crap out of me when i figure out what power you have maybe I can stop laughing.

If I thought you had any honesty I would simply suggest you and your transvestite pals tell the world that all this "transgender" legal bullshit is just an attempt to make transvestism mainstream. Why not tell the public that transgender really means transvestite and cross-dresser. Wow, I bet that would get you assholes a lot of "good" publicity.

Elizabeth said...


Chrysti is a cross-dresser and has been one for a long time. He recently decided to start hormones for some reasoning that escaped me but to be honest I doubt he has any intention of surgery.

Anne said...

Elizabeth. I make no claim to understanding the motivations f me who like to play dress-up or "pretend women". I posted that quote in answer to M'KIA's question as to, " How long do you think it will take for word to spread in "the community" about which doctors to go see to get your paperwork without any surgery or even thoughts of surgery!"

It seems the doctors today are so pressed for cash, they will go for the $$$. It seems that there is plenty for the moment in some people's 401ks.

Anonymous said...


I’m not aware of any of my male friends as cross-dressers, so I don’t believe I have any “friends” who are transvestites. I am aware that many transgender folks take hormones and have various surgeries sans SRS.

I personally don’t know the intentions of most transvestites or cross-dressers legally. I do know that a transgender person who is undergoing some form of medical supervision and treatment should be entitled to change their legal documentation to transition if they choose to.

For me it wasn’t a choice. I had to.

What’s your point?


Elizabeth said...


Typical obfuscation of what transgender really means. Why would a member of your transgender community need to change documents if they are not transsexual? Are the people you are talking about transsexuals or not.

What need would a transvestite have for document changes? Are we to supply them with a separate set of documents so they can be female one day and another set of documents for their male side.

I was under the assumption that gender diverse did not need documentation changes. If I am incorrect I stand corrected.

I would ask you to elaborate but that might result in another 3 post screed.

Anonymous said...

What about all those SheMales with their stand-up 7" neo-clits? Are they "women" too? Does having had a pair of double "DD"s installed qualify as "appropriate medical treatment"? What about testosteone injections for "performance" purposes?

Does that "qualify"?


Anonymous said...


Lets take a step back for a moment, and stop fighting each other, because we seem to have a disagreement on the meaning of terms. Since this is your blog I’ll let you define them and I’ll see what I can put together as a response to your request for me to elaborate. Please correct me?

A transvestite (TV) is temporary; a part time activity. Yes or no? Is a transgender (TG) person just a full time transvestite in your definition of the term? Is a TV the same as a TG?

I was under the impression that a TG is different from the TV and TS in that it’s a place in the middle that doesn’t quite fit the gender binary.

TS is a permanent condition, persistent and not to be conflated under a TG definition? A TS fits within the gender binary. Yes or no?

Is there a gender binary prejudice in your reasoning?

I think you know me well enough to know were I fit in. I have a new friend who is taller than I am now when they were 14 years old. I have to look up to her. She’s is very pretty and transitioned at 20 in college--she is full time and doesn’t have an issue with her height. OK I’ll stop complaining about it. (giggle).


Elizabeth said...


Where in the name of god did you come up with that concept for TG.

The new version of what transgender means was transsexual, transvestite, crossdresser, and gender variant. We do not believe transsexuals belongs there which means transvestite, crossdresser, and gender variant are still part of that lump.

There is no definition nor is there or has there ever been a usage that defines TG as some place in the middle that is not in the gender binary or some fluid version of sex and gender. They are under the gender variant term and have lately been identified by a Q in LGBTQ because they do not want to be under transgender either.

Transsexuals are under the sex binary since gender depending upon the culture may be quite fluid. I do fail to see why or even how someone not defined under the binary system is of any consequence under AB 433. AB 433 is designed for the binary F and M. There is NO third sex or 4th or whatever.

The problem is society has mixed up the meaning of sex and gender when describing the sex characteristics of a male and female. Gender is actually cultural but that is another discussion.

I find your version of TG kind of a dichotomy. If your new friend is presenting as female and they are genetically male with no intention or desire for SRS that is not some third gender. It is what a transvestite or cross-dresser is.

Lord are they now trying to redefine TV/CD so they are some third sex or gender?

I do have a question for you about this. How do you transition to a third sex or third gender?

Anne said...

ACtually Liz, I do beleive that IS the end goal as has been accomlished in various parts of the "old UK".

India/Pakistan and australia come immeditely to mind.

The scary part is thatthee oolsare trying to drag R/D Ts's along with them to provdie medical sustanence.

Miz Know-It-All said...

Did this insane thread derail finally expire? Oh God I hope so! So back to topic... Please? With sugar and cream on top?

Doctors vs politicos...

On the whole I would agree with you Liz were it not for the fact that dispensing with a set threshold opens the door further to the institutionalization of the wacky gender continuum nonsense. Look it only takes one screw ball/loose cannon doc to really crap up the mix... Which is why some fifty odd years after John Money and his fake data were tossed on their collective ear I open forms at the DMV and see "gender" used where the intent is "sex." I fear the same thing is happening with Dr Serano's "Cis" which you and I both know less than one person in twenty understands as she used it, but which has not stopped the other 19 from bandying it about as it were the word from on high, what ever the heck it means! Look back to this very thread and the way that DMA citing GLAAD to us as the penultimate arbiter of terms without knowing squat about Sadeen and what lies behind Sandeens machinations!

So does any of that matter on out there in the one to one, doctor patient basis? It really shouldn't but I fear it will... Having taught far too many med students over the years and having worked for two decades side by side with them in the profession I know all too well, that while most MD's are really great people they're still people and every last one of them is drowning in data and patients as well as patience ... They just don't have the time to suss out what is and is not real... "Get em in, get em out and hope for the best" sadly is the medical mantra of the new century...

So yes.... on one hand this does stand to improve the lives of those who would use the tools appropriately but are they not far outnumbered by those who would and will game the system for their own selfish self interests deluded or otherwise... Then what? What do you think will happen when the Politicos are drug back into the picture by an outraged constituency confronted with the now legal women who still possess things that no woman ever possesses?

This is not a perfect world and I guess bottom line I fear the back lash from that more than I fear having a difficult for some to reach standard...

Anne said...

Well said M'Kia. Thank you for putting it in PLAIN ENGLISH w/o all the "baffling BS."

Elizabeth said...


It is quite simple actually. It is now the law and according to the rule of law we play within those boundaries. If those in California want to change the law then they have methodologies available.

Will Sandeen ever be considered female by anyone that knows the truth? Absolutely not. A dress and the deliberate retention of a penis equates to a man.

There is always the possibility that the big one will hit in California and it will drop into the Pacific Ocean but I do not see this is the end of the world. People have been abusing all systems for years.

Sandeen had a foolish doctor give her a letter that would have played the system as it is currently set up. I think the number of crackpot doctors is lower than the number of crackpot politicians.

After all who are they really fooling other than themselves? Who does a man in a dress with a penis relate to other than a man in a dress with a penis or possibly a wife they have shafted. Do you honestly believe any of those fools will not be pointed out?

It might be advantageous in the long run. The backlash could be interesting but it is up to the citizens of California to fight this.

Dana Marie Andra said...

@ Miz-think-you-know-everything ~

I never mentioned GLAAD in any of my comments.

I've heard of Sandeen in passing, but didn't know she'd only had an orchiectomy as opposed to SRS. Removing ones testicles, in my opinion, doesn't achieve anything more than negating the need for Spironolactone. This would have been, for me, a lot of pain and healing for nothing. The reasons she gives for her decision ~ troublesome gastric bypass surgery, having to dilate, and being bi-polar ~ all seem like excuses, and if she's calling it SRS, then that's just incorrect, or an outright lie.

Dana Marie Andra

Anne said...

Finally. To he meat of the probema. Until and unless there is an "incident" which cannot be buried or "spun" to he TG tune and/or advantage, no "citizen" of California will step up.

Fully enfranchised and assimilated post-op women would not. They cannot without exposure. Religious groups that might find this law, and/or men with female documentation offensive, would be instantly demonized with the usual onslaught of hysterical memes of trans/homo-phobia.

Politico's are already so far up that liberal trough that they are totally bought and paid for, so who is left. No one. We have all already left.

Amber Anne Powell said...

A lot of anger and irritation here. This topic always seems to elicit strong opinions which is not surprising as it is intensely personal and for many, intrinsic to their sense of themselves. I most definetly understand some part of the narrative for those who transitioned young. Their are others though and here is where I would like to ask a question should anyone have the patiencel to answer. I am what many call a late transitioner". I live full time as a female these last six months and willingly gave up my old life to do so. I am not pathetic, I dont feel sorry for myself, I support myself financially and ask nothing from anyone. Living as a woman has not been difficult for me, it has brough me great happiness and satisfaction. MY life prior, while good to many outsider observers brought me little happiness. I have been on hormones for a year and am doing those physical things that i can at this point (ie electrolysis). My question:

What am I? I am not sure about bottom surgery, i feel nervous about it and to be honest at my age (53) sexual issues are not really that important anyway. I am basically celibate and have been for some time. If I want it badly enough I could afford "the" surgery but to be honest other surgeries like FFS feel more important to me. I know I am not a fetishist as presenting as a female has no sexual component for me. I feel I am transexual but my lack of serious interest in genital surgery would seem to suggest I am not. I dont like the term transgender though because of the association with people who are nothing like me. I am now changing my drivers license to reflect my new, and IMO my correct name and gender. In a way it doesnt matter because I am happy but I dont seem to fit into any of these categories discussed here. I am out and open about who I am and very proud of myself as a person.

Elizabeth, I am not posting anonymously - my full and correct name is Amber Anne Powell but I dont know how to load a picture of myself.

I should also add I dont really try to fool anybody. I do present as female, I do get accepted generally but I also accept that I am different from other women who are complete. I hope this offends no one as i am genuine.