Friday, February 21, 2014

Transgender Rapist in Toronto and Montreal

Remember when all the transgender activists claimed there has never been a case where someone identifying as transgender has ever hurt anyone when allowed into women's spaces? Many of us said laws that d not require someone to be under care and on hormones to identify as transgender are dangerous. Well a bird has certainly come home to roost in Canada and women have been raped and molested by a serial rapist who "claimed" he was transgender and by "law" was required he be allowed into women's shelters etc..

Christopher "Jessica" Hambrock claimed he was a transgender woman and was thus not required to prove he was under care, had actually transitioned, or god forbid actually be taking female hormones. He committed these acts which are the only ones they know of in Montreal and Toronto and in all cases used his so-called "transgender" status to access the women in shelters and similar places.

Hambrook, 37, pleaded guilty in February 2013 to two counts of sexual assault and one count of criminal harassment involving two women — a deaf and homeless Quebec woman and a Toronto survivor of domestic violence — while he was living at a Dundas St. W. shelter and the Fred Victor women’s shelter in January and February 2012.
The problem is Mr. Hambrock was not transgender and was obviously mentally ill but under laws passed the shelter's had no basis to prevent him from demanding access if they had beds available and Hambrock preyed on the vulnerable and desperate women in the shelters including one woman who was a victim of domestic violence.

The Toronto Sun posted this story  last weekend saying Toby's Law needs to be corrected and said the following.

Any man who claims to be a transgender woman has the legal right to use women-only facilities with impunity.
It’s a right enshrined in law for 15 years and reinforced in 2012 by “Toby’s Law.”
A man who still has all his male parts, and is not undergoing hormone treatment, can simply say he’s a woman and access women’s facilities.
It’s championed by Barbara Hall, head of the Ontario Human Rights Commission.

In a letter on her website, in response to a Toronto Star article about a transgender “woman” exposing male genitalia to a woman in a gym change room, Hall said such stories are fear mongering.

“We have never seen a documented case of a heterosexual man gaining access to a woman’s change room by posing as transgender. In fact, in washrooms and change rooms, and in society at large, transgender persons are more at risk than anyone else of being harassed, abused, assaulted, or even killed,” Hall said in her letter.

The shocking case of Christopher Hambrook shows just how wrong Hall is.

Hambrook was not transgender, but used the law to prey on the most vulnerable women in our midst -- the homeless, the disabled and people living in shelters.

Calling himself “Jessica,” Hambrook was accepted into two women’s shelters in Toronto.

Imagine the shock of a woman surviving domestic abuse and finding herself sharing a room with a sexual monster.
I wonder if Barbara Hall of the Human Rights Commission would like to rethink her comment but somehow I doubt she has the humanity to do that since she has been busy demonstrating for convicted felons rights to have estrogen and surgery while Canadians that are honest hard working citizens have to wait along with these assholes.

This story has conveniently been ignored by all the activists but I expect Babara Hall will be demonstrating for Mr Hambrock to get his treatment in jail since I am sure he will claim he is transgender and even though experts say he isn't it is his decision after all. I do wonder why nobody has mentioned it but then I am sure the Toronto Sun is making this up like that poor elderly woman in Toronto who was ravaged when she claimed she was flashed by a transgender man in a female space. Would any f you like to possibly reevaluate that situation. Of course not.

The story about Hambrock is found in this Toronto Sun article which describes his purely evil intentions.

Gender Politics Gone Mad

An employee of a catering company in Oregon is suing the company because she is "gender-neutral" and neither make nor female, she is physically female, because employees called her by female names such as lady, miss, little lady despite the fact she identifies as neither. Somehow I guess they were supposed to use "they" or maybe"it" as an identifier.

She asked the management to address all the employees and inform them that they should use gender-neutral something or other and the claim is the management did not. They are asking for over $18K in wages and $500K in damages.

She claims to be part of the LGBTQ but I am unsure where "it" fits in other than well I actually have no clue. Supposedly the plaintiff cried at work and home regularly because of this inhumane treatment. I have only one thing to say.


It is tough enough for those transitioning to gain acceptance and then we have some dipshit like this who is an obvious money grab with some frivolous lawsuit.She was upset because she was not addressed as "it" or "they"? This just proves my point that the Transgender activists and the Transgender followers do not care one bit about the results of their actions when it may harm those that will actually transition and live as women and I am actually including the non TS here because they are harmed by this.

I cannot wait to read how Sandeen and other activists claim she has the right to be an "it" which of course screws with the entire transgender paradigm because just how do you cross to "it"?

Maybe "it" can claim she is a chicken and demand to be called "cluck cluck" or maybe a jackass and be called "heehaw" which kind of fits perfectly/

What a crock but here is betting Oregon screws over the company and "it" gets paid. Is it really possible to discrimante against an "it"? 

Saturday, February 15, 2014

More on Janet Mock

In have been reading a lot of the stuff posted in support of Janet and what Mock has now claimed in retrospect and it suddenly dawned on me Janet Mock was a victim created by herself because she calls herself transgender. Why is that? Let me expplain.

If she identified as transsexual she would actually have a better case in my mind because a transsexual is someone who changes sex regardless of what some would want you to believe. If you define yourself as transgender then unfortunately for you your genitalia are fair game because 97% of the transgender umbrella do NOT CHANGE SEX and keep their male parts. Any interviewer will ask because it is relevant although Janet Mock now falls clearly in the camp of the race baiters like Monica Roberts and Laverne cox where if you question them you are a racist.

They label Morgan both transphobic and racist based on those interviews in an attempt to again obfuscate and blur the lines between those born transsexual and the transvestites , cross-dressers,and drag queens that run rampant within the transgender movement and are pushing for the same rights as women and for the right to call themselves women/female while maintaining and using male genitalia in the manner they see fit. Nobody is allowed to question this because as men they ge to define when they are women and when they may not want to be women such as at the pay windowor the employment office.

Writing a memoir at 29 is in a way egotistical because other than a sex change at 18 what has she accomplished in her life even as a trans activist? I can think of dozens of people that have more compelling stories and had not one single advantage as a kid and did what Mock has done and then went on to lead amazing lives where they were icons in their fields yet unknown as trans.I guess it is better to be a nobody with a little writing talent and the smarts to trick a Piers Morgan into interviewing you and then promoting said interview as an ambush, transphobic, and racist in order to promote book sales and yourself.

I liked Janet Mock and thought she would possibly be a good example for kids but I believe I was wrong now. She cheapened everything that those born transsexual go through in an attempt to satisfy the loony toons wing of the transgender movement. Labeling someone a bigot is a horrible thing to do and it is particularly egregious when the individual is not.Piers Morgan is neither transphobic or a racist yet he has been labeled as both.

I did not think Morgan focused on Mock's SRS but it is relevant to her memoir as was her relationship with Aaron. The real problem might have been that Morgan actually has a clue that transgender includes transvestites, cross-dressers, and drag queens who have male genitalia and prefer thir genitalia which defines them as men regardless of what they claim. The point here is that is why Mock was bitching because that defines her penis packing pals for what they are whic is drag queens, she-males, etc..

When you are promoting the transgender mantra transition and SRS are not items to be discussed because they are not relevant to the vast majority under the umbrella term but if you can confuse the information you cn make people believe transgender implies sex change which it most certainly does not.

In the fantasy world Mock seems to live in nowadays her transition was not a big thing nor was her finding an understanding man after her SRS yet she lies through her teeth and claims she wants to help the young transsexuals and believe me SRS and boyfriends are more than just importantexcept in the new world Mock seems to live in.

Her attempt at denying the truths of her life denigrates everyone born transsexual. Bet you didn't know that nightmare when you transitioned is not important. Neither is the SRS that made you whole. What is important is to uphold the rights of men in dresses to live their pathetic fantasies where they believe their 7 inch neoclit is taken as a clitoris by the "straight" boyfriend who likes to suck her neoclit (wink, wink). Mock is being abused by men and she cannot see it but promotes their issues blindly.

Has she ever wondered how her boyfriend Aaron would have reacted if she told him she had a penis but it was really a neoclit? Of course she would never think that because she was always a little girl even though she was born a boy as I was. We both fixed it yet mock believes the only thing she should have talked about on the Piers Morgan show was transgender issues where she could spout the transgender line in order to support the men. I can think of nothing more misogynistic than that yet somehow Morgan is the villian as are others  who supported Morgan who just tried to do his job.

Now Mock is claiming Morgan called her a "man" to her face which I find 100% unbelievable. I am certain Morgan will avoid trans issues completely after this just like Rosanne Barr,Katie Couric and any other  person in the media. The first rule when you are being interviewed is that the person being interviewed does not control the interview.If Mock wanted to avoid those questions she and her "trans" pals did not like she should have avoided the interview but then she needs to sell "Redefining Realness" which in a way is kind of accurate if she simply replaced "Realness" with "Reality" but then again any title is better tha her first thought of "Fish Food" which is about what her transgender bullshit is good for.

Maybe she can write a sequel called "Redefining Bullshit" when she actually wakes up and smells the roses and realizes she is being used but then Miss Mock does not seem to have the capacity to think for herself or even for that matter on her feet as her two interviews with Piers Morgan proved.

Thursday, February 6, 2014

Janet Mock vs Piers Morgan or Much Ado About Nothing

Janet Mock is an incredibly beautiful young woman from NYC whoa happens to have been born transsexual. The first time I read of her was in the Marie Claire piece in 2011. It was an article by Janet Mock as told to Kierna Mayo.In it Mock clearly identifies as transsexual and the word transgender is never and I mean never used. The simple fact is that Janet was born transsexual and was only transgender if included under its umbrella.

Her story was inspirational and poignant and in her  Blog she mentioned writing her life story in a book called "Fish Food" which evolved into "Redefining Realness" which I have not read but will. It has just been published and Janet Mock scored a major coup with a recorded interview with Piers Morgan of CNN on his National evening Show. I watched the interview Tuesday evening and thought it was okay considering the subject and the participants.

On Tuesday evening after the interview aired Janet Mock was on Buzzfeed claiming Morgan sensationalized her story and failed to discuss trans issues in this comment.

“He’s trying to do info-tainment,” Mock told BuzzFeed Tuesday night. “He doesn’t really want to talk about trans issues, he wants to sensationalize my life and not really talk about the work that I do and what the purpose of me writing this book was about.”

 The question I have is what did Mock think was going to happen? The salient part of this story is that Janet was born transsexual and a boy and survived this to overcome this as she realized she was always a girl and had SRS at 18 and moved to NYC and met this gorgeous guy and they love each other and she faced what all heterosexual post-op transsexuals do which is how the heck do I tell a guy without getting killed?

Morgan was deferential and exceedingly complimentary towards Janet and to be honest I think he was kind to her because I would have asked some pointed questions about certain inconsistencies in her self portrayal which I will get to a little later.

What happened to Piers Morgan after the Tuesday interview was typical of the people running the trans activist community. Salon published an article by Katie McDonough that relates the Katie Couric interview with the Mock interview which claims that anatomy and transition are somehow not relevant which is a very large pile of horseshit. It seems that the fact Mock had a sex change and actually transitioned are not relevant because the issues that need discussing involve something other than Mock's sex change and transition which is an even bigger pile of horseshit unless you understand where these people are coming from.

Mock is a permanent wet dream for every man in a dress if they can get her to devolve herself into their mindset that her sex change was not important and her transition was not important because the issues involve the larger fraternity of the "men in dresses" that want legitimacy. It is why they call themselves transgender and refuse to use cross-dresser or transvestite or even drag queen. Personally I wish not a one of them even the slightest harm and could care less what they do in their everyday life except when it infringes on what those born transsexual go through.

Read the Marie Claire article and other writings by Mock and her SRS was the primary goal in her life  but somehow that has changed and anatomy is unimportant as she attempted to promote in the Wednesday re-interview where Mock was shall we say less than stellar. Morgan was incensed that he was savaged in the media and on twitter in the now infamous style of the crazies that seem to percolate to the top of the transgender community. He was savaged in the same manner as Rosanne Barr who had the unmitigated gall to side with girls that a man, Colleen Francis, and his hairy balls and dick should not be present and viewable where a high school swim team was present. Her life was threatened and worse.

The savaging of Morgan is not up to those standards but it is approaching it. Morgan is like most in the real world. He assumes that transgender means transsexual. What a very silly man he is. Transgender means transvestites and cross-dressers claiming to be the same as those born transsexual. Obfuscate the truth and the truth is obfuscated and skewed towards the falseness of what is transgender.

Some where along her path Mock became an acolyte of the transgender mafia and her view of herself has changed. She is no longer a woman but a trans-woman which is something other than a woman. That is what transvestites and cross-dressers are yet Janet Mock is somehow blinded by this.

Her new pals have stolen the stories of those born transsexual and fitted them to themselves. Somehow a transvestite or cross-dresser always knew they were feminine and some even claim girls at very young ages while others had late onset delusions which are just as relevant as those of us born transsexual. weareallthe same after all.

In the Marie Claire article she said she worked in a Boutique and lost her virginity to a boy at 17 and swore she would never do that kind of sex again and even on Piers' show said she has dated boys since she was 16. In her memoir I am guessing she discusses her claim of working as a sex worker on Merchant Street in Honolulu which was the subject of an HBO documentary. That kind of debunks the Boutique and the lost virginity story but It rings as true as that story but why mislead others in 2011? Mock now claims she was sexually abused which again I can understand since I was raped at 14 but I will know more after I read her biography.

The irony here is that when she first went public Janet Mock was a heroine who had overcome insurmountable obstacles to become the woman she should have been born as but suddenly today Janet Mock has become a "victim"and a professional one at that.One does need those street credentials if one wants to hang around with the professional victims line Laverne Cox, Monica Roberts and their ilk and playing the race card helps a lot in that world.

These loons crucified Katie Couric because she dared ask about anatomy and they are crucifying Piers Morgan because he openly asked those questions and Janet Mock willingly answered them. If you are it and proudly trans those are perfectly viable questions unless of course you are hiding something which many of them are.

In truth there is nothing special about Janet Mock and her story.There are thousands of us born transsexual that faced similar situations and managed to survive in lot worse circumstances but chose to live our lives as women without notoriety. Mock claims she wants to help girls like her which is noble but girls like her and girls like I was as a child are driven to our sex changes like a moth is attracted to a flame. It defines our sex and must be fixed and Janet made statements like that before but now she has fallen under the spell of the transgendered.

If you try and tell me you knew you were a girl at 5 but somehow you made it to 50 and want to transition but do not want SRS I have one word for you. BULLSHIT!! It is part of the giant lie that transgenderism is built around. The sad thing is people like Janet Mock have lost site of this and have fallen "victim" to the transgender lie. In a way Piers Morgan, Katie Couric, and Rosanne Barr also fell victim to the transgender lie in their own sad ways because they dared ask questions that are pointed or they dared side against the transgendered. It is something many others that cross the men that run transgender activism have felt.

When I was in NYC before and after I lost a man I loved because i did not know how to tell him I did several radio shows and two television shows outside NYC. I was asked those pointed questions and I answered them because I thought it might help people understand how rough it was for kids like me. Sometimes it worked and sometimes it got ugly but when you subject yourself to that scrutiny it is something to be expected.

For Janet Mock to make the statements she has made about Piers Morgan and to allow the nastiness that has occurred and claim she was "blindsided" is disingenuous at best and plain stupidity if not. My guess is the "girls" she hangs out with were upset with what she said and Mock reacted in this manner to maintain her credibility within the transgender community because after all they are the ones that will buy her book. I bet Laverne Cox was pissed because she discussed her anatomy/sex change because to Cox that is certainly not relevant or so it seems. I wonder if Laverne is as proud of her 7 inch neoclit as Monica Roberts is?

Will the next victim of the transgender brigade be Jazz when she admits she cannot wait for her SRS? How dare she talk about the horrors those born transsexual see when we look at that part of our anatomy. We should embrace it like they do but how do you embrace what you hate and want rid of as Janet Mock clearly stated in her earlier musings which she now claims were taken out of context. I wonder how it feels to be a trained pet of the transgendered? They truly are like the Borg because they assimilate and resistance is futile if you have no courage.