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.


Kathryn Dumke said...

The Crown has made a motion following trial to have Mr. Hambrook declared a "dangerous offender" which permits keeping him locked up if necessary forever. This will be decided in the next few days.

Ms. Hall has an impressive resume. She has served as Municipal Councilor, was the Mayor of Toronto, is on the Ontario Law Reform Commission and has been the Chief Commissioner of the Ontario Human Rights Commission since 2005. She prefaced her remarks in the letter by saying this: "First, let me be clear – unwanted sexual behaviour is never acceptable. We all have the right to be free from this, and we have a responsibility to report it when it happens." Her remarks were not in response to Hambrook but rather in relation to another case. The laws in place in Ontario permit access to bathrooms in accordance with "lived gender". The law is flawed for all of the reasons we agree on. Women only spaces should be protected. This is the beginning of a huge backlash, it can be seen everywhere here in Canada and let's hope that TS are not among it's victims.

Anonymous said...

I have long believed that the advancement of "transgender rights" in recent years would actually turn out to be detrimental to the rights of those born transsexual in the long term. And cases such as this one only serves to reinforce those beliefs and fears that I hold.

Unfortunately, most of the general public make no distinction between transgender and transsexual, a situation which is no doubt exasperated by the TGs continually conflating themselves with those born transsexual, whilst at the same time, trying to shut down or twist transsexual narratives to suit their own ends.

Because of this, any backlash against the TGs, is almost inevitably going to affect transsexuals also. We are vastly outnumbered by the TG contingent, which makes it much harder for our voices to be heard, and our needs to be addressed over the huge racket made by the men in dresses trying to erroneously gain access to spaces which they have no right being in (women's spaces).

A horrific scenario like this was simply inevitable if you're going to allow men access to women's spaces, so long as they say they are "transgender", with absolutely no evidence that they are undergoing medical treatment for such. Genuine pre-op transsexual women are no threat to other women, however, some other people under the "transgender umbrella" most definitely are a threat to women. I'm not saying the pervert in this case was necessarily "transgender", but my point still stands, nonetheless.

I have been saying this for quite a long time now, but transsexuals being under the "transgender umbrella" only benefits TGs. For those born transsexual it is anything but a benefit, and is in fact, the complete opposite. And I fear the backlash from this case, and other potential ones in the future will only serve to prove me right on this issue.

Anonymous said...

Curious is it not? How in this ever growing cacophony of "gender identities" there are exactly two, and ONLY two which are utterly and totally verboten to speak of...

The first, which is by far the rarest of them all... a woman or man born with the birth defect of being transsexual. A person who will turn heaven and hell to correct the defect and become... how shall I say it? Normal? Oh nooooooooo... that simply cannot be allowed! Better toe the line buddy and rid yourself of those transphobic ideas! OR ELSE!!!

The second, ironically is the largest by far of anything under the rainbow of love glitter and unicorn poop, and yet the one, even more so than daring to become normal that you are NEVER suppose to notice/comment on/ acknowledge/ or even see... and that's the rather common practice of men dressing in women's clothing as a sexual fetish! I mean for shits sake! Men just don't start putting on women's panties because they are stylish or for comfort or any of the other hundred and one lies they tell each other and anyone who catches em in the act... They do it because... it makes their dicks hard! End of story, game over, do not pass go do not collect $200.00!

Perish the thought! Why? Well other than the fact that to do so would cause them untold patriarchal shame... Admitting it would open the door to also admitting that they HAVE TO keep upping the ante to get the same thrill... And if you do that... well...

But, what does it matter because we can't talk about either of those can we? Men don't have fetishes and those born transsexual are the same as the men with the fetishes they don't have...

Yeah right...


Anonymous said...

This begs the question as to how best extricate ourselves from said umbrella.

Anonymous said...

Being born with the birth defect of transsexualism is not a "gender identity", it's about sex identity, and knowing that your outer sex anatomy is completely at odds with what you know your true sex to be. This is one of the fundamental reasons why transsexualism shouldn't be under the transgender umbrella, because having transsexualism is nothing to do with gender. Being under that umbrella gives a completely skewed and false impression of what it means to be afflicted with that terrible condition.

The reason why most people don't see any difference between transgender and transsexual is simply down to lack of education, and knowledge of the subject. The vast majority of those under the "transgender umbrella" are not transsexual, and seemingly have no desire to be forthcoming to others with the fact that they are fundmentally different from those born trans-sexed. We are already a tiny minority, and seeing as trans-sexed individuals generally have no desire to be in the public eye, and just wish to blend in with ordinary society, the general public have very little knowledge, if any, of the subject. But, they do know a lot about transgenders however, which is why the wholly invalid conflation between the two is so damaging for those suffering with transsexualism.

Allowing men who identify as "transgender" into women's spaces was always a disaster waiting to happen. The loony left wing trans supporters and trans activists were always kicking a hornet's nest with this issue, and unfortunately I fear, it is those born trans-sexed, not the TGs who will be burnt the most in the ensuing crossfire that will be (quite rightly though), directed at the transgender lobby. We are guilty by association, even if we have no wish to be associated with them, and actually shared many of the general public's concerns over these crazy TG pandering policies. Women are suffering for this now, and very soon, those women who were unlucky enough to be born trans-sexed will be suffering heavily from the backlash, even though most of us also had grave concerns over this issue. Who actually benefitted from a policy like this? Only men in dresses and rapists, nobody else. Certainly not women, born transsexual or not, that's for sure.

Anonymous said...

The question:

"how best extricate ourselves from said umbrella" ?

Simple time-tested answers:

1. Refuse to accept the bait of public/media/pundit hostility.
2. Step away from view.
3. Get on with life.

-- an elfchick

Elizabeth said...


Do you really believe their will be a backlash? I see zero mention of this anywhere in nthe media or on the blogs.

Anonymous said...

so I checked Transvestite central to see if there was any comment or response from them. Surprise surprise zero zilch nada. Yet of a tg had been justifiably evicted from a ladies room somewhere they would have been howling from the rooftops baying for blood.

Just one slightly connected post from some freak who wrote and I quote; "Since when does having a penis or a vagina make a person a man or a woman? I thought society was starting to move away from these antiquated definitions?" nice eh

So try being in a ladies room with your knickers round your ankles while some tg with a raging hard on comes at you and thinking oh its only a woman really!

These freaks are starting to really piss me off.

Anonymous said...

@Elfchick: Those things are all true of course, the problem is, that only removes us from the transgender umbrella in our own eyes, not in the eyes of the general public. Let's be frank here, all those born transsexual who have not allowed themselves to be duped by the vociferous trans activists do not consider themselves as part of the "transgender umbrella". I myself, have never identified as a trans anything, and have never been a part of the "trans community".

Because those born transsexual generally seek normality, and to just get on with life in obscurity, coupled with the fact that we are a tiny minority compared with the TGs, the general public rarely, if ever, have the chance to learn about our medical condition, and how that effects our day to day lives.

For a lot of us born transsexual, in order to just simply be, and live the normal day to day lives we dearly crave, not sharing the fact that we have (or had) the medical condition of transsexualism with the wider world is an absolute must.

Whether we like it or not, we are seen as "trans" by most in general society, and the TG/transvestite contingent are the loud, in your face, and sometimes obnoxious public face of "trans issues". Our need for obscurity and normality, coupled with the fact we are a tiny minority, means our voices are very rarely heard by the general public. And if we're expecting the TGs to educate people about the vast, and fundamental differences between themselves and those born transsexual, we might as well wait for hell to freeze over, because that is never going to happen.

So whilst we may not consider ourselves to be part of the trans umbrella, we're going to continue being forced under it against our will by the majority of trans, and non-trans people. It plays right into the hands of the TG men in dresses, that we desire to keep ourselves to ourselves, and want no spotlight or special attention placed on us. This sadly means that our needs and rights will always be sidelined and trampled over by the majority of transgender activists. We're in a very bad situation, because we have hardly anyone who will speak up for us, and we can't speak up for ourselves if we want to keep our lives normal, private, and quiet. Which is something nearly all those born trans-sexed desire.

Elizabeth said...

I had a mishap with two comments and they were inadvertently deleted. I am copying them into comments below. Apologies.

Elizabeth said...

1st inadvertently deleted comment

Anonymous has left a new comment on your post "Transgender Rapist in Toronto and Montreal":

Quite agree with Ms. Anonymous @03:12: we're in a double-bind of being unable to speak out on our own behalf, lest we sacrifice our quiet existence. There's an out, of course: anonymous or pseudonymous speech, but such acts of speech tend to receive lesser levels of credence precisely because of that anonymity or pseudonymity.

As to needs? Well, I'd daresay say that we've already acted upon our most urgent needs, or we surely wouldn't be having this conversation from the ex post facto viewpoint.

As to rights, isn't that what we hold in common with all women?

Kind regards,

an elfchick (who always prefer to point the media in the direction of some other side of the mountain)

Elizabeth said...

2nd inadvertenyl deleted comment

Anonymous has left a new comment on your post "Transgender Rapist in Toronto and Montreal":

I an sensing a huge and debilitating defeatism in the current commentary. There is clearly a sense that the war of ideas has been lost and those of us that have overcome our situation at birth will remain in the minds of others, (thanks to the tireless efforts of the T-wacktivists), "Forever Trans".

I do not accept that. We all know who and what we are. We are being grossly mischaracterized and misrepresented and stand silently in the face of evil.

I have another question. Why is it not possible to simple publish what has been discussed above? Am I somehow unaware of some unseen censor or Department of State Truth?

Anonymous said...

An example of what we are currently up against.

The current power structure in DC is hell bent on the "down-sizing" of America. Social deconstruction and the destruction of family values are just a small part of the total agenda to "fundamentally transform America" into a has been, fourth rate ex-superpower.

Anonymous said...

@Elfchick: I knew about anonymous speech, of course, but I didn't mention it, because like you said, the anonymity gives it less power and credence in the minds of others.

And besides, how many people in the general public read blogs like this one anyway? Until I came across this blog, I did not realise how many people I shared commonality with. Living with transsexualism can be incredibly isolating, and TG communities are certainly no sanctuary. That's easy enough to tell, just from being on the outside, looking in on it.

I was aware when I made the comment on our rights, that that just gives us something else in common with all other women. Many females born transsexual are extremely vulnerable before surgery, and the antics of the transgender men and their supporters, are only going to serve to make us even more vulnerable, and isolate us still further. The topic of this blog post being a case in point.

Being recommended for surgery is wonderful, but each day that passes without surgery still feels excruciating, and hard to bear. Post surgery, the TGs can no longer hurt us (although they certainly can still obfuscate transsexual issues, by continually conflating themselves with them), but their actions can do untold damage to pre ops who just want to correct their defect as swiftly as possible, and get on with life normally.

Pre ops, and that includes kids with transsexualism, are mere cannon fodder for the TGs, and they do not care one bit if we are the sacrificial lambs that need to be butchered in order for them to claim "rights" to which they are not entitled.

Anonymous said...

@Other Anonymous (lol): It is unfortunate that in the minds of many people, (the majority in fact, I would say,) that your sex designated at birth will always remain your "true sex", and surgery is not something which changes that. Once it is known that you were born with outer male anatomy, most people will never see you as simply a woman, you will always be something "other" and "different" (even if this is something they will not say in front of you). If this were not the case, so many women with transsexualism (or a transsexual past) would not feel the need to keep that aspect of themselves out of the public concience.

I don't believe that the war of ideas has been lost. I have never seen myself as a trans anything, and never will. But I know it's going to take a lot of education for the general public at large to understand that transsexualism is a medical condition, and that all we are doing is seeking to correct a congenital abnormality.

Although there is still quite a way to go before science can unlock all the mysteries behind why people are born trans-sexed, there is still strong scientific evidence that backs up what deep down we've all known anyway. That Transsexualism has a biological (rather than a psychological) basis. But again, how many people who are not trans-sexed are aware of these medical/scientific findings? Only a tiny minority, to be sure.

We are being grossly mischaracterized and misrepresented, which is exactly the problem I was highlighting. The transgendered are never going to be able to educate anyone about the trans-sexed, even if they wanted to, even though most of them couldn't care less about us.

We know who and what we are, and we do silently stand in the face of evil. TG's speaking on our behalf, although we do not want them to, definitely does damage to us in the eyes of the wider world though, of that I have no doubt.

Anonymous said...


We are talking only to ourselves, we are not engaging the general public and taking our case to them. If we do not take that action those who come after us that are living with transsexualism will forever be labeled as Tee-Gee. Rather you believe it or not that is the way the world works. Silence is consent.


Anonymous said...

But who among us is going to allow ourselves to become "other" and public ally put the case? It will not be me I can tell you that for nothing. Each and every one of the credible outed women have been gagged by the TG


Anonymous said...

@Cassandraspeaks: That's exactly my point. I have no intention of allowing myself to become "other", as I'm sure is also the case for the majority of those born trans-sexed. For women born transsexual, all we've ever wanted is to be no different from any other female. And that includes not being seen as anything other than female in the eyes of others. But, this is something that the TGs use to their advantage, because it allows them to conflate themselves with transsexuals with impunity, and receiving no comeback aside from anonymous dissenters online.

Up until about 8 or 9 years ago, I'd never even heard of the term "transgender". And I'm sure up until that time, most in the general public had only heard of transsexual, and understood that to mean someone seeking surgery to alleviate their distress over being in the wrong body. The transgender phenomena has pushed back progress of transsexual rights (and possible positive public perceptions of the trans-sexed) many, many years. I have no doubts about that.

As long as the TGs are our unwanted public mouthpiece, life for child transsexuals/pre ops is going to remain very grim indeed.

Jessica said...

And I've noticed the same problem, that we wind up agreeing with one another, that the TG types are the problem, hurting young transitioners like me, trying to force their beliefs on me (and others). Great as the discussion is here, that does nothing for the outside world, so I'm with NYF and Cassandra, in that we need someone tell what needs to be said.

My concern is personal backlash (past revealing), because God knows how dangerous the TG get when they do not get their way, or someone dares to disagree with them on their 'shambrella', so to speak.'s been given a TG narrative, massively so, to this point, much to my dismay, but as I've said a few months back, I'm doing a documentary to help other transsexual youth do as they need be to help live better lives as the girls (boys) they are. Don't have to, hell no, but I want to. The point of all this to you, the reader? We (our beliefs) actually do have an outlet (through me) to share what we know to be true, and our experiences with TGs. With that said, if any of you have anything specific I should mention to them, please tell me so it can be said, eventually seen, and heard.

Obviously, it should be different than the lone, broad statement "transsexual is not the same as transgender". I mean, that part is basically a lock to be said, next time I film with them, but go further, be more specific with me. Given I'm helping kids here, it can't be about items like rapists or whatnot, simply not appropriate.

Geez, I am sick of being lumped in, without my consent, let alone approval, non-op transgender, crossdressing men who do this stuff for a fetish funsie in the onesie! Not only that, they like that worthless skin pole. Ew!

Wish you all a warm spring to head your away soon (cold winter up here!), and keep up your work here. It is one of my few areas of my life where rationality actually exists.


Kathryn Dumke said...


While I am in Canada, I have spoken out on this issue and is had netted me much distance, some hatred and a lot of sour faces from the TG crowd. I have drawn a clear distinction between transsexualism and gender variance. I have done so in radio interviews and print press. I have made it clear that I am not transgendered and that I consider being described this way a misnomer. In this province we are still in the process of determining eligibility for surgical candidates.

In speaking about the issues I try to point to the difference in health care needs. I have been called cis scum, nest defecator and a general shit because I ruin the outcome that is so wanted by the TG crowd: informed consent and coverage for all manner of cosmetic surgeries while maintaining the precious. At least it does get people thinking.

I have pointed out that statistics in the Province of Quebec over the last ten years have shown that with variation in eligibility assessment processes the incidence of transsexualism with (covered by the Province which means it is free for those who seek it) SRS outcome is in the 1:32000 range not as claimed by the TG 1:250 - 1:2500. People are listening with interest.

Elizabeth, the backlash is noticeable in that many issues are now being publicly questioned and challenged. In my view the only way to counteract this is information and education of the public explaining the difference. Nothing however will change in my view without there being an accommodation for the TGs because that is what they really need: acceptance instead of marginalization. If that is in place they would give a flying fart what happens to TS. Were just a flag of convenience.

Anonymous said...

"Why is it not possible to simple publish what has been discussed above",(which states the case succinctly), anonymously, (or pseudonymously)?

Anonymous said...

" Silence is consent. "

Perhaps. Yet is not discretion the better part of valor?

Anonymous said...

That is the point I have made before when subjects similar to this have come up. We won't sacrifice our identity and corrected condition for this cause. I believe that in spite of how hard the Tee-Gees try they may ensnare most but not all true TS. There will always be a few of us to take them aside and warn them to stay away from the sickness known as Transgender.


Anonymous said...

I have to agree with the backlash that is being courted. I have found the way the activists have used the medical needs of transsexuals to justify a far broader transgender agenda to be quite exploitive and such activists will rather see no action than one that only serves the medical needs.

To a degree they have become too successful using this exploit in that certain forward thinking organizations/business have strived to make policies allowing for the medical needs. This has forced some back pedaling and changing of the dialog highlighting that not all "transgendered" medically transition or have surgery and that it is only some. Yet this only tends to come out when someplace does go to far but otherwise downplayed as it undercuts the medical need argument.

And not only has the general population been getting duped the transgender are well on the way of convincing themselves they are transsexual.

While this isn't new to the support community, it always seems the newbie transitioners are the loudest voices and there seems to be no shortage of ones chasing a fantasy, believe transition is just a more serious extension of their dressing habits identify as transsexual and are more than willing to tell others just like them that they are transsexual too.

We are in the first stages of serious backlash now and the table is set for the second stage. The second stage will occur as a result of a growing number of non-transsexuals transition, even have surgery (transition and surgery are the only treatments after all) and then have regrets. And as these same people push for stronger earlier intervention for transgender kids, and bad things will happen the backlash will be more serious. And you can see with the absence of young teen and adult CD suggests that they must be believing they are transgender which functionally being equated with transsexual.

Back in the 90s gay had almost become fashionable. Today it is trans that has become almost fashionable. And with Transgender being equated with transsexual...I am afraid one could say trans is the new gay and CD/Transgender is the new transsexual. Spread the word!!!

I wish I could foresee things unfolding differently.

- mostly harmless

Anonymous said...

@mostly harmless: That seems to be like the true nightmare, absolute worst case scenario. Certainly from what I know, there is no sign that what's actually happening, at least not right now. From everything I've read and seen, TGs generally dislike the term transsexual, so much so that they try to get actual transsexuals to abandon the term, and embrace the term transgender for themselves instead.

I also see no reason, at the moment at least, why any TG would feel the need to identify as TS, and seek surgery, when they have done such a "great" job of conflating their transvestism and fetishism, with what it means to be born transsexual. The TG mantra is that surgery is not necessary, and that you can be a "woman" whist wanting to retain your penis, and actually enjoy owning one.

It is true that the TGs have succeeded largely in getting the general public to believe that transgender and transsexual are simply interchangeable terms that mean the same thing. But most of them would rather the term transsexual be abandoned altogether. because they feel it is an inaccurate and misleading term (which for them as fetish driven, cross dressing men, it is of course going to seem "inaccurate" to them).

Most people don't even use the term transsexual anymore, they use transgender, to the point where actual transsexuals are being mis-labelled as "transgender". Even my own doctor once tried to call me "transgender", until I told her that I found the term offensive, and that I felt it was a completely inaccurate way of describing my medical condition.

The only way that TGs MAY start seeking surgery en masse, is when there is a major public backlash against them, but even then, I can't see this happening, purely because their continued conflation with themselves and transsexuals means they are probably going to drag transsexuals down with them, as they have so much blackened and distorted what it means to be trans-sexed in the eyes of the wider world. The offshoot of this is, the public are going to despise us as much as they do the TGs, which would make their wanting surgery a meaningless exercise.

As it stands right now though, I have seen no evidence that TGs generally have any desire to procure surgery. They love their penises too much for that to be a viable option for most of them. This is why they try so hard to convince people that having a penis is no barrier to being a woman. Even if it were magically possible to make these men naturally born anatomic females, they would choose not to do it. I have seen many of them saying they would happily remain trans even if such an option were available to them. These people will never have surgery, not in a million years.

If the term transsexual, and what that really means were not blackened by it's mis-association with transgender, transvestites and the like, then I could see a reason for TGs trying to convince themselves of being transsexual, once they start feeling the upcoming huge public backlash against them which is surely looming. However, they are likely going to drag those born transsexual down with them, in the ensuing backlash, and besides, they have more or less erased the term transsexual from the public conscience. Most people nowadays only know about "transgender". To most of the wider public, TG is TS, so seeking to try and be TS instead of TG, is going to be of no benefit to them. What good is convincing themselves that they are transsexual going to do, when the public see TG and TS as interchangeable terms? Not to mention that they have blackened the meaning of transsexual in the public conscience with their continued obfuscation of TS issues, and bogus conflation of their cross dressing, gender bending behaviours with the medical condition of transsexualism. How is erroneously identifying themselves as transsexual going to change anything for them, at least in terms of public perception? The fact is, it won't change anything in that regard.

Anonymous said...

Try visiting the "Transsexual" Forum on

Every single one of those cross dressing TV's are self described "transsexuals". Most if not all of them have been "trans" since they were "5 years old". In fact many are in "transition" but are still thinking if they should start HRT and "probably will not decide to get SRS".

This is the new narrative of "trans".

Anonymous said...

I first said this in 1986 "there are more transsexuals in the world than most people think but far fewer than the vast majority of transsexuals think there are"


Anonymous said...

@Other anonymous: Visit No thanks! lol

Well, if some TGs are actually describing themselves as "transsexuals", then things are even worse than I thought they were. It does not surprise me in the slightest however, that they have doubts about starting HRT and will very likely not have surgery. For genuine transsexuals, HRT and bottom surgery are necessities, and are procured as soon as is possible. If you'd have to think for even a moment about procuring those things, then you are not transsexual, period. These TVs are totally delusional, that much is clear is clear to see.

TGs/TVs conflating themselves with transsexuals is bad enough, but actually self describing themselves as that is just beyond words. I have real fears that most of those who are actually born transsexual and pre-op are going to be very badly affected by all these TG/TV shenanigans. It's just extremely depressing...

Anonymous said...

@Cassandraspeaks: I've always felt that true transsexuals are a very tiny minority in society. I first learned of the term "transsexual" in my late teens, but when I read about, or saw on TV, people who were described as "transsexual", I felt even more isolated, as most of the time, I felt I could not relate to those people at all. I'd think to myself, well, if these people are "transsexual", then I'm definitely not one of them. It was basically this which made me reject trans labels as a means of describing myself. Which I still do to this day. I suffer with a medical condition called transsexualism, I don't identify as "trans".

Of course, since then, transgender has become very prominent and widely known as a term, overtaking transsexual in the public conscience. Looking back on it now, I now know that most of the "transsexuals" I had read about and seen on tv were actually not transsexual at all, but what we now know as TG/men in dresses playacting at being women. Which was why I couldn't relate to them at all.

To me, it's glaringly apparent why there are so few people I can relate to as far as being born transsexual goes, and that's because very few people are actually born with transsexualism. This is also one of the reasons why living with transsexualism can be incredibly isolating if you are a true TS in the stages of trying to procure surgery. You look for solace within the "trans" community at your peril. And thankfully I dodged that bullet.

People who frequent identifying as "transsexual" says everything that needs to be said about that really. Transsexualism has nothing whatsoever to do with crossdressing/transvestitism, and anyone who is genuinely transsexual knows this. This blog is a rarity, as I actually do find I relate to some of the posters here, and of course, Elizabeth herself. I've never spoken about my experience living with transsexualism online before finding this blog. Which only goes to prove that even on the internet, finding others born transsexual to converse with is very difficult. It is a rare thing, and I've always known that.

forkergirl said...

I'm still learning, and don't want to seem confused about all the possible varieties of people. I can't count all of what is possible. I don't believe that nature has decided, but tries everything, much to the dislike of those who want everything to fit neatly into as few categories as possible.. Much more is possible than many would like to admit. I abandoned trying to pigeonhole people into "male" and "female" --this blog is educating me quite well. Thank you. I also follow this website:
in hopes of being educated.

Anonymous said...

I misspoke before and didn't intend to say that most of these transgender are wanting SRS, but rather some are. And I don't disagree with anything you said really.

I've also seen plenty say things like "SRS isn't important to me but if insurance covers it I will have it". Does that sound like someone who needs SRS?

In my experience those who need find a way somehow. is far from the only place transgender are self identifying as transsexual. When you see half of the self identified transsexuals saying they don't want SRS, you know something is up.

So many have criticized the term "transsexual" because it has the word sex in it, yet it has remained so persistently, why? In my view there are always groups of people who, however they identify, develop a negative reputation. So they like to hide under a different shell. This is a large part of what the transgender movement has been about. Re-labeling crossdressing under some more acceptable guise. Yet this falls short. There is the trans hierarchy that is, well frankly I think is stupid, and while I seen some self identified transsexuals act like they are better, mostly this is driven by transgendered who habitually engage in male posturing and who seek higher status including identifying themselves as what they believe to be the elite. Total foolishness in my opinion.

I also think there is another thing at play. Particularly when it comes to older CD to latch onto the idea of being transsexual. It is known in psychology that men who are very much into pornography get desensitized over time and require stronger and stronger images to get aroused. Much like a drug addict chasing a fix needs more and stronger over time. Even to the point of not being able to find strong enough images and impotence.

Well isn't it reasonable that CD would become desensitized over time? That the mild forms of CDing might become passé. That the lose the sexual thrill and continually chase the stronger thrill. Maybe that involves going out in public. Maybe it is more extreme. is..well developing some real female traits. Really becoming a girl. And suddenly this long term CD goes into denial about the past turn-on, it is no longer a turn-on after all, they become desensitized, so chase the becoming a girl thing and start identifying as transsexual.

Maybe my view is very extreme as to the backlash. It seems to me that if some are only getting surgery only if it is more or less free that there are people going into this transition business and surgery for other than need and that can only increase the probably of negative outcomes.

- mostly harmless

Anonymous said...

@mostly harmless: There is much truth and accuracy in what you say.

"SRS isn't important to me but if insurance covers it I will have it."

Yep, that definitely doesn't sound like someone who needs SRS. And if you don't NEED SRS, then you were not born transsexual. And that's the thing. TVs/TGs erroneously identifying as TS are usually very easy to spot... if you actually happen to be trans-sexed. And therein lies one of the fundamental problems.

People who are actually born with transsexualism can spot fakes from a mile off, but what about other people, the people in the wider world who are ill educated about what it really means to be transsexual? These people are generally much more easily hoodwinked, as they don't know the fundamental and key differences between people born transsexual, and everyone else under the "trans umbrella".

This is why I've felt for quite a while now that these TGs and TS imposters are pushing back progress of rights and acceptance for genuine transsexual sufferers back many, many years. I feel we were making real progress in those areas, until the transgender phenomena reared it's head from the abyss.

I also completely agree with what you said about older CDs suddenly identifying as "trans". And I have said many times, that there is no such thing as "late onset transsexualism". Even if some of these people tried to claim that they "always knew", I don't buy that for a second, because they would not have been able to live full lives as men if that really were so.

For me, death would have been instantly preferable to "living as a man", and I believe this is true for all genuine females with transsexualism. "Living as a man" was never an option for me. I'd have taken my own life rather than do that.

People who are actually born with transsexualism, are the ones who are really going to suffer from all this madness, and that upsets me greatly.

Anonymous said...

It's a curious thing don't you think? How when it comes to genital surgery, the "trans-community" always screams loud and long for their "rights" that it's an absolute imperative that medical treatment for "gender identity" be readily available... but then when asked when THEY themselves are going to get "it," they all very quickly retreats with a cry of
"~Oh, I can't~" followed with,

and even more curious, the "~because-s~" are always the exact same two reasons!

It's too expensive. and... some people have medical issues that prevent it.

Hummmm... Yes... they do have a point... it is rather expensive... but just for shits and grins lets look at what what happens when it doesn't cost a kings ransom... what happens when it is not only cheap, it's totally free? Yes... Free! Free! As in it doesn't cost them even one red cent out of pocket... Surprise Surprise! The number of surgeries doesn't go up one iota!

There is a paper out by the Williams Institute, yes, the Williams Institute...That uber sensitive and politically correct Williams Institute, detailing how it's a total no brainer for companies to offer the surgery because the chances of the coverage being used is almost nil!

To quote George Takei


Well clearly, if cost really isn't the issue stopping them from having surgery, it must be medical issues preventing it!

lets see what Wikipedia says on the matter

Medical considerations[edit]

People with HIV or hepatitis C may have difficulty finding a surgeon able or willing to perform surgery. Many surgeons operate in small private clinics that cannot adequately treat potential complications in these populations. Some surgeons charge higher fees for HIV and hepatitis C-positive patients; other medical professionals assert that it is unethical to deny surgical or hormonal treatments to transsexuals solely on the basis of their HIV or hepatitis status.[9]

Other health conditions such as diabetes, abnormal blood clotting, and obesity do not usually present a problem to experienced surgeons. The conditions do increase the anesthetic risk and the rate of post-operative complications. Surgeons may require overweight patients to reduce their weight before surgery, any patients to refrain from hormone replacement before surgery and smoking patients to refrain from smoking before and after surgery. Surgeons commonly stipulate the latter regardless of the type of operation.

Wait... Let me read that one again... um hummm... difficult... yes... refrain from activites... yes... possible complications... yes... But where are all the things that make it utterly and completely impossible?

Oh... I get it... there aren't any!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


Even when it is free... and in many places that is becoming the norm... and as shown, there aren't any medical issues at all that actually prevent one from getting SRS... The numbers of surgeries performed still doesn't go up even a jot!

Doth the activists protest too much? Might there be perhaps another reason, a perhaps far more valid reason than the two fictions mentioned that causes them to not want to, as the general public would say, "cut it off?"

Hummmmmmmmm... As I said before... Curious, No?


Anonymous said...


"The numbers of surgeries performed still doesn't go up even a jot!"


In 2008 I was at a California Senate hearing at Children's Hospital Los Angeles. They focused on the treatment of transgender/transsexual/gender non-conforming children, . By then the clinic treated roughly 250 kids the tens years prior. NOW they have 300 current patients within a 30 mile radius.

Now some of those children will not desire SRS, some will but the numbers treated and who will receive SRS are demonstrably greater. Paid for by health insurance. Which is what I worked on--mission accomplished!

I SAVED ALL OF THEM! The rest of the States will follow soon enough.

It wasn't that hard, just a well placed law review article, some lobbying, a couple speeches, some letter writing and a couple public/private cost analysis presentations--I was a power player that made sure the health insurance industry got the message. SOMETHING NONE OF YOU HAGS WERE WILLING TO DO FOR ME!!!!

Generally to this post: I give the public more credit than you do. I have enough faith that the general public will not condemn an entire group for the actions of one person. I recommend some counseling for those that still think that pointing your bony fingers at others you deem unworthy and start looking in the mirror. Your era is over--got it!?


Elizabeth said...


I guess you are on the sauce a little early today with a few distortions in your response.You actually did not save any of them you pretentious asshole. You played a very minor part in the effort because it would have outed you.

Most of your existence after your late life transition has been spent lying about your age, denying you were born a boy, and striving to make yourself famous or infamous might be more accurate.

You were never a power player because you were never at the forefront so please stop the bullshit. Just what were we supposed to do to help you in the early 80's you dumbshit? You are such a freaking phony.

You have continually denied being born a boy in your public life which is a fucking riot because it is kind of obvious but then you were and will always be delusional.

Of course you miss the entire point of the post. You are an apologist for the transgender frauds because you are a fraud yourself. The problem really was all he had to do was say he was transgender with zero proof of treatment yet you think it is fine that he got to enter women's spaces and raped women and sexually harassed them. That is fine in your pathetic world.

All that proves is quite firmly that you are still just another man that made a mistake and got a sex change. You are a walking advertisement for what is wrong but you are too stupid to even realize it.

That asshole WAS unworthy but none of us ever heard a peep about it from the frauds like you but then you are kind of stuck with too many manly years and thinking like a women is alien to you.

I never had an era and never wanted one. Just for a little edification Childrens's in LA has had 100 children as new patients since early 2011 requesting help with GID which is about 33+ a year.

The number of surgeries has gone up because fools have gotten surgery but then Harry always felt it is better one too many got SRS than one too few.

It might help if you actually had a clue how to be a woman but then your everyday life proves you do not. Embarrassing women as a whole is not productive in my book but then by your standards my life is boring.

Personally I did my share having done radio and television shows in the early 70's because unlike you I was actually a good representative of what it meant to be born transsexual and get cured. I have also helped kids for 42 years and have given back when I can but this was and is my life and I do not owe anyone anything other than being a good woman which I have accomplished. You might want to try that but I kind of doubt you have a clue.

Anonymous said...

BS. If you were not so pathetic you would be laughable. Is that really the best you can manage? I guess you invented the internet too. Wow! You must be seriously hung with a pair of brass nuts to boot. Pity you are so intellectually challenged, but then again with your narcissism only exceeded by your towering stature, I guess just brainlessly bullying about, and beating your own, err...drum, just comes to you as naturally as beating up on your sissy boys "clients".
As usual, you never allow the facts to interfere with your BS.

If this discussion was exclusively about the children, that would be a conversation entirely worth having. However, what you do, as is so typical of you tranny boys -- is to USE those children in need of competent and compassionate diagnosis and care -- and exploit them for your own ends and the perverted desires of your male compatriots to get 'speshul' accommodation to satisfy your sexual fetishes.

You are disgusting as well as totally delusional. Our "era"? What era is that? Are you referring to that era in human history where men are men, and women are women? I suppose we are all just to backward to accept your era where "men" get pregnant and 'women' like you have penises.

Anonymous said...

Strangely BS none of this is about you. Believe it or not no one is the least bit interested in you since you are neither interesting or significant in any way shape or form. Fact is you basically are beneath contempt.

Anonymous said...


Hmmmm, you should read your post. It's SO BOASTFUL - "I did this, and I'm so great!", blah, blah, blah. How totally guy! I work as a QA Engineer, and your attitude remands me so much if some of the corporate bigwig guys I've been exposed to, who are constantly boasting about how they're "so much more badass", than other men are. I've seen so called "late-onset transsexuals" (an oxymoron term, if I've ever heard one) who also have this mindset. It must come from having all of that male privilege for so long.

As for being THE ONE, who helped all of those TS kids in California, with just one article on a law journal - yeah, right! It's very seldom that actions like that are profound enough to have a positive effect in one fell swoop. I doubt very much that was the case with your action - especially with all of the TG kooks doing their best to muddy the waters, trying to drag us into their camp, which has the effect of making John and Jane Q Public want to back pedal, and say to themselves, "whoah! hang on a minute! Do we want to make it easier for young people to have access to this (goofy) TG lifestyle?". This in turn, results in more work needing to be done to prove that "hey, those of us who are the real deal are not a bunch of goofballs, and we had (as do many if not most of these young people), a legitimate medical issue, that needed to be taken care of, so we could live normal, fulfilling lives."

About "late onset transsexualism" - unless you've lived under a rock for most of your life, how can you not know that treatment to deal with/fix transsexualism has existed for decades? With that being the case, why would you wait until you're middle aged, or a senior citizen, to do something about it? As a TS, you wouldn't!


Anonymous said...

part 1

@Elizabeth and Anonymous Dumb and Dumber:

When I say "I saved all of them" it may be more accurate to say "IT saved all of them." I didn't invent the process, I used it. The "IT" is the question. Its been a ten year plan from my early days at Gibson Dunn & Crutcher (Oh yes, the plot doth thicken doesn't it), one of the oldest firms in the US, and one of the most powerful law firms on the planet--my first big firm gig. I learned to play the long game there. You can add Howrey & Simon, Ogletree & Denkins, Mayer Brown Rowe & Maw, Barger & Wolen to my CV. Only A-listers work for these firms. I was a contractor for another agency. This last firm we'll visit later in the discussion. Somewhere within this time I worked as financial crimes investigator with OSI and UBS Financial Services. My history prior is unimportant.

As you know for a couple years I was a lobbyist for the Underwriters Association, until I showed them their shit stain, and one of the articles I wrote was soft a indictment of the insurance industry. Remember "It cost less to treat then not to." In the planning prior to 2001, the San Francisco experiment proved that, but Elizabeth, thanks to you and several others who had their surgeries covered by insurance prior to 1982, the insurance industry already knew this. I eluded to them knowing it--having prior knowledge. Have they committed a fraud, which, I know, well... that's my secret.

There is a correlation between transsexual/transgender medical legitimacy and your civil rights. I discovered this working for Barger & Wolen, an insurance defense firm. A law review article and legal memorandum (Janis Raymond was mentioned) in oblique paraphrase; "If you keep them from medical legitimacy you keep them from civil liberties"--they're reasoning is prejudice towards gay people, in history we were considered equivalent to homosexuals who just went too far by the general public--hence the need for your secrecy--you cowardice and fear. There would be a lot of political momentum from regaining our medical legitimacy. How do you change that thinking? How was it lost in the first place in 1982? That's a historical fact folks. FACT: There were no services in 1984-86, and the "AIDS plague" was in full force, fear and self loathing, my only window lost forever to keep me from being turned into an ogre sized human being.

Specially "E#" I get to beat my own drum a bit and have a good brag on this one, albeit privately here I hope. Call it healthy pride. If Elizabeth brags she's been at it for 48 years--but only helps (8 kids, financing their surgeries) I call bullshit! 48 years and no actionable solutions to the larger problem is what usually is called incompetence. Whatcha been smoking Liz?

Anybody ever see the movie "The Firm?" Remember those dark figures that did the dirty work for the law firm--that was my job title: Corporate Assassin. Part of my job description was "Morally Flexible." There I learned the dark arts of corporate fascism--how they really do business.


Anonymous said...


part 2

I neither need to prove how it was done nor my reasoning behind it. The numbers I quoted are directly from Dr. Joanna Olsen from Children's LA. We had dinner recently. I don't need to be a hero nor need to prove my CV to you. You only see publicly, a small fraction, of the work I've done. Most of it is in secret; how do I prove to you I called a Senator? It wouldn't be appropriate if I did and I'm not going to publish the letters and emails of my lobbying work for you to tear apart.

The fact remains, when I came on the scene the job was done, but what raises my ire is after providing a blanket of healthcare and civil liberties for future generations you have the gall to question the manner in which its provided. You sit on the sidelines in fear and you do nothing but complain.

I don't have to explain myself to you and your anonymous trolls. You know exactly who I am. I know exactly who you are. We're on equal, knowing terms, CassandraSpeaks knows I can find anyone one of you--even if you post anonymously. I don't need to prove it, I already have. That little bit of fear should tell you something.

Doesn't it say "Female" on your birth certificate? People died for that right. Mine says female as well. Its legitimacy to say "I was born female." A girl. Its not denying I was born a boy. "Boy" is only a gender label--a word created by another to label me without my permission, same as you. Other people fought for that. Here is an interesting question: When does a person sense of self agency begin? Is that self agency retroactive?

Words have meaning, value and power. If you hold up a white piece of paper and a black piece of paper I challenge you to find any person that is colored exactly with that binary. Isn't it true we are all colored? Who is 100% female and who is 100% male. Its an invalid question from the first. Asking me if I was born a boy, male or a man is an invalid question from the first. I can legitimately say with absolute confidence and back it up legally and scientifically, "No I was not."

Anonymous said...

Part 3

OK, I'll admit I'm a pretty ogre.

To sum it up. Even after the AMA and APA declaration, you'll notice that when California removed the insurance exclusions in all insurance contracts the EEOC changed their policy within the year to include transgender people in the 1964 civil rights act under Sex Discrimination. It still is a 10th Amendment argument for States that don't have an ENDA.

This is the done deal.

The argument that works, as in most medical issues: You don't need to know from where it comes from, don't need to understand all the surgeries involved, don't need to know about about what our crotches look like. All you need to know is it costs less to treat than not to.


Anonymous said...

More male chest thumping. watch out for the implants you'll burst them with hands like those!

Anonymous said...

Yep, women celebrate this way all the time!

"Chest thumping" a tard term, shaming my body, calling me on my physical deportment only illuminates the strength of my argument.

If there was someone like me at the helm prior to 1980 I would be about 6', transitioned young, lithe and pretty.


Elizabeth said...

@BS aka Bull Shit Artist


When I can stop laughing at the utter hubris and outright LIES in your latest posts I will have a comment but I have a party to go to but I have to admit you are really funny. stupid funny and delusional funny but funny non-the-less.

Mostly Harmless said...

"I SAVED ALL OF THEM!", supposedly in later post that "I" was "IT" yet as a stranger to the group, the thing that stands out in BS's postings is the level of self congratulation.

I've met a few thru the years, who tracked the thousands (and it was into the thousands if not tens of thousands) of people they helped transition and/or lives they saved by advice they gave or ear they gave to someone depressed. I found it pretty disgusting however because who truly motivated to do good counts that stuff? It was all about them. Maybe there was some positive motives deep down there someplace, but between the gross exaggeration, and counting it just seemed slimy to me. Or maybe it was these people's obsession over getting kids that always seemed to be part of it.

I personally think when it comes to kids, it is a very delicate situation. Not all the huge numbers (as being reported these days) of trans identifying and gender non-conforming kids are transsexual. Yet they are all fed the message they are transgender.

I figure the real transsexual kids will go for what they need cause it is a need after all, but I wonder if they will get lost among the hordes of transgender? Feel like maybe they aren't trans because they will know they are different than most of those trans identifying kids. Isn't that the truth, the transsexuals know they are different, but the transgender always think they are just like transsexuals?

"There is a correlation between transsexual/transgender medical legitimacy and your civil rights"

Well it seems to me that lumping in transgender with transsexual is a pretty serious way to compromise medical legitimacy. After all transgender don't have the same medical need and many choose to not have surgery. That kind of undercuts the need argument. And then, as these people who have convinced themselves they are just like transsexuals go have surgery, there will be an increase in regrets undercutting the medical effectiveness argument. Some temporary gains may be achieved but the long term trend will be negative.

It's a curious thing don't you think? How when it comes to genital surgery, the "trans-community" always screams loud and long for their "rights" that it's an absolute imperative that medical treatment for "gender identity" be readily available... but then when asked when THEY themselves are going to get "it," they all very quickly retreats with a cry of
"~Oh, I can't~" followed with,

I always love it when the person who can't afford it bought a new car, house, etc. Their actions demonstrate what the real need is.

- Mostly Harmless

Mostly Harmless said...

The fact remains, when I came on the scene the job was done, but what raises my ire is after providing a blanket of healthcare and civil liberties for future generations you have the gall to question the manner in which its provided. You sit on the sidelines in fear and you do nothing but complain.

There are lots of people who have done plenty, paved the way for others, provided positive examples. I for one get tired of seeing all that effort go down the drain by the promotion of a primarily transgender agenda under the guise of it being what transsexuals need.

- mostly harmless

Anonymous said...

Here's the article I cited...

And as you seem to be a bit overly consumed with your own brilliance but somehow incapable of reading between the lines at the moment... With your permission, may I help you out a bit?

The reason, the one and the ONLY reason it's so darn cost beneficial for these employers to offer SRS coverage is simple. It is rarely if ever used! Look at the City of SF fer shits sake!! They've been offering this benefit to all their employees for over a decade and they have had to continually revise their projected expenses for SRS downward because the benefit is almost never used... SF? Yes! SF! The Nexis for all things "transgender." A city where all one has to do is get even the most menial of jobs with the city and starting day one, your surgery will be bought and paid for? Heck, they offer it now as a SF citizen benefit, All you have to do is establish a residence in SF and your surgery is covered... Can you say UPS drop box? It has been the same with all the other cities and with other companies in the USA that have offered SRS as a health benefit. The cost is next to nothing because... it is almost NEVER used! And it is not just here in the good Ol' USA! Look to our neighbor to the north. Dear Old Canada, more specifically Quebec, where SRS has been a benefit available to ever single one of their citizens for more than a decade... and yet... it is still almost NEVER used!


Because, as you good and well know with your "clients!" Men absolutely love their little dicks and no matter how much chintz and lace they wrap their precious in, they are just as loath to even think about "cutting it off" as is any man! Noooooooooo! Not the precious!

These are fact Sweetie... Not conjecture! Not shrill "haters" wagging bony old fingers in glee at the TG plight. Nope! Guess again! It doesn't matter how much noise you and "they" make about how "they" would get run right out and get surgery.... if it was affordable... when the offer is there on the table... "they" always back the hell away from it just as fast as possible!

Now then, seeing as you have hijacked the thread to talk about YOU... there is another issue YOU brought up that as Liz pointed out that needs to be discussed.... Why it is that every time it comes to talking about TG, the lions share of whom are nothing more than a bunch of pervy old fuck panty wackers... It is always, ALWAYS, the rare as hens teeth transsexual kids being trotted out as the shining example of what is going on in "the community!" Wrong! Wrong! Wrong! While the kids are being helped more now than in the past, they are just a handful and their one and ONLY desire is to be shed of this curse so they can live totally normal lives. Not to be shining beacons for the pervs to whack off to!

Just like the sick "transgender" fuck we were talking about before you popped in... There are men, and they are legion and by the score, they are using these kids just as you have and it is ALWAYS to justify their having access to women's spaces for nefarious sexual reasons...


Anonymous said...

Someone should inform Black Swan that for most of us there was nobody around to help us transition, we had to find out how, and where to find resources on our own.

So while BS may think she has more brain power than the rest of us, that would be a delusion.

I can't speak for the rest here, but I am sick to death of hearing you feel sorry for yourself. To me that is the worst of your Tee-Gee traits.


Anonymous said...


You received nothing but kindness compassion and the offer of friendship from me. Yet because I disagree with the ridiculous rantings of your tg friends you threatened to expose my past to my friends and to my husband if I did not comply with your views and stop expressing my own! What kind of a person does that make you?


Anonymous said...

This threat of 'outing', is just another example of the TG practice of threats and intimidation used in their "war on women".

Like most men, they view women as objects to be used for their own gratification. When that acquiescence and subservience is not forthcoming, the threats, provocations and intimidations begin.

Just like any hard core drug addict, they become desperate and dangerous when their "needs" for gratification and accommodation are not met. They are full of falsehoods and their lies and misrepresentations must be exposed and called out.

This blog is just the beginning.

Anonymous said...

BS's veiled threats of "outing" anonymous posters is, on it's own, clear cut evidence that TGs are the enemy of those truly born transsexual, not our allies. Though I'd love to know exactly how she/he is going to "find" me, when I don't even know who she/he is, and have never once conversed with them, nor indeed, anyone from the "trans community". Is Elizabeth giving you access to our IP addresses? Somehow, I seriously doubt that. Or are you some kind of expert hacker?

I can only applaud everyone else's posts, and am pleased that here at least if nowhere else, the voices of those born transsexed are not being drowned out in a sea of TG male intimidation, falsehoods, and deceitful conflation of our issues.

The bottom line is, TGs obscenely thinking they can speak on our behalf, conflating their "gender issues" with our medical condition, or even erroneously identifying as "transsexual", is doing great damage to those born transsexual. TGs are in actual fact, doing a great job of undoing all the good work and progress for improving the rights and overall quality of life for those born trans-sexed, before the transgender phenomena reared it's ugly head.

The fight for TG rights is to the detriment of transsexual rights, due to the deliberate and deceitful conflation with our issues, which are worlds apart from their own issues.

I don't think there's a single trans-sexed female who would have believed it was a good idea to allow individuals with male genitalia into women's spaces so long as they say they are "transgender". Granting these TG men such a "right" was a time bomb waiting to go off, as has now been proved. TGs only care about the rights of men. The rights of women, whether trans-sexed or not, is of zero importance to them.

Mostly Harmless said...

"I don't think there's a single trans-sexed female who would have believed it was a good idea to allow individuals with male genitalia into women's spaces so long as they say they are "transgender"."

That statement says it so simply.

Most any woman would understand the sensitivity women have knowing someone with male genitalia is in women's spaces with them and in most instances be willing to take whatever steps to respect those feelings. Yet the TG mantra is to demand access to such spaces by people claiming to be just like other women except for their body but this insistence on access is prima fascia evidence they don't think like women.

The current pervy obsession that has developed and really has taken off in the past couple years has just handed critics something they can get real traction from. That is something that the general person will see as pervy. That is very different than some abstract moral objections.

But do they care? No, because their needs, their validation (cause they have no self esteem) is more important than anything. They make it a battle of rights. Their rights and demand for respect. The hurt male reaction when they don't get what they feel entitled to. And completely fail to understand nor recognize what needs to be earned instead of demanded.

- mostly harmless

Anonymous said...

@mostly harmless: Yep, that's it exactly, and in a nutshell. Transgender "women" are not women, because they think and act like men. And acting "en femme" has nothing whatsoever to do with being female. This is where the TG men delude themselves.

Their demands to have access to women's spaces without question, is proof in itself that they are not women. They are not sensitive to women's needs, and only care about what they want, and that their own desires are met, no matter at what cost to women.

Any genuine woman suffering from transsexualism would understand that all women's needs need to be taken into consideration, not just their own, and would also understand why some women would be very sensitive and apprehensive about sharing a women's space with someone who possesses male genitalia.

As a woman who is currently pre-op and awaiting surgery, I would not want to access a woman's shelter before surgery, even if I needed to use one. I know I'm a woman, but I also know my current anatomic setup betrays that fact, and that would likely make other women uncomfortable sharing their space with me. I'd also feel uncomfortable, because I wouldn't want to be among other women, knowing I'm the only one who is anatomically incorrect. It would only make me feel more isolated, and add to my personal trauma.

I definitely don't belong in men's spaces, but I also don't belong in women's spaces whilst I have the outer anatomic set-up of a male. Which leaves me in a limbo state until surgery.

This situation is horrible to be in, but lets face it, is there anything about being female in a pre-operative transsexual state which isn't horrible? Nope. Living with transsexualism is incredibly painful, and is literally a living hell prior to surgery, which is why surgery for those genuinely born trans-sexed is a necessity, not something which is "optional". Again, this is something the TG men will never understand, and why they have no clue of what it means to live with transsexualism, or what it means to be female.

Anonymous said...

Thanks to Anonymous from earlier this morning, for raising the issue of 'necessity' vs. 'option'. Granted that memory plays tricks, now in middle age, but I still experience those echoes of teenage desperation even now on the other side of the long curve of time.

About gendered spaces, yes, absolutely what she wrote. Beforehand, it was always a struggle to find a safe place to use the loo, and I was exceedingly reluctant to set foot in a crowded ladies' room. I'm still shy of those spaces, decades afterward, even though I've got no practical reason to be shy of them.

I do recall the wise advice of my psychiatrist (one Russell Reid, in London: some of you will have met him) to the effect of "be a good woman: the world depends upon good women"). I do think he was right.

I count myself lucky to have been among the 'pre-computer cohort', when we could seek and attain personal privacy concerning the most intimate details of our lifes. I do yet worry about those (from the TG cohort) who seem to bask in publicity, as they bring unpleasant attention unto everyone within their vicinities. Not sure at all what the answer for that is, save to seek and hold as quiet a life as we can.

Hugs to they as would want them...

an elfchick

Anonymous said...

@elfchick: Well, I've always had a non-existent social life, so thankfully, I've very rarely found myself in situations where I've had to use gendered spaces. Places like gyms, swimming baths, etc which would require me to change my clothes in a public space have always been no-go areas for me. Such activities are off-limits to me until I've had SRS.

Because of the times of day I go out, on the rare occasions where I've had to use the ladies, it's never crowded. And if I'm very lucky, it's empty. Even so, I'm always nervous and acutely aware that I'm in the wrong body when I'm there, which is why I will avoid using those facilities whenever possible.

Something that most people do every day without even giving it a second thought, is a very traumatic, and emotionally triggering experience for me. Things like this are why I consider the so-called "real life test" a bogus concept right from the off. I can only live some kind of a normal life after I've had surgery, doing it pre-op is simply not possible for me.

It sounds like you had a very nice psychiatrist. All of the clinicians I've dealt with aside from my current one, have been terrible, and only succeeded in worsening my mental health.

TGs are definitely making things worse for those born transsexual, not least in terms how the wider public perceives us. That is something which terrifies me. In any event, any kind of social life for me pre-surgery is a no-no. But like I said before, suffering with transsexualism can be very isolating.


Anonymous said...

"I", the young pre-op anonymous raises an important point. If one considers that most conventional treatment programs for GID, GD or any form of "gender variance" is based on WPATH's SOC. is it not obvious that such a treatment program, devised by the TG to treat TGs would be highly ineffectual in treating those suffering from a totally different condition.

Besides all the social stigma of being associated with TGs, the medical and psychological abuse at the hands of the so called "caregivers" is scandalous to the point of criminality. This is a direct consequence of the TG's stealing our "narrative".

"They have always felt like a girl", but only when they put a dress on, and amazingly, the feeling just magically goes away just as soon as they obtain "relief". It is little wonder that the medical community must proceed with caution.

Anonymous said...

@Other anonymous: Exactly. Before I sought medical assistance in procuring hormone treatment and surgery, I was under the naïve impression that the gatekeepers were trained solely in how to treat and give help to those born transsexual.

However, after some time, it became apparent to me that I was receiving very poor medical assistance due to the fact that I wasn't performing a very narrow sterotype of "femininity". In other words, I wasn't expected to be a real woman, but instead, an overexaggerated caricature of a woman. Now I realise I was quite possibly the first actual woman with transsexualism they had come across, which is why they didn't have the first clue how to deal with me. Particularly as I am a little bit tomboyish. To put it bluntly, they were expecting me to be TG, in order for them to take me seriously. But I knew I did not belong in that box, and vigorously resisted being forced into it.

To me, it's just plain logic and common sense as to why the "real life test" is of no benefit to females unlucky enough to be born transsexual. There's nothing about women's real lives which involves possessing male genitalia. Why would I need SRS at all, if I could live a normal, fulfilling life possessing the wrong anatomical set-up for my sex? The bottom line is, women/girls born transsexual NEED SRS in order to live normal lives. So the RLT is totally a bogus concept in treating real females afflicted with transsexualism.

Your last point sums it up completely. For those born with transsexualism, there is no relief prior to SRS. It's like living in a constant nightmare which you cannot wake up from. TGs can find "relief" from putting on feminine attire, and playacting at being women. This will not suffice for those born transsexual, because we actually are women. I cannot function properly in society whilst I have these horrible and useless male appendages stuck to me. It really is as simple as that.

Whilst "caregivers" (and I use that term very loosely) are trying to push those born transsexual into a TG mold, there are always going to be those like me suffering in a system which should have been there to help us. TGs twisting our narratives only helps them, whereas it only does great damage to us.

Anonymous said...

Reading these last few comments, I wonder whether I was luckier than I thought I was at the time: having a decent shrink in my home country, whose sage counsel to me consisted of "go get yourself sorted out, and you'll be happier". I never did think to steam-open the sealed envelope she gave me with her letter of referral to Dr Reid in London; it was enough for me that she gave me a big warm hug and sent me on my way.

Dr Reid was an absolute treasure; he helped many others besides myself (and we have a small informal network of his 'nieces' to this day), and in the end he fell afoul of a medical standards tribunal for (perhaps, my reading of the situation) being too willing to be helpful.

Standards of Care must have existed in the late Seventies, but I never explicitly was aware of them. There were various support and therapy groups in my city, but I elected to just go ahead with my own private arrangements, and nobody seemed to make all that much of a fuss about it as long as I showed up at my counselling appointments on the stated day and time, and also as long as I was reasonably polite and at least outwardly clear-headed about who I was and what I wanted to be doing. I suspect that nowadays we'd call that the 'informed consent' model of care.

Honestly, I cannot recall ever having heard the term 'transgender' in 1976-1978. "Sex change', sure, that was in common use, and the concept made sense to me because of course there was a physical correction that needed being done, and I wasn't in the least fazed by the wild notion of travelling a third of the way round the world to do it. Getting my passport was more work than getting through the various 'gatekeeping' processes.

I suspect that the situation is much harder, now, for transsexual women and men both, since the public discourse seems to be so much about overblown pervy actions and pervy people. Reasonable levels of anonymity must also be much harder to attain; my heart goes out to those of our lot who are faced with such an unspupportive social situation.

"Playing at being women" is a strong and accurate metaphor. For the likes of us, there's very little agency for 'play', and much more agency towards 'be'.

I hesitate to baldly advocate separatism, but that does seem to make a lot of sense.

Hugs as ever,

an elfchick

Jessica said...

Elfchick: My how times have changed, for the worse in this regard. The default terms I get applied to me by therapists, doctors, etc. are "transgender" and "gender non-conforming". Well, hmm, last I checked, I have a sex identity issue between my legs. My gender's never been the problem. Non-conforming, eh? Last I checked I conform to a standard woman's sense of self, save that wretched bit.

It's really disturbing, too, given the people I deal with in such matters are dealing with other transsexual youth, not to mention, this is their specialty. This then goes to the supportive parents, which eventually trickles down to the youth as terms they use to self-define. My mother is no exception...she's reading, enjoying the work of one Boylan, of She's Not There. Wasn't Boylan is rather selfish for the treatment regarding Boylan's wife, with the degrees of surprise, shock, etc. involved?

You address a major concern I have of my time, in that being anonymous, during such an age of technology, where everything is stored, and easily accessible, is all but impossible. Not through my own tryings and failures to do so, mind you, but the way things are. Thankfully, it appears such information is well-hidden, as I tried to keep any such record of the name hidden, and all but impossible to find. It still is not good enough, because I have that fear of my future, should someone find out.

Anon at 9:27, absolutely. I thought they'd know basically what a true TS needs, from hormones to give temporary relief, but also that SRS is a must. Not an option, not a choice, but a matter of life or death. I don't know what is so difficult to understand about this to doctors. I honestly feel there will NEVER be self peace until SRS cures me of this condition, and this point seems rather lost on all but those who I speak to here. To the TG, oh perhaps they get this on a small level, if only for the purposes of turning around, to use to their greedy little men advantage, for their own (fictional) stories.

Clothes for happiness is classic TG...they did nothing for personal enjoyment for me, prior to hormones, as they made me feel worse, reflecting back in the mirror, that my body shape, my figure was masculine at the type, and utterly disgusting. I mean, I like clothes now, to feel pretty on a rather superficial level, but they don't help with my problems regarding that skin tube, not in the least.

That bit is why I feel worried in the bathrooms...I much prefer to go when they are empty, for those privacy reasons for THEIR sake (see that TGs? NOT MINE!) because of that greatly disturbing appendage. It doesn't belong in there, that part is obviously MALE, no matter what TG types say.

Sigh...I wish I had been born years ago for these reasons. Wish you all well in these times of concern and caution.


Jessica said...

Oh, yes, one last bit...I am not a pioneer, for trying to simply obtain inner peace in my life. Nor am I on the forefront of a movement for change. It is not becoming more "popular" to do so, as I do not believe the numbers of those unfortunately truly transsexual have remained constant. TGs, oh sure, they've increased, I would agree there. I'm also not so sure if this transsexual medical condition should go the route of homosexuality, wherein it is accepted by the common person, with television representation, and so forth. Finally, I do not believe God gave this me to me for a reason, to be a messenger; as I believe it merely a horrific birth defect that has haunted, hurt me in too many many ways, with self-hatred.


I say these things, because dearly and closely as I love my mother, supportive as she may be, has clearly bought into Umbrella Inc. The above are my counterarguments to some of her thoughts about me and this condition. Take any of them, and apply the reverse. Sigh. Thankfully, I've gotten her to only use transsexual, and I think I've taught her the huge difference between the two terms, or at least I hope so. Strange place to ask for advice, but what would you suggest I do here to further illustrate my points? Thanks much in advice.


Anonymous said...

Maybe it is something in the water...

Anonymous said...

Hope you are okay Liz
It has been a while.


Jessica said...

NYF, indeed, I was worried about Elizabeth's health as well. It is reassuring that your post went through. Hopefully she merely was on vacation, or a likewise equal leisurely activity.

I hope all is well with you and your family this spring, and just enjoying life as it should be, in your various endeavors.