Skip navigation

?

And, just what did the GLBT expect?

112 Comments

  1. We could make a movie out of it called The Normal People Strike Back.

  2. they expected to win … obviously .. and sooner or later they will .. oh well

  3. IMO anyone who is against same sex marriage is simply prejudiced or insecure.

    Either government should not be involved with marriage at all in ANY WAY or same sex marriage should be allowed.

    This is NOT a theocracy… and basic civil rights should not be put up to a popular vote. That’s why the constitution established the US as republic… and tried to protect individuals from the tyranny of the majority.

    I would think anybody who changes sex would understand that.

    If our legal status as women was put up to a vote, it would certainly be voted down by ‘normal’ people i most states… and no that would NOT be the TG’s fault.

    Most ‘normal’ people simply don’t believe someone who was born a physical can actually change it… After all that is why most TSes have ALWAYS wanted o be stealth even before the rise of the TG’s

    The religious right would be rallying support to defeat it just like for same same sex marriage. Using bathroom scare tactics etc… just like with the ERA!!!

    That some here can’t see that and understand why ON PRINCIPLE they should support same sex marriage, whatever their own orientation, is beyond me…

    • I have to disagree;
      Marriage is between one man and one woman.

      Everything else is a domestic partnership.

      Let the gays hijack another term.

  4. Aww now come on!

    The idea that someone can marry any gender or species they please to is not and never has been a civil right.

    In the same vein, it is also illegal in this and many other countries for people of anyone to marry below a certain age. Some things are just not in the interests of the social fabric. Should it be a civil right for a 10 year old to marry their school sweetheart if they so desire ?

    The point is that marriage is already a civil right, but one with restrictions and rules. Nobody is stopping anyone getting married. As long as they play by the rules, anyone can get married. That some large portion of the population doesn’t see fit to change the rules to support a small percentage, does not make it prejudice.

    Transsexuals change sex because they have to. They change sex to JOIN the other sex, not to become a third sex, not to change laws and not to make a civil rights statement. Transsexuals come in all denominations, from republicans to liberals, from catholics to jews. Transsexuals are not by default gay or lesbian, and many of us do not suffer discrimination, nor if we do, are willing to cry foul for suffering such. We are resourceful and we tend to overcome, but it is not in our nature to play the victim card. We tend to leave that to the transgenders.

    The major problem when it comes to transgenders is just what in the hell is a transgender? What can it be defined as? Since there are no real rules to be transgender, then anyone can claim it. If we make a law that says transgenders can use the womens restrooms, then any man could in fact use the womans restroom, dressed “en femme” or not, and if challenged, simply use the transgender defense to avoid prosecution or arrest.

    Transsexuals go stealth because they WANT to be known as women .. compleatly! They don’t do it to hide away from society, they do it to JOIN society!

    It doesn’t follow that transsexuals have to stand for gay values, not even on principle!

  5. Kaa, you make some absurd statements, If anyone is insecure it must be you. You`ll never change anyones mind in here or in society at large. I think same sex marriage is wrong and I vote that way also.
    So now you can go and play victum with your gay buddies.

  6. I read comments here that seem to be disconnected with logic.

    Take this one:

    [quote]
    Transsexuals go stealth because they WANT to be known as women .. compleatly! They don’t do it to hide away from society, they do it to JOIN society!
    [/quote]

    Which kind of makes my point. If the legal status as post-ops was put up for a vote it would be defeated precisely for the same reasons as one needs to be stealth to be seen ‘completely’ as woman.

    That is exactly such things (which include same sex marriage) should not be a popularity contest.

    And then there is the:

    [quote]
    Marriage is between one man and one woman.
    [/quote]

    Why outside of religious beliefs? As I said this is not a theocracy….

    The only societial interest in it would be to promote procreation…

    But guess what? Post-ops are not fertile and can’t procreate. So should post-ops (or post menopausal women or …) not be allowed to marry?

    So WHY should legal benefits be given to some couples and not others if it’s not REALLY about procreation?

    Homosexual couples can raise children just fine as homosexuality really is not catching just as TSism is not.

    So why should the government care about the sex of partners?

    I repeat how would you like YOUR legal status as woman voted on?

    Any takers? It could happen you know.

    • KAA;
      Religion or not marriage has always been female (s) and a man. What I don’t understand is why can’t the homosexuals use the domestic partnership structure and harmonize it’s rights privileges with marriage. Keep in mind everyone that marriage is not a right in the first place, you have to have a license to get married in this country, that license makes it a privilege and can be revoked at any time. This is a throwback to the racial hygiene laws of the early 20the century, many of which are still on the books.

      Why is it Kaa the word marriage must be hijacked in the first place. I would think the queers would be against this as this hetero-fies their queerness.

      We have discussed why government and people care about sex, we want to keep the penis people out of our spaces.

      Thankfully the voters in Maine and elsewhere have spoken.

      • They want the term “marriage” for the same reason they want the term “transsexual”, to take the sexual stigma of being queer away and to legitimize them. Fuck em! They will never get my vote … on principle!

      • Right On Leigh;

        They haven’t earned my vote in years.

  7. We must thank the GLBT for the sterling job they have done in supporting us. In the past, people in state government did vote on things having to do with us and it came out very favorably. These days, of course it would be a different story. And every bit of it can be laid at the feet of certain people in the gay movement.

    Regardless of my views on personal freedoms, why should I support them in any way? I’d be a fool to kiss the hand that strikes me.

  8. Could you give details on those votes way back when?

    Most were administrative actions and/or judicial decisions and I would be very surprised if there were any back in the day that actually went before voters in an election that passed way back when.

    In any case you can’t have/be guaranteed continued ‘personal’ freedom if the principles of freedom are only applied to groups you (or the majority) approve of. Doing that is exactly what the tyranny of the majority IS.

    ” and when they can there was no one left to speak out”

  9. Ok i’ll Bite…

    If there were a popular vote tomorrow on the legal status of post-op transsexuals to be considered women (ftm) it would be a resounding NO!

    but……….

    had the medical condition of transsexuality been voted on before it got intentionally conflated with homosexuality, it would likely have been a very different outcome.

    KAA .. you are responsible for this. You and your transgender allies, the ones that are pro GLBT because you cannot stand on your own two feet without having the GLB crutch to hold up your illegitimate claims to transsexualism. Get this through your head KAA … we don’t want your homosexual alliances. We would rather live in the shadow of a religious right than live under the threat of having our condition considered nothing more than homosexuality.

    … and that is what this blog is about, a small voice in the wilderness that calls you out for the pretenders you are. You do not have our medical condition, you have a social condition.

    We dont give a rats ass about laws to make us who or what we are, we know who and what we are and no law or popular vote will ever change that. The GLBT can go to hell, for they will get no support here from transsexuals.

  10. [quote]
    had the medical condition of transsexuality been voted on before it got intentionally conflated with homosexuality, it would likely have been a very different outcome.
    [/quote]

    Evidence against that as is said that stealth has ALWAYS been needed to be seen as woman by most people. That being the case why would a majority vote have voted to grant us equal status as women?

    BAck then outside of some in he medical profession we were regarded by most people as gay men… and that is still the case. You can’t blame it on TG’s because it was that way in the 60′s.. LONG before TG politics.

    [quote]
    KAA .. you are responsible for this.
    [/quote]

    I did not know I was so powerful! BTW I’m NOt part of the LGBT movement nor am I an activist of any sort.

    But I do have a sense of justice.

    [quote]
    You and your transgender allies, the ones that are pro GLBT because you cannot stand on your own two feet without having the GLB crutch to hold up your illegitimate claims to transsexualism.
    [/quote]

    LOL!
    I did change sex. I am a woman.

    I went full time over 12 years ago and I’m over 11 years post-op. Whatever you may think does not change that.

    That I support same sex marriages does not who I am nor does it define who I associate with or what I think about TG or GBLT politics… Im point of fact I think adding T to GBL is a mistake – an least for TSes.. But that has NOTHING to do with my position on same sex marriage and why all should support it regardless of orientation.

    [quote]
    We would rather live in the shadow of a religious right than live under the threat of having our condition considered nothing more than homosexuality.
    [/quote]

    How in the world is the issue of same sex marriage connected with TSes being seen as homosexual? They are totally orthogonal issues with respect to TSes being women.

    [quote]
    for the pretenders you are. You do not have our medical condition, you have a social condition.
    [/quote]

    Because I’m not a right winger and consider myself a liberal?

    You mean someone has to be an ultra conservative to be a TS?

    I never knew there were political and or religious requirements to be TS or to be either sex!

    [quote]
    We dont give a rats ass about laws to make us who or what we are,
    [/quote]

    Well if you want to marry it matters. If you want to be locked up with women if you ever get tossed in jail for any reason it matters. If you don;t want an M on your driver’s license despite being post-op it matters. When you get a job and you don’t want a SS mismatch letter that could cost you your job it matters…

    [quote]
    we know who and what we are and no law or popular vote will ever change that.
    [/quote]

    To quote Joni Mitchell:

    “Don’t it always seem to go
    That you don’t know what you’ve got Till it’s gone”

    [quote]
    The GLBT can go to hell, for they will get no support here from transsexuals.
    [/quote]

    You don’t speak for all (or even most ) TSes on this issue. What goes around comes around eventual…

    Support bigotry and it will come back to bite you… Remember most of those against gay marriage will never accept post-ops as woman.

    Being anti same sex marriage does not give you any legitimacy as a woman in their eyes… Really.

  11. yet another transgender on a mission .. will it never end

    http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/scotland/article6903784.ece

    • Transgender Jesus, TG Virgin Mary calendars, there seems to be no end. What sort of people in their right minds would just invite ridicule and derision into their lives?

      Hmmm. Guess that question answers itself.

      Sara …

  12. I was there in the 60′s .. I transitioned in the 70′s .. Transsexuals were NOT considered gay .. except by the gays.

    Hows the wife ?

    • That wasn’t even the case in the early 80s when I began transition.
      People thought of us as being a little strange but didn’t think of us as being ether sex obsessed or gay.

  13. I don’t know what circles you moved in …

    I remember the 60′s and 70′s … and the common working class person most certainly did consider TSes homosexuals in the US.

    And as for my spouse she is doing fine thank you…

    BTW pre existing marriages are a separate issue both legally and morally and a red herring in this discussion.

    Attend any tea parties lately?

  14. So you were living as a woman full time in the 70′s were you?

    Out there working as a female yes?

    I mean, you actually did have that experience so you know for a fact that you were treated as a homosexual by the working classes?

    … or did you assume that would be the way it was?

  15. I never said I transitioned in the 70′s…

    But I sure heard people talking about TSes back then … there were TV talk shows back then too you know… and they did talk about TSism and people i knew did watch them and comment on them.

    And my family was working class and lower so those are the people I heard it from.

    I payed attention because i knew what I felt… and BTW the first time I went out presenting female was in grammar school in the 60′s… So it was something that mattered to me.

    I find it very interesting that you seem to believe that for someone to be a REAL TS… They have to be socially and politically, conservative, heterosexual…

    Last I checked women (genetic as well as TS) were of all political persuasions as well as all sexual orientations.

    It seems to me YOU are saying Tsism is a social condition and all about fitting a very narrowly social role…

    That to me says you are the one with the social condition. That is the only thing which would explain the demand that ‘real’ TSes adhere to a narrow set of attitudes and beliefs to be ‘legitimate’.

    After all if it is biologically based, one would expect TSes to be of all political persuasions as well as sexual orientation as genetic women are.

  16. KAA will never actually “transition”. If it hasn’t happened by now, it never will. It should be clear to the most casual observer that the tragically transgender can never be something they are not, and they will also never change. That is why they try so hard to convince everyone that a crossdresser is transsexual: If you can’t change reality, change the perception. Transgender is a lie, not a medical condition.

    The only thing left to do is to explain exactly who the transgender are to the people who are confronted with that “philosophy”. It’s sad that it has come to this, but they just won’t see reason. Just read KAA’s posts here after 12 years of the nonsense. That’s all the proof anyone needs.

    By the way, if you want the evidence for the “vote” you should see the provisions that exist for changing ones legal sex on ID’s all across the country, and birth certificates in 47 states. Contrast that to the continued rejection of gay marriage, and it certainly looks like a ringing endorsement by way of comparison.

    These are indisputable facts and if you can’t stop trying to turn everyone queer you deserve what you get. You are being rude, crude, and absolutely immoral toward your fellow human beings. Is that what you set out to do? The time for TG idiocy is past, and it is going to go away faster than any of you TG’s can believe.

  17. Oh BS karen

    The only thing the general public knew about transsexualism in the 70′s were the very few notable transsexuals of the time. They read the stories in the newspapers of the day and it was considered a medical anomoly, albeit a bit over sensationalised. Almost nobody had actually met a transsexual or knew any. Even the drag queens and transvestites of the day knew the difference between us. That was the very reason Virginia “Charles” Prince coined the term transgender, to differentiate the differences between transvestites and transsexuals which he hated with a passion.

    I was working as a waitress back then, early in transition and not at all stealth. I had NO problem getting employed, in fact I went from construction work to waitress in one week ..ONE WEEK .. and got a job in a quite swanky hotel catering to a high society kosher Jewish clientele. I started at the bottom and was promoted to head waitress in just six months, and had several girls and a couple of guys on my staff. Management and staff knew my background and it was not an issue. Nobody considered me gay except the few gay men that worked at the hotel. In fact one of them asked me out for a drink after work one night. We dropped by his place so he could “change”, and oh boy did he change! .. into a flaming gay man. I picked up my things and left. He was so embarrasssed he didn’t come to work the next day.

    I had met a married couple over at the bar on the corner one night. They invited me over to dinner at their house. They had 7 kids and I fit right in. Bernie, and his wife introduced me to the merchant seamans club down on the boardwalk. There I met a couple that when they heard I was looking for an apartment, were insistant that I come live with them. He was running for Mayor. They had a teenage daughter and son, he was a rockerbilly type. We all got on famously together, and I was even included in their social events. I was 25 years old.

    I will respect that you have had gender surgery but I will not respect that you are classic transsexual. We just dont go off and get married, produce kids then wait till we are retired to “find ourselves” True classic transsexualism demands us to correct our sex as soon as possible. We forego just about everything in that endevour. We dont go out presenting .. we just are!

  18. Yes most back then had not knowing met a TS… through teh high profile TSes most had heard of the. Same is true today actually.

    Not having met a TS never stopped people from having opinions about them. Actually it’s easier when they don’t know any personally to have opinions and talk about then… Then all they have is their prejudices and confusing reality does not get in the way.

    I don’t really care about labels such as “classic”. in the end they mean nothing.

    I was sneaking out of the house presenting female when I was in the 7th grade back in the 60′s in a working class neighborhood … I knew i was not female… yet I did it because I had to let the world ‘know’ i was a girl… Schizophrenic in a way? You bet!

    One just is what? A TS? Sorry no… Something has to cause one to be different from 99.9+% of humanity in a way nature was not aiming for.

    So nobody just ‘is’ … There is an underlying reason/cause … though there may be more than one reason/etiology involved.

    But in terms of “presenting”, I used that word because as I said I was aware i was not female despite what I desperately wanted.

    Genitals kind of had something to do with that. Once the age of reason is reached only someone who is delusional would not understand that.

    The real question is WHY do we do what we do when we do it… And the answers depend a complex constellation of individual circumstances, emotional makeup, sexual orientation combined with degree of sex drive and even physicality that all interact with each other.

    And because of that etiology can not be (or logically should not be) inferred from from things like age at transition, as you are trying to do.

    That is a fact just as the fact that I did not start transitioning until 39.

    But if you think that describes my life or defines who I am in a globally meaningful way you are very mistaken.

    You assume a lot.

    You don’t know the horror of my childhood that had nothing to do with being TS. You don’t know my first ‘date’ was at age 27 and that is who I married… and only person I ever dated.

    You don’t know we never had any children because I was not comfortable being sexual as a male…

    From what I’ve said before you SHOULD know I was a very long way from retirement when I transitioned 12 years ago, and still have a good numbers of years left until I reach retirement age.

    As I said your insistance on gender orthodoxy would point to it being more social than biological in your case, but that might be only one factor.

    In any case as I said labels like Classic are meaningless because human are so complex… I’m a woman and that is all that matters to me.

    But how did we get into this area? Oh yes you are trying to discredit my arguments about why we (and everybody actually, but particularly us) SHOULD support same sex marriage by discrediting me.

    That is the tactic of those who can’t counter an argument. If I am a classic TS or a martian should no bearing on the validity of my arguments.

    You seem to see the world through a very narrow filter. Obviously that makes you feel more secure. You (and others here) feel threatened when any points out the wider issues.

  19. Aria, Aria,

    More attacking the messenger instead of the arguments… A sign of intellectual and moral bankruptcy … and very right wing.

    [quote]
    KAA will never actually “transition”. If it hasn’t happened by now, it never will.
    [/quote]

    LOL! Pray tell how would you know that to be teh case form on-line..

    Because I’m a liberal who supports human rights?

    [quote]
    The only thing left to do is to explain exactly who the transgender are to the people who are confronted with that “philosophy”.
    [/quote]

    What phillospht may that be… I really curious what you think I believe..

    [quote]
    Just read KAA’s posts here after 12 years of the nonsense.
    [/quote]

    What nonsense specifically? Anything that does not agree with your politics?

    [quote]
    By the way, if you want the evidence for the “vote” you should see the provisions that exist for changing ones legal sex on ID’s all across the country, and birth certificates in 47 states.
    [/quote]

    Those laws did not come from popular votes.

    [quote]
    Contrast that to the continued rejection of gay marriage, and it certainly looks like a ringing endorsement by way of comparison.
    [/quote]

    Just like anti-segregation laws were popular in the south in the 60′s… If they had been put for a vote there then, what do you think would have been the result?

    Human rights should not be subject to the tyranny of the majority… It’s the principle that matters not if you like the groups it gets applied to.

    [quote]

    You are being rude, crude, and absolutely immoral toward your fellow human beings.
    [/quote]

    I believe feminists refer to statements like that as a reversal…

    [quote]
    The time for TG idiocy is past, and it is going to go away faster than any of you TG’s can believe.
    [/quote]

    I don’t support TG politics… I don’t support conflating TSism with TGism..

    But I do support human rights.

    Something more than few don’t seem to.

  20. Cut the human rights crap, that is just so homosexual speak. You and your liberal
    friends take that so far out of contex.
    It seems that comes up with liberals & the gay community, which you show you are one of them. You don`t have any valid argument than to repeat what the gay & tg activist state. I do have to agree with what Leigh has said to you.
    Now you call me whatever you want cause I could care less.

  21. Ok .. enough .. I feel like I am arguing with BattyBattyBats, that crossdressing goth from australia. If KAA don’t get what we are saying here then it’s just a waste of time and energy and I have better things to do.

  22. I know what you are saying. You are saying that i someone does believe the same things you do they are not legitimate.

    I think my arguments stand up pretty well…

    And no amount of name calling or trying to delegitimize who I am affects my arguments one itota.

    Just as calling me a a TG or an Xresser does not make me one.

    If you think I need or care about validation or approval from you, then you awfully high but unjustified opinion of yourselves.

    But I do understand that needing to see things as you do comes from a deep down insecurity in your own womanhood. That’s where the lashing outcomes from.

    Unfortunately to are giving ammunition to those who say TSes are just walking stereotypes of woman and so you are hurting all of us.

  23. I guess it will all get a whole lot worse before it gets any better.

    http://trans-fried-fluff.blogspot.com/

    Once the APA has done its worst – yet again!

  24. To no-one’s surprise, I’m with Kaa on this one.

    I don’t identify as an Aleut Eskimo, yet I’m in favour of equal human rights for them. If I see an Aleut Eskimo being persecuted, I’ll be against the persecution, even if I’m accused of eating whale-blubber and having a secret collection of walrus-teeth as the result.

    Just because both Gays and TGs give me a queasy feeling doesn’t mean to say that they’re not my equals. My existence gives many others a queasy feeling too.

    The only reason I’m posting here is not to convince, not to educate or inform. It’s to tell kaa that she’s not alone in her views. We who have been unjustly persecuted, misrepresented and misunderstood have no excuse for doing the same to others, no matter how strange they are.

  25. Zoe;
    What goes on in your country has no impact on what goes on over here on this side of the pacific. What happens over there is for you to deal with not us, same applies here.

    There are equal rights here and the hate crimes law that was just passed created a class of extra constitutional citizen, people who are privileged above the average citizen. A crime is a crime just because you are a homosexual or a man with a vagina or a woman with a penis shouldn’t give you special status under the law. this country is suppose to be about ALL PEOPLE BEING EQUAL UNDER THE LAW!

  26. I’m not au fait with the law in the USA, but here, if a bunch of gay bikies assault a straight-looking guy simply because he appears to be straight, then that’s just as much a “hate crime” based on sexual orientation as a bunch of religious nutters attacking some “fags”.

    Since I have no reason to doubt you, I’m surprised that the US law obviously must give special rights to homosexuals per se, rather than just protecting everyone equally on the basis of (perceived) sexual orientation (gay, straight, bi, asexual) and/or gender identity/presentation (male, female, andro).

    I’m also surprised that you don’t have existing similar laws, based on religion and race. Most countries do, so it doesn’t matter if you’re a Jew being attacked because you are Jewish, or a Catholic being attacked because you are Catholic, or even an Atheist attacked for being an Athiest, all are given equal treatment. Someone who is Jewish but is attacked for being a Carlton supporter is not protected. Someone who’s Muslim but is attacked because he “looks Jewish” by people screaming “Filthy Kike” is.

    That’s the way it works here. Could you please tell me how the new US law differs?

  27. So much venom and vitriol!?

    Is this a response to the issue of gay marriage or a response to the co-opting of “Transsexual” by the T portion of LGB~T? I can’t tell and to me it seems the two are being blended here. Are these not two very different issues? If I am missing the point, which is more than possible, then please elucidate as I don’t get it!

    If the anger is indeed about gay marriage, I too have mixed feelings about the issue.” Deep down inside I also feel a marriage is in fact a social bond created between a man and a woman. But… that said I cannot go further and outright condemn the idea because I really don’t have the faintest idea of what it means to be gay and denied the right to have a mate. I’ve gay friends in committed relationships that are as long lasting and seemingly stable as those of my straight friends who, with the option to marry, come in both the married and not married flavors. When I look to all of them I have to ask where is the harm in having a social recognition of any relationship?

    Perhaps that is the rub is it not? The semantics? Marriage vs. Civil Union? Frankly I think the activists shot themselves in the foot! They should have stuck to a state by state fight for recognition of civil unions. Had they not raised the flag of marriage or, to have done so right on the heels of the Mass. court case. Then the right to civil unions would have been granted in most cases and rightfully forgotten. They would have had their marriages in all but name rather than DOM.

    Perhaps if they have taken this path, later when society was in fact comfortable with gay unions we could have better judged granting the title of marriage or not, sans all this emotion.

    But that is neither here nor there is it? They didn’t take that path They bet the whole enchilada on a VERY long shot and lost big time, again and again and still, they do not back off! Makes me wonder! Are all the gay activists really that disconnected from reality?

    They may be! They did the same thing to feminism when they drug its focus into marginal lesbian issues rather than those of most women. And they certainly did it with our issue did they not?”

    So! Am I angry with the gay activists for what they have done? The very mildest I can put it is “Oh Hell Yes!!!!” That bastard creation of LGB~t is a total travesty that should never have been… but it was, and it is… and we, and the women who follow must focus on putting that genie back in the bottle…

    If we can!

    I put it to all of you… Should we allow our righteous anger at this to carry over to all gays? I don’t see where that gains us much if anything! Tit for tat? An eye for an eye? Didn’t the HBS’rs pretty much do the same thing with their anger and became “those marginalized hateful harpies who only beat a dead horse?” For all I know, The TG’s may in fact be sick perves as the HBS’rs claim, but dwelling on that one and only note has not gained them much has it?

    A good tactic when preaching to the choir but not so good when it comes to effecting change.

  28. Final word on this.

    There is no point in trying to counter an argument since whenever I do it is simply re-packaged and presented as another argument. I will not engage in futile arguments.

    As susan said “The transgender are fully wrapped up in intractable group think delusion.”

    The reason the TG have been unjustly persecuted, misrepresented and misunderstood is their own fault for throwing in with the gays and turning a medical condition into a homosexual condition. That is the essence of my anger toward the TG’s and the GLB.

    As for SSM, I do not support it and never will.

  29. Leigh,

    You have not presented ANY logical arguments for why same sex marriage should NOT be supported, so I guess tehre is no need to start now,

    All you have done is rant about TG’s and GBLT politics – which is not the same thing.

    You and others went on to ‘accuse’ me of being TG for supporting same sex marriage to try and discredit my arguments.

    The thing is what I am has no bearing on the merits of my arguments… and not a very honest tactic in a discussion.

    In any case while there is nothing inherently wrong with being TG (and being TG does not equate to promoting the ‘TG Agenda’ ),that is just NOT who I am.

    Next when I mention I am a relatively long term post-op (which some here who knew from years on line know is true) to put where I am coming from onto perspective … and then you continue try to discredit me buy saying I’m not a ‘classic’ transsexual.

    How in the world does that relate to the same sex marriage argument one way or another? (And the whole notion of ‘classic’ is fatally flawed by it’s simple mindedness anyway)

    So as far as I can see you have not argued the merits of your position on same sex marriage at all yet.

    Why does every single issue here always come back to “TG’s”?

    You don’t support same sex marriage because of TG’s? Huh?

    You don’t support it because marriage is between a man and woman – Which means it’s for procreation? (remember we as women can’t bear children regardless of age at transition)

    Or are you just prejudiced?

  30. Kaa;
    There is no such thing as same sex marriage.
    Marriage is between one man and one woman. Everything else is not marriage.
    You and the others on the queer front are trying to redefine a word that has a solid meaning like the word up or the word light, or down.

    We and the mainstream won’t accept you redefining marriage to include homosexuals, or groups.

    Take your civil unions and make it work for you, we won’t let you pervert marriage.

  31. [quote]
    There is no such thing as same sex marriage.
    [/quote]

    Well there in 5 sates and some other counties.

    [quote]
    Marriage is between one man and one woman. Everything else is not marriage.
    [/quote]

    Why? Why SHOULD that be? Just because something was as certain way, does mean it should stay that way. Should Slavery still be legal… after all I’m sure it wen back in human history a LONG way.

    [quote]
    You and the others on the queer front are trying to redefine a word that has a solid meaning like the word up or the word light, or down.
    [/quote]

    No… I’m pointing out unjustified inequality.

    [quote]
    Take your civil unions and make it work for you, we won’t let you pervert marriage.
    [/quote]

    If legally civil unions were equivalent in all respects to all levels of government to marriage in all jurisdictions that would be fine. But that is NOT the case- even in some places wit civil unions. THAT is why it needs to be marriage not a second class status.

    We are not a theocracy .. the constitution explicitly specified that church and state must be separate because of the dangers a theocracy poses.

    Civilly privileging het unions over others only because of religious beliefs goes against the basic founding principles of this country as well denying human right.

    The only possible civil justification for that could possible be to support children …. If so not just homosexuals, infertile people should not be able to marry… which include post-ops.

  32. I made my Same Sex Marriage arguments perfectly clear above. FIFTH COMMENT DOWN.

    You never commented on them in your reply, presumably because you could not find fault with the argument, so your reply went off on the aspect of transsexuals and stealth which I also commented on in the same post in reply to your original post. You are the one that took the debate out of context.

    I will repost it.

    “The idea that someone can marry any gender or species they please to is not and never has been a civil right.

    In the same vein, it is also illegal in this and many other countries for people of anyone to marry below a certain age. Some things are just not in the interests of the social fabric. Should it be a civil right for a 10 year old to marry their school sweetheart if they so desire ?

    The point is that marriage is already a civil right, but one with restrictions and rules. Nobody is stopping anyone getting married. As long as they play by the rules, anyone can get married. That some large portion of the population doesn’t see fit to change the rules to support a small percentage, does not make it prejudice.”

  33. I’m not trying to discredit the messenger KAA, that would be giving you too much credit; as if you are some kind of guru on trans issues. I’m pointing out how full of it you are.

    You have been a drag on everyone you come into contact with on this topic for many years now, adding confusion and poison to an already ridiculous situation.

    As usual here, you obfuscate and misdirect, trying to make it seem that this is about politics or how you chose to pursue “transition”. The fact is you are not like us, and we all know it.

    Everything you say betrays the lie. I am sick of people like you comparing yourselves to us, stealing our voice, pretending to be something you are not.

    You think you are so clever, that you can fool people into thinking the only difference between you and “born transsexuals” is one of process. The fact is that we are physically different from you types from birth. And you can never erase that distinction.

    All your efforts will amount to nothing in the end. The truth will be known.

  34. On the other topic, I think arguing over same sex marriage is a distraction. It has nothing to do with us and discussing it with a transgender is a complete waste of time.

  35. Those are not serious logical arguments… They are RR talking points designed to appeal to prejudice

    [quote]
    The idea that someone can marry any gender or species they please to is not and never has been a civil right.
    [/quote]

    Neither was being free of slavery , until it was. There are basic standards of fairness and human rights that society has not always followed. That is what progress is all about.

    Because something has been is not a justification for continued unfairness.

    [quote]
    In the same vein, it is also illegal in this and many other countries for people of anyone to marry below a certain age.
    [/quote]

    The ability to give meaningful consent is a factor in that… and it is not unjust to set an age limit to making a lifetime commitment.

    [quote]
    Some things are just not in the interests of the social fabric.
    [/quote]

    Why is same sex marriage not when marriages with no chance of reproduction are allowed? WHY is it not in societies’ interest?

    As far as i can see that is a religious view. If your religion frowns on same sex marriages it does not have to perform them and you don’t to have one.

    But why should religious beliefs be forced on someone who does not share them?

    [quote]
    The point is that marriage is already a civil right, but one with restrictions and rules.
    [/quote]

    And at one time in many jurisdictions inter-racial marriage was against ‘the rules’. That as much an affront to human right as disallowing same sex marriage.

    [quote]
    Nobody is stopping anyone getting married.
    [/quote]

    Yes they are. Just as interracial couples were stopped from getting married.

    That illustrates the baselessness of that argument. That’s the way it is, has never been a good justification for continuing oppression. If that were so we would still have slavery and inter-racial marriage would be illegal.

    [quote]
    . That some large portion of the population doesn’t see fit to change the rules to support a small percentage, does not make it prejudice.”
    [/quote]

    Again you don’t seem to understand the principles the US was founded on.

    You do know that majority in the south supported Jim Crow… If the Federal government has not stepped in things would be very different now…

    Again you make no logical arguments. You parrot the RR using appeals to prejudice and status quo to support your position. Not reasoning, and your view of history us rather myopic.

    You don’t seem to understand why the framers of the constitution were worried about the tyranny of the majority and why they separated church and state…

    It was because they saw consequences of those things in Europe… In fact that was a big reason WHY this country came to be.

  36. Aria,
    In one breath you say you are not trying to discredit the messenger. And in the next you do it yet again.

    Anybody looking at thus thread will see that you have made no cogent arguments against same sex marriage… only attempts at character assassination.

    To set the record straight. I have not spent years arguing for same sex marriage. It’s something I believe is right but I have not campaigned for it.

    BTW, as I said, I to see TG as dirty word even though that is not who I am.

    Just like all (most) who are homosexual are not flamboyant or ‘out there’ most who are TG are not either.

    All are just people trying to get through life as best they can.

    Judging people as group is exactly what prejudice is… And many do the same thing to us (TSes). That you, who has had to change sex, feel comfortable doing it to members of other groups is disturbing.

    That’s why I posted on this thread in the first place

    • “Anybody looking at thus thread will see that you have made no cogent arguments against same sex marriage…”

      And she doesn’t intend to. Maybe you missed this from her before.

      “Regardless of my views on personal freedoms, why should I support them in any way? I’d be a fool to kiss the hand that strikes me.”

      i’m pretty sure that she, like myself, isn’t against gay marriage.

      And i’m also pretty sure that she, like myself, sees this as nothing more than one giant pointless distraction that you are gleefully exploiting.

      For a minute there i was agreeing with you on a couple of points, and giving you the benefit of the doubt that you weren’t pointlessly trolling.

      So much for that.

  37. It’s like arguing with my husband ..

    ok you win.

    Now you can gloat and go cuddle the wife.

    • It’s hard to argue with a zealot, especially one who thinks the constitution says things it does not.

  38. LOL!

    I feel like I’m arguing with the RR! Which seem rather self hating for someone who has changed sex.

    I hope you do realize that having a marriage that survives transition and surgery speak volumes about how much we value each other as human beings. In a few months we will have been together longer after my transition than before.

    I hope you can be happy for us.

  39. Kaa;

    You said…
    “We are not a theocracy .. the constitution explicitly specified that church and state must be separate because of the dangers a theocracy poses.”

    You had better actually read what the Constitution says before making such claims.
    The First Amendment prohibits the establishment of a government sponsored religion. That is all it does.
    Let me quote it for you.

    “” Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.”
    It doesn’t even come close to saying what you say it does.

    Congrass passed the defense of marriage law which sets up federal standards for marriage by defining it as between one man and one woman.
    I suggest your TG and homosexual friends get to work insuring that domestic partnerships are equal in every way to marriage, because we are not going to allow you to hijack the word.

    Marriage is a Privilege not a right, you show me where heterosexuals are guaranteed the right to marry.
    You cannot because it doesn’t exist.

  40. DOMA is unconstitutional if for no other reason than the Full Faith clause of the constitution.

    In any case as i said slavery was once legal… and there WERE laws on the books preventing interracial marriage. A law being passed does not make something right.

    Currently it is the right any adult het couple to marriage outside inbreeding issues.. The don’t have to pass a written exam to get a license… And common law marriages are recognized in most jurisdictions.

    And AFAIK there are no laws PREVENTING het adults of same sex couples marrying.

    So HOW is it not a right?

    The 1st amendment as well as how the government structure was set up was all about trying to prevent the tyranny of the majority being visited on unpopular minorities.

    If all your arguments are based on religious beliefs/prejudice and history, I think I’ve shown they are not very strong or defensible under what this country is supposed to be – but often falls short at achieving.

    • Kaa;
      you said…
      “DOMA is unconstitutional if for no other reason than the Full Faith clause of the constitution.”
      Show me; site referances even court cases to back this up…
      You can’t because they don’t exist.

      You don’t understand the law much do you?
      Marriage is a privilege because YOU MUST HAVE A LICENSE. It doesn’t make a damned bit of difference if the license is free or if you have to take three week course beforehand and pay $1000.00 it’s still by legal definition a privilege.

      You should perhaps do some reading of late 19th and early 20th history and read up on the racial hygiene laws which are still on the books in this country. They were not just for interracial marriages they were also to keep certain other groups from marrying.

      Instead of just saying things are so because you want to believe it’s that way, why don’t you actually do a little study to learn how things really are.

      Back to my original statement show me where in the law or the Constitution that marriage is a right.

      URLs please…….

  41. Kaa – congratulations!

    There’s more to marriage than just sex- though sex helps.
    It’s a shame that my partner and I are both strictly straight. But though the Eros is gone, the Agape remains.

    We may yet split – if she finds Mr Right. Or I do (scary…). But if we do, it will be an upgrade, and we will always remain closer than twin sisters.

    They would walk down the street in the evening
    And for years I would see them go by
    And their love that was more than the clothes that they wore
    Could be seen in the gleam in their eyes

    May your love too last until the rivers run still, and the four winds we know blow away.

  42. If DOMA didn’t exist, then Gays wouldn’t have fought for marriage so hard.

    But while there’s a Federal law making marriage highly privileged, and explicitly denying civil unions any federal benefits whatsoever, even denying that same-sex marriage exists in states that have it, GLBs will continue to fight. Because civil unions have been explicitly forbidden at the federal level, and in many state constitutions too, from having even similar rights to marriage. The RR played hardball, granting no concessions. So the GLBs have nothing to lose.

    It’s arguable that DOMA is against the separation of church and state too – because it discriminates between married relationships from some churches, and not others. Now this is allowable, human sacrifice for example is not an allowable religious ceremony. But there has to be a clear and compelling government interest in interfering with religious rites.

    There is no such interest in this situation. That’s been tested in court. Saying “it’s against the Bible” may work with the electorate, but has no effect on the Constitution. And attempts to show that same-sex marriage is sociological undesirable from an objective viewpoint have all failed.

    While most Americans believe that same-sex marriage should be forbidden, and it’s quite clear that those whose reason boils down to “just because” are in the majority, there can be no clearer case for an appeal to the SCOTUS.

  43. Well Zoe you fall into the same uninformed rut that most homosexuals do;
    Marriage is a licensed activity, therefore it’s illegal to marry or be married without a license. I suggest you read up on what a license is (legally speaking) and what it is used for.

    There is no right that guarantees heterosexual couples can marry in the United States.
    Since the regulation of marriage in the late 19th century under racial hygiene laws nobody has a right to marry, it is a regulated privilege like driving a car flying an airplane.

  44. anoldfriend –

    Violation of Equal Protection
    http://www.desmoinesregister.com/assets/pdf/D213209243.PDF

    Marriage as a Human Right (Universal Declaration of Human Rights)
    http://www.un.org/en/documents/udhr/
    Article 16, with explanatory clarification in the Yogyakarta principles, principle 24
    http://www.yogyakartaprinciples.org/principles_en.pdf

    US is a signatory, with the reservation that the federal govt cannot over-ride state laws, and that the treaty is not self-enacting, but will be implemented by federal laws passed by Congress at some future time.

    So while the US has recognised that marriage is a human right, the laws of the states may not.

  45. Marriage has to be licensed? Not as such.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Common-law_marriage_in_the_United_States

    “The requirements for a common-law marriage to be validly contracted differ from state to state. Nevertheless, all states — including those that have abolished the contract of common-law marriage within their boundaries — recognize common-law marriages lawfully contracted in those jurisdictions that still permit it.”

  46. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Common-law_marriage
    “Common-law marriage, sometimes called de facto marriage, informal marriage or marriage by habit and repute, is a form of interpersonal status which is legally recognized in some jurisdictions as a marriage even though no legally recognized marriage ceremony is performed or civil marriage contract is entered into or the marriage registered in a civil registry. A common-law marriage is legally binding in some common law jurisdictions but has no legal consequence in others.”

  47. Too many links in one post – try again.

    Violation of Equal Protection
    http://www.desmoinesregister.com/assets/pdf/D213209243.PDF

    Only binding in Idaho, but the arguments before SCOTUS would be the same.

  48. Sorry Common law marriage isn’t recognized in the us anymore.

    As far as equal protection goes that only applies to Idaho, not the rest of the US.

    Again no citation.

  49. Correction……..
    Iowa not Idaho.

  50. What Aria said… Why are we even having this discussion!

    SSM has zero bearing on who we are, or why we’re here. If anything this “discussion” proves if we go off message the othering that is so prevalent out there will lead us straight back to the to the LGB-TG tar baby that defiles us!

    EN, has been a singular voice with a clear cogent and well-written argument to end the lie. Real deal woman post-surgery never have and never will have any connection what-so-ever to that bastardized LGBT umbrella!

    So, shall we get back to that point? If any of us feel the need to wade into that cesspool of TG hive mind we’ve only to drop in on “Dysfunctional” or Mr. Helms, or if really in a mood to slum there is always Bilerco!

    What would all of you say to deleting this post and the comments?

    Before that happens I have something to say “kaa ne. Karen A.” I don’t know you nor do I give a rat’s ass about your opinions on SSM, your marriage, your wife, or how out, or not you are. What I do care about is how you have spent decades posting after post spewing forth the exact same toxic message again and again. First in the news groups, then the forums, now, the blogs.

    “You can’t succeed,yYou will always be a man” “You can’t succeed, you will always be a man” “You can’t succeed, you will always be a man” “You can’t succeed” “You can’t succeed, you will always be a man”

    For fucks sake! Enough already! How many women I wonder have you have pushed into suicide with that pernicious lie! I’ve held my tongue but I simply can’t any longer. I’ve had it! take that horrible message, stuff it up your ass and go straight to hell!

    I and everyone else who have succeeded are sick to death of hearing this refrain because we have DONE what you say is impossible! We are the living counter to your lies. It IS possible to succeed and become a normal everyday woman no different than those who did not have to under go surgery. Pity you will never know what it feels like to be free of that monster but that said, damn it, stop taking your miserable experience of being solidly connected to your past and extrapolating that no one else can success because you can’t!

    You have no idea of the things some of these women have done There are among us women who have not been read in decades. Women who are happily married to men who do not know. Women who have successfully sundered their past. Women who have taken their lumps and started a new into careers that have no connection to what went before. Women who are pillars of their communities and all of this, without that connection.

    It’s past time for you to pack up your doom and gloom and stick it where the sun don’t shine because you are wrong wrong wrong!

  51. Zoe, I find you to be nothing other than a fraud. I know of another person in Melbourn who also laid claim
    to a miraculous discovery of suddenly becoming IS,rather than TS (Katerina). When you did that you
    lost any creditably you migh have had. You are no different from other activist who are looking for some fame.
    Now regardless of how many things you might sight in regards to same sex marriage, the people of
    society (in the USA ) at large say no. The most recent is in The State of Maine. I wouldn`t be surprised
    that if it came to a vote of the people in your country it would have the same out come.
    Regardless of what you or other homosexual activist say marriage of same sex doesn`t fly when
    the public has a say so. You folks call it anger, homophobia & bigotry but even though you don`t like
    it, it is the way it is. Get use to it, you can`t always have your own way.
    I don`t intend on making anymore responses to this issue, by the way angery I am not.

  52. Welcome to the new Enough Nonsense ..

    Left wide open by my capitulation arguing pointlessly with a transgender fundie, and Susan’s withdrawal from the transgender debate, Zoe Brain, the spontaneous sex change from Oz, sometime medical expert on everything transsexual and intersex, and mouthpiece for GLBT rights turns up and puts a foot in the door.

    Welcome to the Zoe Brain Show….

  53. [quote]
    SSM has zero bearing on who we are, or why we’re here.
    [/quote]

    Which is EXACTLY my point. It does not have any bearing on why we are… Which is EXATLY the reason why it is so problematic that people here seem to think if someone does not opposee, that are nota “true” or ‘Classic’ or a real or legimitimate TS.

    [quote]
    “You can’t succeed,yYou will always be a man” “You can’t succeed, you will always be a man”
    [/quote]

    That must be your own insecurities speaking because I have NEVER said any of those things to anyone, nor do I believe them, Even if that was YOUR INTERPRETATION filtered through your own insecurities.

    I have spoken about my own challanges as well as the issues we do have to confront (both internal and external)because of having changed sex.

    I am not man and I have never said another TS is a man. And nothing is this thead I say implies that.

    [quote]
    I’ve held my tongue but I simply can’t any longer. I’ve had it! take that horrible message, stuff it up your ass and go straight to hell!
    [/quote]

    You and your warped perceptions of what I said and who I am can go exactly there. They say more about you than they do me.

    And NONE of that has anything to do with the, same sex marriage debate

    [quote]
    You have no idea of the things some of these women have done There are among us women who have not been read in decades.
    [/quote]

    Guess what, I’ve known and been online friends which some such… who were not right wing wingnut Rush Limbaugh fans.

    [quote]
    Women who are happily married to men who do not know.
    [/quote]

    That IMO is not healthy… amd marriage IM needs to be built on trust… Not worrying about what your spouse would think if you if they ‘knew’.

    But Guess what? In very anti-TS forums I have defended the RIGHT not to tell a spouse in that situation even though I think it is a big mistake, because I understand where it comes from.

    In any case that type of DEEP stealth like you are talking about is next to impossible in the modern world for those who transition as adults because of electronic public records and the net. The chances of a modern transitioner’s spouse NEVER finding out is slim.

    If that is the type of thing you call saying, “you will always be a man”,well your logic is very very faulty. And you are very out of touch with the current world.

  54. Enough Nonsense!

    The nonsense in this article is that the GLBT represented here by KAA and Zoe Brain, seem to think that I and others need to explain to them why we will not support Same Sex Marriage.

    They accuse us of bigotry and self loathing, unhappy individuals that are not comfortable in our womanhood. KAA simply cannot understand why anyone that has “changed sex” could be so down on other minorities, especially the transgender which KAA would like to say are “Just like me”.

    First of all, WHY I do or don’t support ANY particular political issue, is none of anyone’s business but mine. I do not need to answer to them for my beliefs or for my decisions. I don’t support Same Sex Marriage .. period ! I am not alone in this view, in fact I am in good company in this view and it is a view that has been held in all 50 states when put to the popular vote.

    I have to remind ZOE and KAA that the entire populations of those voter states are not by default governed by the religious right, therefore to try to disqualify my views as religious right puppetry is fallacious. My views are in line with popular opinion, solidly along mainstream lines. I am in the majority, not the minority.

    I never transitioned to be a GLBT sockpuppett. Their issues are not my issues and never were. I transitioned to be a woman with all the rights and pitfalls attributed thereto. Women do not have it easy in this world, I knew that. I accept that. In some areas, women have it good, in other areas we don’t. I never expected to take any male privledge into my womanhood. It doesn’t belong there. I Vote along the same lines as other women and the vast majority of them do not support same sex marriage. It has nothing to do with bigotry, it is my views, just as you may not like me to smoke cigarrettes in bars and restaurants, I go along with the majority even if I don’t agree with it.

    I vote along mainstream lines because I AM mainstream. I am a heterosexual woman with a heterosexual husband. I would have no problem with homosexuals being given civil union rights and all the legal benefits attributed to heterosexual married couples, but I do not believe that it should be termed marriage. I see no need for the time honored tradition of marriage to be extended to same sex couples. As a heterosexual transsexual woman of operative history, I have special concerns when it comes to the enactment of same sex marriage. I think ANY transsexual that wishes to be just another married woman with a husband can see the pitfalls of same sex marriage enactment. Our marriages have been assailed on legal grounds now since the GLBT came to the marriage fight. They cause our LEGAL marriages as post op Women to be brought into question. In turn that brings my gender and my husbands sexual orientation into question. Any transsexual woman out there that seeks a heterosexual relationship with a man, must first and foremost convince the man that he is not entering into a homosexual relationship by being with a transsexaul post op woman. These are genuine concerns among heterosexual men, nad I am not speaking here of closeted men or the tranny chaser types, but those men who consider their sexuality to be strictly heterosexual. This is MY HUSBAND! I stand by my husband and I have no desire to draw him into a situation where he will feel uncomfortable, where his marrying me will be construed as anything but a one man one woman relationship. Those like KAA who transition to stay with their wives as lesbians WANT same sex marriage because it fits their agenda to do so. KAA may have changed gender and consider herself a woman, but it is simply a change of clothes and genitals if they stay married to a woman that was their wife. For the life of me I have no idea how a hetero woman can marry a man and later just become a lesbian or a pervert in the eyes of her family and friends in order to stay with her husband who is now presenting as a woman. That has to be a serious mind fuck, love or no love.

    Transsexuals that do this and then support homosexuals are the ones who put forward the stereotype that we are all our birth gender. They make a mockery of our marriages to heterosexual men and then complain that their human rights are bieng abused in some way. What they will NEVER understand or acknowledge is that there is a difference between us that they will not recognise, that we have similar backgrounds but that we are NOT the same.

    My life goal is to be a woman among women, married to a man. It is not to be a gender changed transsexual tied to the LGBT or to be considered by mainstream as a same sex marriage. My marriage is NOT a same sex marriage any more than any natal womans marriage is a same sex marriage, but I can guarentee you one thing for sure, there are a lot of KAA’s out there, far more than there are transsexuals that are married to heterosexual men, and if same sex marriage is adopted in the United States, ALL of our marriages will be seen as theirs .. HOMOSEXUAL!

    Now… I have stated my views. They are intractable, they are NOT up for discussion by either KAA or Zoe brian and that is the end of it. If this is not the end of it I will urge Susan, who is shortly going to post on this discussion, to pull this entire thread and trash it.

    I will not be spoken down to by the GLBT or its mouth pieces.

  55. I agree if the thread is trashed it’s not a big loss.

    I don’t owe the homosexuals anything.

    I don’t owe the Tee-Gees anything

    I didn’t transition to become some fetish freak, trans-lebisn or any member of that tiny subculture, and make no mistake it’s a TINY subculture.

    I didn’t wake up one day and decide I was TS nor did I spend a year being sexually abused in a Thai prison and then decide I was a TS.

    All of you TG’s and TG sympathizers can just go to hell.

  56. [quote]
    KAA simply cannot understand why anyone that has “changed sex” could be so down on other minorities, especially the transgender which KAA would like to say are “Just like me”.
    [/quote]

    First it’s not a matter of being ‘like’. It’s about a principle, not if one likes another group or their politics or not or if they are the same as you.

    It’s about basic human fairness. How someone who had to go through what we do, would deny what we want for ourselves (to be and live as who who we are) would deny that to other groups is what I have a problem understanding.

    [quote]
    First of all, WHY I do or don’t support ANY particular political issue, is none of anyone’s business but mine.
    [/quote]

    that would be true as long as you also it does not becomes a litmus test on who is a ‘real’ transsexual.

    [quote]
    I have to remind ZOE and KAA that the entire populations of those voter states are not by default governed by the religious right,
    [/quote]

    But they are affect by the scare tactics used by the RR and the massive amounts of money they push into local elections.

    But just as Jim Crow was strongly supported by the population in the south this should NOT be a matter decided by a majority vote, but on the principles under which this country was founded. That was my point about speaking of the tyranny of the majority and why the founding fathers were worried about it

    [quote]
    therefore to try to disqualify my views as religious right puppetry is fallacious.
    [/quote]
    They are… and you certainly have the right to lead your OWN life by those beliefs… but as i said this is not a theocracy so it should not control other’s lives.

    Neither you nor anyone else her has advanced any defensible non theological arguments as to why it should not be allowed.

    [quote]
    I never transitioned to be a GLBT sockpuppett.
    [/quote]

    I’m certainly not that… I support the same principles of human rights regardless of what groups are involved.

    [quote]
    Their issues are not my issues and never were. I transitioned to be a woman with all the rights and pitfalls attributed thereto.
    [/quote]

    Which is neither here nor there with respect to the principles involved … But are you saying lesbians are not women?

    [quote]
    I Vote along the same lines as other women and the vast majority of them do not support same sex marriage.
    [/quote]

    Do you have reference on that? It sure seems to me more women support same sex marriage than men…

    But again what does the number who support a position has anything to do with the principles involved

    [quote]
    It has nothing to do with bigotry, it is my views,
    [/quote]

    Which have some basis. You still have not presented andy strong logical ones Basically you keep saying you don’t LIKE GBLTs and that seems to be the core justification, not the principles involved.

    [quote]
    I am a heterosexual woman with a heterosexual husband.
    [/quote]

    More than a few of which support same sex marriage

    [quote]
    I would have no problem with homosexuals being given civil union rights and all the legal benefits attributed to heterosexual married couples, but I do not believe that it should be termed marriage.
    [/quote]

    I agree the government should ONLY sanction civil unions and the word marriage only used in a religious context. If those who opposed same sex marriage agreed to that, I would be fine with it… But you know very well that won’t happen…

    Unless and until it does, same sex marriage is what has to happen to have fairness.

    [quote]
    I think ANY transsexual that wishes to be just another married woman with a husband can see the pitfalls of same sex marriage enactment. Our marriages have been assailed on legal grounds now since the GLBT came to the marriage fight.
    [/quote]

    That is logical nonsense. If we are legally recognized as women, a post-op marrying a man is not a same sex issue and there is no problem. If we are not legally recognized as woman only then is it an issue… the same one there has always been.

    Therefore the two issues are orthogonal (they don’t interact legally). If A post-op’s marriage to man is challenged it’s on the basis they are not ‘really’ a woman… So it the legal sex that is the issue for post-op’s marrying.

    But if same sex unions were fully equal no one would have motive to challenge a post-op hey marriage because there would be nothing to gain (unlike now when relatives and/or insurance companies do sometimes have something to gain)

    So LOGICALLY it really is against a het post-op’s self-interest to oppose sane sex marriage.

    [quote]
    They cause our LEGAL marriages as post op Women to be brought into question.
    [/quote]
    No it does not. Any shakiness of our legal status as women does…

    [quote]
    In turn that brings my gender and my husbands sexual orientation into question.
    [/quote]

    But if you are stealth, how does that matter? If You were out just as many people would think that anyway?

    It sounds to me like you are speaking from fear based insecurity, not logic

    [quote]
    Any transsexual woman out there that seeks a heterosexual relationship with a man, must first and foremost convince the man that he is not entering into a homosexual relationship by being with a transsexaul post op woman.
    [/quote]

    Unless you are stealth from your spouse that has always been and will always be the case regardless of the status of same sex marriage be it legal or not.

    [quote]
    I stand by my husband and I have no desire to draw him into a situation where he will feel uncomfortable, where his marrying me will be construed as anything but a one man one woman relationship.
    [/quote]

    Again your line of reasoning is fatally flawed. Your legal status as woman and being seen as woman are totally separate from the issue of same sex marriage. If you are stealth now you could still be stealth…

    [quote]
    Those like KAA who transition to stay with their wives as lesbians WANT same sex marriage because it fits their agenda to do so.
    [/quote]

    As I’ve said before same sex marriages are in a separate legal as well as moral category from the same sex marriage issue. My marriage IS ALREADY legal in all 50 states.

    My support of same sex marriage is not about my situation but principle… But even it it was, the principle is what matters in a discussion

    [quote]
    KAA may have changed gender and consider herself a woman, but it is simply a change of clothes and genitals if they stay married to a woman that was their wife.
    [/quote]

    So you think people love genitals and not people?

    [quote]
    Transsexuals that do this and then support homosexuals are the ones who put forward the stereotype that we are all our birth gender.
    [/quote]

    Again logically does not follow nor does it take into account the realities and complexities of human emotions and lives.

    [quote]
    They make a mockery of our marriages to heterosexual men
    [/quote]

    Really? how so?

    [quote]
    What they will NEVER understand or acknowledge is that there is a difference between us that they will not recognise, that we have similar backgrounds but that we are NOT the same.
    [/quote]

    That assumes you are and your cronies here are a sort of gold standard…

    In point of fact more than few early transitioners who married men do disagree with you… But they are more secure in who THEY are.

    [quote]
    My life goal is to be a woman among women, married to a man.
    [/quote]

    Being a woman is who I am. My goals in life go beyond just being or trying to be a stereotype to ‘prove’ who I am.

    If My marriage has not survived I WOUDL have been dating men… Not because it would make me more of a woman, but because that is where my physical attraction lies.

    But my relationship with my spouse was never based on the physical or trying to fill the ‘husband; role…

    [quote]
    My marriage is NOT a same sex marriage
    [/quote]

    I would NEVER say it was and I don’t believe it is.

    [quote]
    but I can guarentee you one thing for sure, there are a lot of KAA’s out there, far more than there are transsexuals that are married to heterosexual men,
    [/quote]

    Maybe you are not aware that most marriages DON’T survive transition in the long term, so I doubt that is true.

    [quote]
    and if same sex marriage is adopted in the United States, ALL of our marriages will be seen as theirs .. HOMOSEXUAL!
    [/quote]

    Not if we are legally women….

    As I said right now, if you were out many would see it as a homosexual relationship regardless of the status of same sex marriage OR your legal sex status.

    So how would same sex marriage change anything in that respect?

    [quote]
    I will urge Susan, who is shortly going to post on this discussion, to pull this entire thread and trash it.
    [/quote]

    Because you see the power of the arguments I suspect.

  57. Oh by the way – some of the eyewitnesses to the unusual events of 2005 have chimed in on my blog.

    No-one can have a spectacular and rapid change like that without there having been some witnesses who actually saw it happening. Quite a few, actually. Not exactly easy to miss.
    https://www.blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=5573426&postID=4564276461638376368&isPopup=true

  58. What an insulting troll you are. You dare to pick apart my views and inject insult into them are typical transgender tactics. Your putting words in my mouth will not stand.

    • Leigh;
      She was that on Usenet 13 years ago.

      Kaa;
      If you really believe in all that stuff and have guzzled all that homo-kool-aid then leave us alone.
      Go live your life is you are so secure in it.

      Otherwise you are playing the same troll games you did back in the Usenet days.

  59. How dare i logically analyze your words is a discussion of issues!

    I should know you are the font of all that right right and proper for transsexuals!

    • Not issues.
      And you lost the marriage debate.

      • Not that I can see.

        BTW I first got in line in T fora in the mid 80s.

    • You also seem to be reading from a different constitution than the rest of us.

  60. And I know that what I am up against here is your male ego and mysogonistic need to win. I already gave you the win earlier in the thread .. or did you miss the point of my remark that it’s like arguing with my husband or battybats… A MAN!

  61. i noticed the personal attacks you use in lieu of a logical argument.

    I also noticed your very male entitled attitude in terms of define who I am, what I feel and how I identify.

    Do you think women have to be doormats and if not they are men or lesbians?

    BTW I don’t know who you are referring to with the “battybats” references

  62. Really, Kaa, if you feel so passionately about gay marriage why not put your energy into fighting for it somewhere where it matters?

    Still, I’d like to respond to one point: “In any case that type of DEEP stealth like you are talking about is next to impossible in the modern world for those who transition as adults because of electronic public records and the net. The chances of a modern transitioner’s spouse NEVER finding out is slim.”

    I keep coming across this argument. But what nonsense!! If a man was so suspicious and paranoid that he checked up on me on the internet to dig up any secrets behind my back then I’m not going to be worried about him dumping me – no, he’d better be worried about me dumping HIM! LOL

  63. [quote]
    keep coming across this argument. But what nonsense!! If a man was so suspicious and paranoid that he checked up on me on the internet to dig up any secrets behind my back then I’m not going to be worried about him dumping me
    [/quote]

    They don’t have to be searching for THAT to have it come up.

    As for why here, it has to with what all of us have gone through.

    As well as having a problem with those who make it seem like TSism is about being a stereotype of certain type of woman instead of ‘real’ woman with all sorts of views and orientations.

    • Are you drunk, or just developmentally delayed?

      Do you have any idea how wildy different the beliefs of those here are?

      The only common bond is a resistance to the political and social manipulation of the transsexual and instersexed conditions.

      As for your self-grouping them with ‘what all of us have gone through’.

      That must be some sort of subtle push.

      Either by way of shouldering yourself in or showing someone like myself the door in this ‘conversation’.

      Care to debate with little old me?

      i’m harmless, i swear.

      • [quote]
        Are you drunk, or just developmentally delayed?
        [/quote]

        Yes I could really count on having respectful intellectual discussion with you!

        [quote]
        Do you have any idea how wildy different the beliefs of those here are?
        [/quote]

        All I see is a sort of group think where you all reinforce each other and personally attack people who disagree.

        I’ve seen that over and over since I found this site.

        [quote]
        The only common bond is a resistance to the political and social manipulation of the transsexual and instersexed conditions.
        [/quote]

        The strange thing is I agree with that… I DON’T what people see here AS that.

        [quote]
        That must be some sort of subtle push.
        [/quote]

        I’m a woman. One who was born physical male and who had to change sex and the things that come with that. THAT is what I meant by those words.

        If those here are not women who had to change physical sex then I’m sorry for assuming that.

        [quote]
        showing someone like myself the door in this ‘conversation’.
        [/quote]

        This is your first post on the thread…. So what are you like?

        [quote]
        Care to debate with little old me?
        [/quote]

        If you have a point on the subject to make, then make it if you feel the need. You certainly don’t need my permission to do it.

        If I feel I should respond I will.

        As to harmless.. TSes tend to hurt other TSes more than ‘nons’ do. That’s what insecurity causes.

      • KAA.

        “Yes I could really count on having respectful intellectual discussion with you!”

        You ruin what good points you may have with balantly trollish behavior. You are projecting the image of a pseudo-intellectual more interested in riling people up than actually convincing them of your view.

        Which is too bad, because up until you made your behavior obvious, i was feeling your vibe on a couple points.

        But this is the typical behavior of someone as interested in performing for an audience as much as engaging in debate. You have everyone’s attention, and now you’re going to hang on as long as you can.

        For infamy or activist cred, it makes no difference.

        “All I see is a sort of group think where you all reinforce each other and personally attack people who disagree.”

        You couldn’t be more wrong.

        i don’t know what else to say, since it’s obvious you react with snap judgements and surface impressions.

        “I’ve seen that over and over since I found this site.”

        Then why keep coming back here? Masochistic? Trollish? Or both?

        “The strange thing is I agree with that… I DON’T what people see here AS that.”

        This is an incoherent sentence.

        “If those here are not women who had to change physical sex then I’m sorry for assuming that.”

        Have or had.

        You assume a lot. That’s your problem.

        “This is your first post on the thread…. So what are you like?”

        Wrong. You ignored my first post, which pointed out how you didn’t bother reading Aria’s post before reacting.

        Since you didn’t even bother reading my first post which pointed out that you didn’t bother reading Aria’s post, well.

        Troll revealed. You’re only interested in inflamming a board.

        “If you have a point on the subject to make, then make it if you feel the need.”

        Why bother? You won’t read it before responding.

        “If I feel I should respond I will.”

        You mean, if it doesn’t point out how wrong you are or you can find a way to reverse-troll it?

        “That’s what insecurity causes.”

        *L*

        Yup. i don’t like you or the behavior you are demonstrating right now. Clearly that makes me insecure.

        Troll school 101.

        As old as you are, i thought you would be better at it by now.

  64. “They don’t have to be searching for THAT to have it come up.”

    Absolute rubbish. You can’t find anything about my past life on the internet without LOOKING for it!! If I don’t tell you something – and if the people around us don’t tell you – then you have to search for it. Why would a boyfriend/lover/husband be doing background checks? Really, what kind of people do you hang around?

    “As for why here, it has to with what all of us have gone through.”

    Again, absolute rubbish. I’m not gay. And I’ve never been married – gay or straight. So what common experience are you talking about that makes gay marriage relevant to me?

    • Having who you are being denied and denigrated.

      It’s not about orientation… It’s about fairness and principle.

      • Huh?

        So, by virtue of being TS I have something in common with anybody or anything that is “being denied and denigrated”?

        You can’t equate all issues like that.

        That’s so ridiculous I’m….speechless!!

      • [quote]
        You can’t equate all issues like that.

        That’s so ridiculous I’m….speechless!!
        [/quote]

        And not understanding why you can and should, is the core of the problem IMO.

    • lisalee18wheeler
    • Posted November 8, 2009 at 11:50 pm
    • Permalink
    • Reply

    You know, if this was my blog, I would have shown Ms KAA the door some time ago. But it’s not and Susan is very gracious and patient with TG sympathizers.

    Just sayin’…

  66. Karen A, I have been reading your stuff on various forums and blogs for a few years now and in that time have seen you post a catalogue of views and enough of personal history to provide me with a reasonably good profile of both who and what you are from a number of angles. So I understand why you hold the views you do. I know more about you than you think I do.

    The SSM debate at current time is one that affects only the USA citizens on this forum and yet people around the world are involving themselves because we know that what happens has some influence around the world. What happens in the US may encourage activists in countries not currently involved in the debate. Some countries including UK have had this debate and established civil partnerships as part of their laws. I find that a just situation. Those who enter civil partnerships enjoy privileges similar to heterosexual marriage and that is justice.
    In the USA the militancy of GLBT organisations is standing in the way of that compromise. I believe that is foolish and from the perspective of once transsexual women and men threatening of our status as women.

    You see this as a human right issue which of course it is. One of the resons there is a Gender Recognition Act in the Uk is because of Goodwin v UK a legal case fought in the European Court Of Human Rights was lost by the UK government. As a signatory to the UN Convention on Human Rights the UK government was forced to act. The result was two acts of parliament. The Gender Recognition Act 2004 which granted full legal recognition of transsexuals in their target sex. They realised that doing this would legitimise same sex marriages in the case of those such as yourself Karen who had entered a heterosexual marriage. This fact would have caused the GRA to be rejected by parliament so they drew up the Civil Partnerships Act 2005 which gave marriage in all but name to gay couples. I believe that is justice in action.

    The situation I just outlined albeit briefly is the limit to which we as once transsexual women are affected by marriage laws. From a personal perspective I believe that this issue is one for the USA to sort out out for itself it’s none of my business and I feel the same about Gay relationships. It’s none of my business I do not wish to become involved. However if asked for my opinion so long as it does not call into question my own marriage as a heterosexual one I really couldn’t give a damn, it’s not my issue. If I had a vote in the issue I would vote against SSM but in favour of Civil Partnership. I don’t have to give a reason and I will not.
    Now as for you Karen A your personal situation I believe is a matter for you and you alone. None of my business you do what you like. However as part of the human rights you seem to hold so dear I have a right to an opinion on your personal situation. I see it as one of a transvestite taken a few steps too far. Deal with that how you like I don’t care, you’re opinion carries little weight with me. But I have been around long enough to know the situation as applied to transsexuals over the years and I know the attitude to transsexuality before Charlie Prince and then GLB got their greasy mitts on it and added the “T” I saw how public opinion changed during that time. You’re view of the world as you have outlined it here on EN both in this thread and on other issues is one divorced from reality. You know less than nothing about real “Classic Transsexual” experience, you’ve neither lived it nor seen it.

  67. [quote]
    I have been reading your stuff on various forums and blogs for a few years now
    [/quote]

    I have only been posting a few places for the last 4 or 5 years. What may those be?

    In any case If you think you can get to know someone without actually spending a significant time with them in 3D then your view of people would be very shallow.

    [quote]
    So I understand why you hold the views you do.
    [/quote]

    Without asking me you can not possibly know that. You can make assumptions but that is what they are.

    [quote]
    What happens in the US may encourage activists in countries not currently involved in the debate.
    [/quote]

    Socially in many ways the US is BEHIND the rest of the developed western world.., not the leader.

    [quote]. I find that a just situation. Those who enter civil partnerships enjoy privileges similar to heterosexual marriage and that is justice.
    [/quote]

    As I said if they were same that would be fine with me, however in the US the only way to happen is to make same sex and het marriages indistinguishable LEGALLY.

    I don’t care if that is accomplished by calling the the LEGAL union of two people a Civil union regardless of sex and leave the term marriage to the religions, OR by making same sex ‘marriage’ legal.

    The point is het unions should not be privileged over same sex unions , nor over same sex over het unions. However that is accomplished is fine with me.

    [quote]
    I believe that is foolish and from the perspective of once transsexual women and men threatening of our status as women.
    [/quote]

    You would have to explain the logic behind that belief because i don’t see the legal connection. I can understand how insecurity could cause one to feel that way but I don’t see any concrete reasoning that leads to that.

    [quote]
    They realised that doing this would legitimise same sex marriages in the case of those such as yourself Karen who had entered a heterosexual marriage.
    [/quote]

    In the US marriage is a contract. Once a contract is entered into legally only a party to the contract can contest it. That means under US law existing marriages are not nullified by changing sex. If there is a divorce however future marriages would be subject to the laws of that jurisdiction on same sex marriage.

    [quote]
    However if asked for my opinion so long as it does not call into question my own marriage as a heterosexual one I really couldn’t give a damn, it’s not my issue.
    [/quote]

    It does not in any real way as far as I can see.

    [quote]
    If I had a vote in the issue I would vote against SSM but in favour of Civil Partnership. I don’t have to give a reason and I will not.
    [/quote]

    Of course not. REasons don’t matter when the basis is purely emotional.

    [quote]
    I see it as one of a transvestite taken a few steps too far.
    [/quote]

    Given I was not Xdresser , was not a member of any TG organizations or Xdressing clubs, what do you base that on besides politics?

    [quote]
    Deal with that how you like I don’t care, you’re opinion carries little weight with me.
    [/quote]

    Neither does you opinion of me with me… It;s easy to sling mud… and it seems that is the first reaction to having one’s ideas challanged here for more than few.

    [quote]
    You’re view of the world as you have outlined it here on EN both in this thread and on other issues is one divorced from reality. You know less than nothing about real “Classic Transsexual” experience, you’ve neither lived it nor seen it.
    [/quote]

    Again unfounded assertions based on political beliefs. Obviously many see see transsexualism as a social and not a biological phenomena… Because as i said before, if it was biological, no ideological purity would be expected.

    The funny thing Is I too think GBLT was a big mistake… but that does not stop me from seeing others as worthwhile human beings who deserve the same right that others enjoy.

  68. [quote]
    You ruin what good points you may have with balantly trollish behavior.
    [/quote]

    What I have learned is more than few here regard anyone who disagrees with them as a troll. They then go on to attack the messenger and if one responds to that at all to the denigration even is mild way, it’s more evidence of ‘trolling’

    [quote]
    You are projecting the image of a pseudo-intellectual more interested in riling people up than actually convincing them of your view.
    [/quote]

    I don’t think they have open minds at this points… But such debates are ALWAYS about the undecided who read these things. That’s why i continue arguing the point.

    [quote]
    Which is too bad, because up until you made your behavior obvious, i was feeling your vibe on a couple points.
    [/quote]

    I don’t believe that for one minute.

    [quote]
    But this is the typical behavior of someone as interested in performing for an audience as much as engaging in debate.
    [/quote]

    Not performing for an audience but to get the audience to consider a position in a way they may not have before… And This the purpose of this Blog , no?

    Blogs are for public discourse and ARE public to play to large audience.

    [quote]
    You have everyone’s attention, and now you’re going to hang on as long as you can.
    [/quote]

    I will argue for what I believe… Same as the others here…

    [quote]
    “All I see is a sort of group think where you all reinforce each other and personally attack people who disagree.”

    You couldn’t be more wrong.
    [quote]

    Not from what I have seen… Has ANY regular poster here come out for same sex marriage?

    [quote]
    Then why keep coming back here? Masochistic? Trollish? Or both?
    [/quote]

    Because I feel I’m saying things that need to be said. And i don’t want the public view of TSes to be right wing steriotypes.

    Part of my tone definitely comes from the personal attacks on me and who I am here, but that that is neither here nor there to principles involved

    [quote]
    This is an incoherent sentence.
    [quote]

    Sorry. I agree GBLT was mistake but that does not stop me from seeing them as people and not a faceless abstract group.

    [quote]
    You assume a lot. That’s your problem.
    [/quote]

    Actually that seems to be a common malady here.

    [quote]
    Since you didn’t even bother reading my first post which pointed out that you didn’t bother reading Aria’s post, well.
    [/quote]

    I read all the post I see and i certainly read Aria’s… Yours I missed (or forgot)

    Your last post posted sounded like an invitation to barroom brawl or cage match… Which is Why I responded as I did.

    If you have seen me elsewhere you know I don’t shy from debate.

    [quote]
    Troll revealed. You’re only interested in inflamming a board.
    [/quote]

    Your only interested it seems in convincing people I am a troll to not have to deal with thw substance of my arguments. More attacking the messenger instead of the substance of the message.

    • “I don’t believe that for one minute.”

      Go fuck yourself. Seriously.

      i don’t bother debating people who call me a liar.

      And i highly encourage everyone here to not feed the troll.

      Everytime you respond, this asshole wins.

  69. You see there you go in your TG speak. If I make an assertion about an issue you acuse me of insecurity. When the truth is that you are constantly being “read” Karen. I have not been read in 27 years. Who is insecure you or me?
    My husband does not know I was ever TS you are still legally married as a man to a woman. Secure about that are you? You are currently unemployed. Unsettled you has it? Been quite a few months now hasn’t it?
    You cannot see the threat Gay marriage poses to Classic Transsexual” not because you believe in Human rights and equality but because you cannot perceive the threat. You don’t understand the issue Karen. You see far from being your scared doormat I know you Karen for who you are. A nasty little negative Troll who has been a thorn in the side of successful transitions for years with your negativity and and misrepresentation of fact.
    Your constant posts of “It depends on the circumstances, everyone is different, it’s not possible in the electronic age to be totally stealth when the truth is that I and a great many of those I know are just that. People I know and have known personally are what YOU say is impossible.
    Now you come come here with your talk of “We must be involved because of what we have been through” Who’s the we here? You including yourself? Because you made your life a living misery don’t try to drag us into your tiny world of fantasy.
    You call my friends a liar again Karen A and what I have written here will be nothing to what comes back to you.
    You are no more a transsexual than the incredible hunk.

  70. [quote]
    When the truth is that you are constantly being “read” Karen.
    [/quote]

    That is FAR from the case now, and it’s been a lot of years since since it was. It’s not something I go around worrying about.

    But even if it WAS the case, how does that bear on the question of sex marriage?

    BTW all my documents including birth certificate do say female so I have no reason to be any more insecure than anyone else who changed sex.

    That my marriage survived speaks to the strength and depth of our relationship, not insecurity of any sort.

    Saying someone does not “understand” without logical arguments to support your views is NOT very convincing.

    I’m sorry you are afraid your husband could not accept you and your life if he ‘knew’. I think a marriage with such secrets is a time bomb…

    But it’s your life and you have the right to live it that ways… Something I have even defended in other fora.

    In terms of electronic records for modern ADULT transitioners say 30+ total stealth is next to impossible these days. If you disbelieve me go to one of the people search sites and pay $15 to do search on someone.

    I’m sorry if facts are inconvenient but they are what they are.

    But you are right, I’m not a transsexual… I’m a woman.

    As to the liar thing, I said I don’t believe their sated intentions… and given the tone I have good reasons not not to.

    At this point as I can see no one here will present logical arguments with respect to their position on the same sex issue, I rest my case, and am out of this thread.

  71. Ciao, and don’t let the door hit your ass on the way out.

  72. “At this point as I can see no one here will present logical arguments with respect to their position on the same sex issue, I rest my case, and am out of this thread.”

    I posted the facts, you couldn’t refute them.

    You haven’t changed since the Usenet days.

  73. Ok Karen you asked for this.

    I have documented proof that as recently as earlier this you confessed to being “read” often. Shall I embarrass you by producing it? You have been through full facial reconstruction with Ousterhout and still you get “read” I have not and have never needed cosmetic surgery.
    Your continued marriage to a woman speaks not of the strength of the relationship but of the basis of the relationship both in the past and the present and since you claim not to have cross dressed the only possible answer is that you remain the male in the relationship. But as you say, none of my business.

    How dare you accuse me of fear as to the understanding of my husband or not. I chose not to tell because the fact is not relevant and the accident of my birth condition is my burden to carry and not his. It is a burden because people just like you have made it so. He will be viewed as Gay because of asscociation with and that is because of you and those like you. That is why same sex marriage must never happen. Besides all that, the strength of my relationship with my husband is none of your business and stay out of it.
    You acuse me of insecurity in my relationship and then refer to a time bomb as if there is some dreadful event in iminent danger of happenning. Tell me how? Pieces of paper prove nothing not even what is written on them. It is what you say and how you say it that speaks of your charector Karen A and it is that to which I refer when I say “male” is written all over it.
    I am tired of being polite to people like you. Tired of allowing your type of half truth and accusation go unchallenged. You are not a woman either Karen A you are a man married to a woman by your own admission and by your willingness to cling to the marriage. One of the key indicators of transsexual is the urgent imperitive to surgery. You left that far too late for you to qualify.
    Now go play with the other “men in frocks” I’m tired of dealing with you.

  74. You have been given both logical and emotional arguments on SSM which you have dismissed out of hand. You complain about us attacking the messenger and then take our comments and chop them up into line items in order to disassociate our message and inject your own.

    Our opinions on SSM are still in the vast majority. Your side have lost all 50 states in public opinion polls.

    I hope that trend will continue for a very very long time.

  75. OK I’ll defend myself against the personal attacks as you apparently want me to keep posting.

    Any post you may have found someplace would say that I get read once in awhile not CONSTANTLY…
    So if you want to go ahead and post a link to whatever post you are referring to for full context. It won’t say anything else.

    It’s really NOT something I NORMALLY think about these days when living my life… But I am aware that a small number can read me. And I know there is nothing I can do to change that as I had done all that possibly could be done long ago.

    FTR when it happens it’s been from behind because of build but it really is far in between…

    But how some is built does not define if they are TS or not. Thought is does have a tendency to affect age at transition.

    For something that is none of your business you sure do have strong OPINIONS about my marriage… The relationship is complex but close, mutually nurturing and loving with a deep trust. I am not about to toss it away to gain anyone’s approval or to try and ‘prove’ I’m a woman to myself or anyone else.

    [quote]
    How dare you accuse me of fear as to the understanding of my husband or not.
    [\quote]

    The same way you and others here dare to define who I am.

    Hiding one’s past is hardly a strong basis for mutual trust. BTW I was (and am) speaking in general. That said , as i have said before, it is your (generic) right and I do defend it.

    BTW if you have been polite to me before this you have been hiding it very well!

    BTW there was a reason I had SRS first when I did not know if I could manage to have FFS and SRS.

    So at what age does someone have to have SRS by for them to be an honest to goodness TS with your seal of approval?

    Do ALL the regular posters here meet it?

    You want things to be simple , straightforward and cut and dry.

    That is just NOT how people or life is, as most everyone here would admit if they were being honest instead of behaving insecurely and defensively.

    So pontificate all you want… It just shows your lack of understanding of human nature and the complexity of real lives.

    As long as this thread is here people can read the whole thing and decide who has been behaving how and who’s arguments are valid or not.

    As I said as you are trying to make this about me instead of the topic (and then no doubt accuse ME of making it about me)

  76. Somethings to think about Kaa;

    We didn’t make it about you, you chose to defend yourself regarding some aspects of your life you made public here. A little bit of discretion may have been in order. You could have defended SSM without making it personal by bringing details of your life into the discussion. This would have saved a lot of bandwidth.
    I know I am not the first one to tell you this; your personal life can only serve as a weapon against you.

    Another item;
    It’s suicide to try and continue to debate when the other side is intractable. People who hang together and discuss issues usually don’t keep picking on the differences between each other, they work from what they have in common.

    There is a big difference between you and the rest of us, that being we want nothing to do with the alphabet soup of self ghettoized, marginalized miss-fits who make up the GLBT, some of us even work actively against them whenever possible.

    Your not a bad person (at least in my eyes) and your life is none of my business, just as my life is none of yours.

    I learned an important lesson back in the days before DSL that a person is far better off if they keep their personal life off the computer.

    One thing that does irritate some is the line by line disassembly and arguing the components of an idea instead of taking the idea as a whole and arguing your side of the issue.

    If this were Bilerico and you were one of us, ideologically speaking you would have been banned thirty comments ago. But this is not bilerico, PHB, or any of the other GLBT Kool-Aid bars.

    One last item;
    Everyone deserves happiness, but not at the expense of someone else.

  77. anoldfriend:
    “Sorry Common law marriage isn’t recognized in the us anymore.”

    URL please? I gave the wiki URL which has lots of links to court cases and legislation saying the exact opposite. You appear to have ignored it.

    re “Zoe Brain show” –
    as you can imagine, there were plenty of eyewitnesses. Some are now chiming in in the comments section of my blog.

    re SSM -
    One thing I think we can all agree on is that the majority of US voters are against it.

    Where we differ is whether they should be or not, and if there’s a reason for that other than prejudice.

    So – are there any good reasons, other than “just because” or “God says so” etc. ?

    re Human Rights -
    See previous remarks about Aleut Eskimos. If anyone anywhere is being treated unequally and unfairly for any reason, then I’m against their persecution. Even if by doing so it damages my cause.

    re Personal Attacks:
    Ewwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww.

  78. [quote]
    We didn’t make it about you, you chose to defend yourself regarding some aspects of your life you made public here.
    [/quote]

    All of that are things you and other’s here knew about me already and was thrown against from the first time I posted here. Those go back to early in transition…

    If I was staring today knowing what I know now, I would not have posted as I had, because i am no longer that naive and trusting.

    But In point of fact it was others who brought it up first… reread the thread.

    For example the first person who mentioned my marriage in this thread was Leigh. Not me.

    Her comment out of the blue was: “Hows the wife ?”

    [quote]
    I know I am not the first one to tell you this; your personal life can only serve as a weapon against you.
    [/quote]

    Not a legitimate one and not one I consider valid. I have nothing to be ashamed of… I survived as best as I knew how… Those that have a problem with it IMO are the ones with the problem.

    I’m not unique and what I see is tarring of any and all who’s lives have gone as mine have, regardless of the details and reasons. I don’t buy into it’s validity.

    [quote]
    It’s suicide to try and continue to debate when the other side is intractable.
    [/quote]

    As I said the point then becomes not to convince them but to get others who are reading but not posting to see the issues are more complex and nuanced.

    [quote]
    People who hang together and discuss issues usually don’t keep picking on the differences between each other, they work from what they have in common.
    [/quote]

    The areas of differences can be as important as the commonalities. Differences of opinion don’t have to mean being enemies.

    [quote]
    There is a big difference between you and the rest of us, that being we want nothing to do with the alphabet soup of self ghettoized, marginalized miss-fits who make up the GLBT,
    [/quote]

    I too have no wish to be identified as GBLT as that is not how I feel about myself… Never have… Years ago that is exactly why I posted so much about my worries about passing.

    But that does not mean those who are, do not deserve human rights. It’s really not a zero sum game as far as I can see.

    [quote]
    One thing that does irritate some is the line by line disassembly and arguing the components of an idea instead of taking the idea as a whole and arguing your side of the issue.
    [/quote]

    That has been standard neticate for decades and the style I have used for decades. I use the quotes to address specific points… and to cut down on typing.

    After all these years I am still a horrible typist.

    Form my side It bothers me when people don’t address the points I bring up specifically… To me it seems like they want to duck that point because they have no good answer to it.

    [quote]
    Everyone deserves happiness, but not at the expense of someone else.
    [/quote]

    Yet to me it seems that is what others here are basically arguing for… Think about that…

    Anyway there really is not much more for me to say. I’ve said all I can.

    Now if I not attacked in this thread again I’ll leave it

    • Karen if I never see one of your posts again it suits me fine. However like a bad penny you keep turning up.
      You know this blog is all about anti GLBT dogma yet you turn up expressing an opposite view and act innocent when opposed. Come on now, act your age and not your shoe size.
      It has been made crystal clear why we here are against SSM. I do believe all of us have expressed the view that the correct and acceptable course is to advocate Civil Partnerships. You yourself expressed that point. However this was never about SSM v CP you made this personal when you said and I quote ” IMO anyone who is against same sex marriage is simply prejudiced or insecure. So you are basically either lieing about the CP acceptance or deliberately Traolling. Since I am against SSM I take a statement like that statement as an attack on me which I believe it is. Again you come the innocent when called on it.
      You call Democracy a “popular Vote” do you? If Democracy is not a popular vote then what is it. The wishes of the majority are an essential part of Democracy.
      You describe the majority electing Barack Obama as “Tyrany” do you? What kind of logic is that?
      You consisantly and frequently talk of “changing sex” when every “Classic Transsexual” I know consistantly talk of correction or of having a birth defect. And I have talked about myself in those terms since the 1960′s So again Karen you display a mindset different from my own and from those whom I have encountered as genuine “Classic Transsexual”
      Finally in your first post on this thread you said “That some here can’t see that and understand why ON PRINCIPLE they should support same sex marriage, whatever their own orientation, is beyond me” Here again YOU are deliberately and I believe maliciously provocative in your visit So why are you surprised you get treated as a troll when in your very first outburst you make assumptions about what prejudices you believe we have when in reality we just believe Gay and Lesbian issues are for Gay and Lesbian people. I will not support them while their behaviour and pernicious insistance on speaking on transsexual issues about which they no nothing and have no business involving themselves.
      So Karen take your trolling elsewhere. Here you are out of your depth.

  79. Zoe;
    Try to get social security survivor’s bennifits without a marriage certificate?
    Just because you live together doesn’t mean you are married.

    You like most in the GLBT need to understand marriage is a privilege not a right in this country.

    Truthfully I think you would be better off minding the store in your own country.

  80. Oh and Zoe;
    Common law marriage is only recognized by a few states here in the US. The Federal Government doesn’t recognize it.

    http://www.nolo.com/legal-encyclopedia/faqEditorial-29086.html#container

    It has gone the way of the dodo bird along with common law name changes.

    The US use to be a common law nation, not anymore the common law is being phased out in favor of other forms of law.

  81. I have hesitated getting involved in this thread; I continue to feel I have no stake in the gender debate and am sick to my stomach of blogs in general, but this concerned marriage, particularly same-sex marriage, and I have been urged by many to weigh in. So, even though I have no stake in same-sex marriage either, I will give my opinion.

    One advantage I have in making a statement on this topic now is that I have read all one hundred of the posts that have been made this far, in just two sittings. Before I go any further, I would like to address you folk’s attention to two post by other authors. The first is by Alex Blaze over at Bilerico. I am no fan of Mr. Blaze, but his essay entitled “We can’t deny the fact that you hate us right now, you hate us!” is worth reading, this may be the best article he has ever written…pay particular attention to the chart that is listed within the context. The second article I would like for you all to read was written by Cathryn Platine on her Riding the Second Wave blog. The name of this piece is “Bringing Out the Worst in Me”. I insulted Ms. Platine a while back, something I deeply regret and apologized for, though perhaps not sincerely nor adequately enough for I feel she would just as soon I drop off the face of the earth…perhaps as a few other might as well.

    The gist of Mr. Blaze’s piece is that society is just not accepting of same-sex marriage. In Maine, the GLBT out spent their opposition considerably; they out campaigned the opposition considerably; Maine is over 97% white…the “black vote” could not be blamed as was in Prop 8; the GLBT couldn’t, and didn’t, blame either President Obama nor the Human Rights Campaign for the loss; the GLBT couldn’t blame the state political machine who had already voted in the affirmative; even the religious rights was not a “…dominating feature of the campaign scene.” No, the GLBT threw everything but the kitchen sink at Maine’s electorate, one of the more liberal states in the Northeast…and still lost by six percentage points. Thirty one states have constitutional amendments preventing same-sex marriage. Every single time same-sex marriage has been put to a vote in a state wide election same-sex marriage has lost. I offer no opinion on this; it is simply the fact of the matter.

    The overwhelming theme of Ms. Platine’s essay, as I understand the excellently written piece, is that blogs in general and the GLBT political debates that take place on the internet absolutely bring out the very worst in people. With just a few exceptions, this blog thread is a perfect example of that. I’m no newbie when it comes to any of this and I can attest with absolute certainty that people will make statements on blogs while addressing a comment (or the person making it) in a manner and with language they would never ever use if they were conversing with their adversary in a head up conversational debate.

    The articles I reference above are not related per se, nonetheless, I think both should be read and considered with an open mind by those who might want to continue to comment on this thread. The reason I left the gender debate is because my conscience could no longer justify what I was writing from my keyboard. Don’t misunderstand, I meant what I was saying and wrote; the convictions and positions I presented here I still feel just as strongly about. But, quite honestly, I was often ashamed at the way I presented them in writing here at Enough Non-Sense. I am a Christian, and quite proud of being so. Cathryn says in her article that she is “…a very compassionate woman…” and then goes on to say “I am a very gentle woman by nature.” I don’t doubt that in the least. So am I. Blogging brought out the very worst in me…the very, very worst.

    Again, having read all the comments posted here, in this particular thread, there is much discussion of one or the other participants having to justify their position with regard to same-sex marriage. There is the tone of one or the other having to present “logical arguments.” Why? If one feels a certain way about an issue, whether it be a social issue or right, or a civil issue or right…no one is required to argue why they are for or against it. Society throughout all of written history has granted or retracted social and civil rights for no other reason than that is just how they felt about it. No one is required, and absolutely there is no societal or cultural mandate for individuals to defend a position they may hold. One may choose to defend their position, but they are not obligated to do so. When a person walks into a voting booth to cast their ballot they have free will to vote as they please, yea or nay…no one is going to be there to make them defend their vote based on what another might view as the logical and reasoned choice. And, that rationale, the electorate voting based on how they feel, has decided the same-sex marriage issue so far. No one who has commented on this thread is under any obligation whatsoever to explain, defend, give a reason, or justify how they feel about the issue of same-sex marriage unless they choose to. And, not choosing to defend one’s personal decision or position on an issue such whether they approve or don’t approve of same-sex marriage implies nothing.

    Personally, I think Cassandraspeaks most represents my position on the issue and her analogy of the United Kingdon and the issues that lead up to the Gender Recognition Act 2004 and Civil Partnerships Act 2005. Cassandraspeaks says: “I feel that is justice in action.” I agree. And, further, if the recent post Maine election analysis on the blogs is any indication, I think the GLBT who advocate for same-sex marriage are also beginning to realize that marriage (the term) is simply not going to pass the electorate here in the United States anytime soon…like decades and decades. The GLBT, as of very recently on the blogs, are more and more shifting their political strategy to civil partnerships with the same rights as marriage but not being referred to as marriage as such. I, for one, would vote this very day for homosexual couples to have the right, in every state in the Union, to enter into civil partnerships with the same rights as marriage effectively immediately. I don’t support same-sex marriage, and the use of that word…I don’t need to give a reason or justify why I feel that way and I won’t.

    Just a few other comments and I’m done.

    The GLBT is shooting themselves in the foot with a shotgun by continuing to call those who don’t agree with them bigots and haters, along with a host of other slurs. Many learned that big time after the Mormon Church/Proposition 8 fiasco. Doing so is only alienating those who, though they don’t support same-sex marriage, would otherwise support civil partnerships.

    As well, as the chart I brought to you folk’s attention in Mr. Blaze’s essay above clearly shows, the vast majority of the US doesn’t support same-sex marriage, though quite a few do clearly support civil partnerships. Just as society instantly relegates to something other than woman the transwomen/transmen that prefix their womanhood/manhood with the term trans, whether they are polite enough or not to actually say it…just as certainly, whether same-sex marriage ever passes society will never see a same-sex union as a marriage…again, whether they are polite enough or not to actually say it.

    If the GLBT want to ever do anything constructive they would put all of their effort behind the repeal of the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA). At least at that point, other states that don’t sanction same-sex marriage could be forced to recognize same-sex marriages that occur in the few states in which same-sex marriage is legal. That goal is attainable.

    If the transgender want to ever do anything construction, they would put all of their resources behind federal legislation that would recognize post operative transsexuals as legal females/males just as any other natal born female/male is. As I believe most of those who identify as transgender are also homosexual, as well as the transgender continuing to define a man with a penis as a female and a female with a vagina as a male…that goal is very much not attainable.

    As far as those from other countries jumping in, please remove the log from your eye before you try to remove the splinter from the eyes of those here in the United States.

    The thread stays.

  82. I have read Kathryn’s peace some time back. I was shocked by Alex’s peace, very atypical of his homo-socialist tone.

    I guess they have realized the backlash some of us warned them of 3 and 4 years ago.

    We shall have to see if they have learned anything.

  83. This is my initial foray into this forum. I am not a blogger. I was given this thread in response to my posts on TG Advocacy, (a yahoo group) where I tried to draw a distinction between woman whose primary all consuming motivation had always been obtaining syncronicity within their minds and bodies, and those others which had all sorts of other ways to cope.

    I have spent several days exploring the various threads and have formed some tentative opinions.

    By way of introducing myself, I should add that I underwent a successful “sex change”, (that is what it was called back then) in 1972/73. I was fortunate to have survived the experience and until about 3 years ago have never ever been concerned about my history.

    I will admit to having lived the past 40 years as a “priviledged heterosexual whute woman” and to having enjoyed most of the benefits and shortcomings that such “status” implies.

    I post here with some timerity as I have been poorly recieved and reviled on other “T” related sites. I will say that I agree with the majority of opinion here and feel very uncomfortable being associated with TG’s as they seem to have a very militant agenda which if I don’t accept causes them to attack me as elitist.

    Gee perhaps if they had walked in my shoes in the late 60′s….

  84. Welcome Anne, this has been one of the better blogs around,voicing the feelings of po-ops.

  85. Hi Anne;
    I have been thrown off that group for not agreeing with their homo-socialist dogma and for being too privileged. (another homo-socialist term)
    That and other Tee-Gee groups are nice places to be from, if you get my meaning. Thankfully there are some islands of sanity on the web, this certainly being one of them.

    They speak of our privilege; Privilege is something granted to one person by another or something few are borne into. We worked hard and some of us sacrificed a great deal in order to correct something we knew was very wrong with us since our earliest conscious thoughts. To say we are privileged is an insult to our hard work and endurance, and sacrifice.

    They who speak of passing are what the term implies, counterfeits.

    Their reaction to you, I, and the others who have interacted with them is nothing less than green-eyed jealousy.

    Welcome pull up a chair, the coffee is hot :)

  86. Welcome Anne

    You’re home and among friends here. The women associated with this forum are all cut from the same cloth. We are an interesting and divergent group of women with different personal interests. The one area we all have in common (minus the occasional unwanted input from the TG hoard) is; we did what needed to be done. We alleviated a medical problem so we could move on with our lives to become… dare I say it?

    “Normal?”

    Yea gods! There ya go! Sibyl’s done gone and pulling the dreaded “N Word” out yet again! Yep! And dear friends, she is going to continue to do so as long as she is on line and drawing breath!

    Like all here I’ve been banned, heckled, moderated and shouted down again and again for daring to use that seeming innocuous word while in the company of those whom would claim to “be like us.” Yet as you noted, what motivated us to get here was our overwhelming need for synchronicity between mind and body. Our need to be normal women integrated into the binary without any of those horrible TG modifiers!

    What motivates them is beyond me and perhaps one of these days I may get an honest answer from one of them about it but I’m not holding my breath!

    Anyway we are all pretty much the same as the other 3 billion women walking this wondrous earth… We’re caregivers, wives, mothers, nurse-mates and friends and our medical history is nothing but an unhappy footnote from the past

    Here are a few other links you may want to explore (many of the authors are taking a respite at the moment having battled the hoard all summer)

    http://ariablue.wordpress.com/
    http://cassandraspeaks.wordpress.com/
    http://radicalbitch.wordpress.com/

    Sibyl

  87. THank you friend, for your warm welcome.

    Having read a number of your threads, I feel comfortable enough here to share a bit more about myself. Something which is not always easy to do in mixed company. I sense a sympathetic ear here and perhaps what I am about to share will strike a chord.

    My father was the son of a Columbian father and a Jewish mother whose family emigrated from Holland in the early 1930′s. My mother’s family, who raised me, traces its roots to the original Spanish settlers of Central America. The events surrounding my conception are a bit cloudy but the end result was that my mother legally emigrated from Costa Rica to the USA prior to my birth.

    I knew from my earliest consciousness that I was a girl. Despite what everybody told me, I knew that someday I would grow up to be a woman. The most significant confirmation that there was a serious dichotomy between whom I believed myself to be and the contradicting physical realities occurred when I started kindergarten. I was told to stand with the boys. From that day forward, my life became a constant struggle to live up to that lie and the expectations of others to be someone I knew I was not.

    In 1966 I graduated from a Catholic College Preparatory School for boys run by the Jesuits. I enjoyed learning and was highly motivated to excel. In 1970 I graduated UCLA with a major in Psychology and a minor in philosophy. I went to work for the Social Security Administration after graduation and learned quickly that I was not suited for that type of bureaucratic drudgery.

    Less than one year later, I was working as a carpenter’s apprentice in a small town in Southern Utah, where I had moved to ski the “greatest snow on earth”. Here is where I met the first mental health counselor with whom I felt comfortable enough to discuss what was just now coming to be described as gender dysphoria. I had read all the available literature, which was not extensive, while I was an undergraduate at UCLA. I understood the jargon, but it was obvious, that no one had any idea what caused this phenomenon or what to do about it.

    Nevertheless, I agreed to move to Salt Lake City to work with a “specialist” that “might” be able to help me. In addition, the snow was deeper, dryer and better at the newly opened ski resort of Snowbird. This “enlightened” man tried to “cure” me by using electric shocks. This obviously did not work. The good news was that besides the better skiing, the move to Salt Lake City allowed me to take advantage of a special program offered by the University of Utah in their efforts to train and recruit teachers fluent in both English and Spanish. After completing the course work for a Master’s in Educational Psychology, (the art of learning), I accepted a contract to teach high school history and social studies for the Salt Lake City School District.

    1972 would be my last year on this planet for me as a man. I had exhausted all known available options. I had tried living as a man with a woman. I had explored the possibility that I was gay to no avail. Cross dressing was most certainly not the answer for me. I could not see myself staying alive by pretending to be someone I was not. I was now left with the one option that offered the possibility, however remote, of becoming the woman I truly believed I was. I had finally arrived at the incontrovertible conclusion that I could, and would, have to change my sex.

    Starting in the early spring of 1972 I began taking massive doses of female hormones. That fall I began my first and last term as a high school teacher. I was sporting a beard at the time and I kept my suit jacket on even as the weather warmed the following spring to conceal my newly developing breasts. By the end of the term I could no longer stand the hair on my face and finally shaved my beard the last week of school. Apparently the change in my appearance was so dramatic that some of my students noticed. There was some interesting speculation among them I am sure, but a week later school was out for the summer and I was on my way to San Francisco for surgery.

    Very few surgeries of this kind had been performed in the United States prior to 1972, although they were becoming more common. I knew it would be a painful and risky procedure. It was not known if I would still have the capacity to orgasm or what would be the extent of other possible complications. Despite the risks, I knew that the cold, hard truth was simply, that I had no other choice. Fortunately, after a long and painful recovery, I survived with excellent cosmetic and functional results.

    I returned home to Salt Lake City as an attractive young woman and legally changed my name. Surprisingly, this was accomplished by the simple order of a sympathetic judge. I chose to not continue as a teacher but would not allow the school district to revoke my teaching credential. I was able to address the district board directly and after consultations with Utah’s Attorney General, they agreed that I had earned my credential and had provided them with no legal cause for them to take it away.

    In 1973 I began my career as a real estate investor. In the early 1970′s, rental property could be acquired for as little as $9,000 for a small house in Salt Lake City. I bought my first 4-plex for $22,000. I continued buying and selling and renting residential real estate until 1975 when I moved back to Los Angeles where I married my first husband. He was a successful businessman and that allowed me to embark on my next great love in life which started with an extensive remodel of our home by the sea in Oxnard and evolved into designing and building custom luxury homes. My first marriage lasted ten years and he never knew that I was transsexual.

    In 1986 I tried marriage for a second time. My second husband was an engineer and this again allowed me to continue to design and build beautiful homes. I also started a General Engineering consulting business which evolved quite nicely into an asphalt recycling business. Unfortunately, my business fell victim to the financial collapse of Orange County in 1997.

    Also by then my second marriage was on the rocks. I would not consider this one a failure, as we are still the best of friends. The simple truth was that we were just not compatible. My second husband did not know that I was transsexual either until I told him years after our divorce. Initially he was nonplused but recovered well the following day.

    My third attempt at marriage was short lived and ended in 2001. I had told him that I was transsexual before we married, but he was not to be dissuaded. Nevertheless, we also remain the best of friends. Since then I have lived exclusively with my current “significant other”. We do plan to marry “someday”, but in truth, what’s the hurry?

    In the course of the nearly 40 years that I have lived as a woman I have accomplished very little of any social significance. I have been blessed with good health and above average intelligence. I have traveled the world over and have experienced many incredible things. I have no children and few regrets. I have lived by a simple code of do no evil and try to be of benefit to others. I do have a deep faith in God and the power of prayer and I am extremely grateful for the blessings I have received and the time that I have been given on this earth. I sincerely hope to leave behind me a legacy for good.

    • We have crossed paths before on one of those TG groups.

      Like others here I have been banned from some of the Tee-Gee groups because of my views regarding our rightful place in mainstream society.

      You try to impart some knowledge and experience to those people and they attack you calling you homophobic or self hating.

      They don’t get it.

    • Hi.

      Where are you currenty living?

  88. The most miraculous thing about transition for me was the people I’ve met as the result.

    Thanks, Anne.

  89. Thanks for sharing your story Anne. Your narrative is very consistent with those of the majority of the women who post here and is most obviously classical transexual as that term is used here. You’ve had an amazing life and more to come!

    Personally my story is not so classical in nature. However, I enjoy this blog and others like it because it most closely echoes the way I am living my life now, outside of any LGB and TG paradigm. My female life, my transition has been joyful and successful, though not nearly as long.

    Thanks again for sharing. By the way, I grew up in Oxnard and I body-surfed Silver Strand, Hollywood, and Oxnard State beaches incessantly. I also worked in a restaurant on the corner of Victoria Ave. and Channel Islands Blvd. for a while in the time frame you were there. I am sure our paths crossed somewhere!

    Sara …


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

Gravatar
WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. ( Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. ( Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. ( Log Out / Change )

Cancel

Connecting to %s

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.