tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4108804421076471842024-03-05T09:13:58.069-08:00Maple CentersSex, Politics and Religion ... what better trifecta could there be?klfhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00523944623131700808noreply@blogger.comBlogger19125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-410880442107647184.post-45677210536319752662012-05-30T17:41:00.002-07:002012-05-30T17:41:30.017-07:00How Radical Feminism Gets Trans WrongA couple of utterances from a well known RadFeminist thinker came to light today that I think deserve to be addressed:<br />
<br />
First is the following interview: <a href="http://www.feminisms.org/5039/anybody-can-be-absolutely-anything-if-they-simply-say-they-are-an-interview-with-sheila-jeffreys-on-transgenderism-and-feminism/" target="_blank">Sheila Jeffreys on Transgenderism and Feminism</a><br />
Followed by this article on The Guardian: <a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2012/may/29/transgenderism-hate-speech" target="_blank">Let us be free to debate transgenderism without being accused of 'hate speech'</a><br />
<br />
I'll start off with Ms. Jeffreys' interview, as it contains a great many clues as to what is wrong with the Radical Feminist stance towards transgenderism. <br />
<br />
Right at the top, we find the following:<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<i>I understand transgenderism to be a diagnosis of the medical profession
constructed in the late 20th century. It seems to have come from work
that was being done by sexologists in the mid 20th century when the
sexological profession – endocrinologists and so on – invented the idea
of gender</i></blockquote>
There are several points in this sentence that I think are important. She has confused the evolution of the notion of <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gender" target="_blank">gender</a> as distinct from physical sexual attributes with the work of <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harry_Benjamin#Work_with_transgender_people" target="_blank">Dr. Harry Benjamin</a>. Her reference to endocrinologists seems like a bit of an attempt to diminish the significance of the work that Harry Benjamin and others did in breaking ground for the treatment of transsexuals. She is also conveniently ignoring the fact that formal study of cross-gender behaviour predates Dr. Benjamin quite significantly, with <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magnus_Hirschfeld" target="_blank">Magnus Hirschfeld</a> having coined the term "transvestism" as referring to cross-dressing in the early 20th century.<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<i>there were two categories of them [men who wanted sex reassignment
surgery]. One category was definitely homosexual men, and in fact the
first transsexual surgery that got a great deal of publicity in the US
was [performed on] a man called <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christine_Jorgensen" target="_blank">Christine Jorgensen</a>,
who actually specifically said that he was homosexual, and in fact we
have it on record that it was his doctor who said to him “no, you’re
suffering from a condition which affects every cell of your body” and so
on. His was the first case, and that was basically about the gay-hating
of the general society, which causes men like him (and unfortunately
there are still many men like him) to have surgery because he could not
bear to love other men in the body that he had. </i></blockquote>
Here's the next big point. Notice that Ms. Jeffreys has chosen to use masculine pronouns with respect to Christine Jorgensen. Not only is this profoundly disrespectful of Ms. Jorgensen's lived gender, it also makes it abundantly clear that Ms. Jeffreys has either not read Ms. Jorgensen's own autobiography or is choosing not to acknowledge much of the narrative that Ms. Jorgensen expressed in it.<br />
<br />
As far as I can see, Ms. Jeffreys is falling into the trap of using sexual attraction to describe someone's gender. This is a tactic that we see all too commonly from the "Christian" far right when they want to invalidate a transsexual.<br />
<br />
Ms. Jorgensen may well have been attracted to men, but in her male past was unwilling or outright unable to engage with men sexually for a variety of reasons. That may have resulted in her describing herself as homosexually attracted in her pre-transition state, but that doesn't make her homosexual per se. In fact, it tends to suggest that she is a straight female.<br />
<br />
The second point that I take great exception to is Ms. Jeffreys' insistence on attempting to frame transsexualism in the context of the homosexual world. While a good number of transsexuals do inhabit the gay community for a variety of reasons, it is folly indeed to try and glue the two together as though transgender people are simply a subset of the GLB population. By arguing that Ms. Jorgensen transitioned out of shame or in response to the social pressures against being homosexual, Ms. Jeffreys is denying the fundamental validity of the transsexual's drive to transition. <br />
<br />
Speaking for myself, I didn't transition out of any fear of consequences for being homosexual. In fact, my own experience of the process of transition was that the pressures against a transsexual undergoing transition were at least as harsh, if not more so, than the pressures that homosexuals experience. <br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<i>Nonetheless, queer theory, which is very social constructionist, created
this idea that gender is socially constructed – which is true – but
then [within this framework] there can be all kinds of genders, and
gender doesn’t have any kind of relationship to the actual material
reality of the subordination of women and the dominance of men from
which gender actually arises </i></blockquote>
Queer theory doesn't adequately describe transsexualism either. Trust me, I've studied enough of Foucault, Butler, and others to long ago realize that social constructionist theories cannot account for some key aspects of transsexual narratives. Among the key factors that transsexuals often express is an awareness of being different as one of their earliest memories, sometimes well before any development of socialized gender behaviours. No constructionist view of gender accounts for this, and usually the response when confronted with this fact is to attempt to dismiss it as "unsubstantiated essentialism".<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<i>At the same time there was the development of plastic surgery. The
medical profession had to develop certain skills in order to make
transgenderism happen – they were indeed engaged in a project to create
heterosexual correctly-gendered people, but they needed endocrinology,
they needed plastic surgery, they needed anaesthetics in order to do
transgenderism. </i></blockquote>
Here's the next bit of idiocy. Ms. Jeffreys is now trying to conjure the idea that the medical professions set out to create an industry for themselves. While there is no question that the treatment of transsexuals (and other transgender people) makes a small number of professionals a very healthy living, there is no evidence that this is a result of some kind of conspiracy on the part of them. Having studied the work of so many of the early pioneers in the treatment of transsexuals, there is no evidence that supports that kind of hypothesis.<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<i>So there’s really a campaign of censorship on the net, which frightens
people and it’s not just feminists that they do this to. There was an
American sexologist called Michael Bailey who wrote a book back in I
think 2004 called ‘<em><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Man_Who_Would_Be_Queen" target="_blank">The Man Who Would Be Queen</a></em>’
in which he made arguments that transgender activists do not like —
that transgenderism for, not those men who have been homosexual and do
not wish to be in that category, but the other large category of those
men who decide that they’re transgender who come from cross-dressing,
who’ve been sexually excited by women’s clothes. Michael Bailey argued
that for that category of men – which is a very large one – who’ve
usually been married with a couple of children and decide they’re
transgender in their 50s or so – he said that that was sexual and it was
about sexual excitement, at least in its origins. </i></blockquote>
So, now she wants to martyr Michael Bailey. Bailey wasn't shouted down by the transgender community simply because he argued for a particular model, but rather because that model was based on a horrendously bad set of research, assumptions and inferences. Attempting to describe the entirety of transsexuals based on solely on interviewing people who hang out in drag bars is a guaranteed way to fail. Bailey tried to defend an indefensible position by telling a lot of very clear-headed people that they were "deluded". Hardly a way to "make friends and influence people.<br />
<br />
In short, if Ms. Jeffreys wants to "debate" transgenderism in the context of feminism, that's fine. Until such times as Ms. Jeffreys wants to start dragging into her space a whole bunch of utterly bogus assumptions about transsexuals that are so fundamentally flawed as claiming that we are really homosexuals, or dragging Bailey's autogynephilia nonsense into the conversation. In short, if you are going to debate the subject, treat the people you are talking about with some respect.<br />
<br />klfhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00523944623131700808noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-410880442107647184.post-12486102340527387972012-05-24T08:56:00.002-07:002012-05-24T08:56:56.134-07:00On Jenna Talackova and "Double Dipping"Barbara Kay over at the National Post is busy ranting about how there's something wrong with Jenna Talackova participating in a trans-oriented beauty pageant in 2010 and then Miss Universe in 2012.<br />
<br />
<div style="text-align: center;">
<a href="http://fullcomment.nationalpost.com/2012/05/21/barbara-kay-jenna-talakova-goes-double-dipping-in-the-theatre-of-gender-politics/">Jenna Talackova Goes Double Dipping In The Theatre of Gender Politics</a></div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
Ms. Kay is arguing that there is a degree of inconsistency to Ms. Talackova's behaviour in this regard. How can you claim to be "just a woman", and at the same time participate in an event focused on transgender women? </div>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<i>Is Ms Talackova a woman or a transsexual? Are they one and the same thing? Because if they are one and the same, then how is it that Ms Talackova did not see a conflict of interest in taking part as well in The Miss International Queen pageant in Thailand before she took part in Miss Universe Canada?</i></blockquote>
<div style="text-align: left;">
The problem with this kind of reasoning is that it is a false dichotomy. In order for Ms. Kay's dichotomy to hold together, it would require Jenna to not just ignore her past, but to actively deny it.</div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
For example, I am a woman. Make no mistake about it - I have been a woman for quite a while now, and I'm perfectly comfortable with that. At the same time, I am a woman with a transsexual history. In other words, when I was born, I was assigned a male gender role based on some dangly bits that the doctor could see. I do not deny this, nor do I deny the reality of my transition. Were I to attempt to do so, I would basically walk right back into the emotionally confining closet that was part of my pre-transition past - a place that was very unhealthy for me to live in.</div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
I see it as a matter of Ms. Kay not fully understanding how being trans can affect a person's life and personal narrative. To deny the reality of your past is guaranteed to be destructive, and there is so much work that goes on in transition that is very constructive that it would be ridiculous to entirely deny your past experiences simply to make Ms. Kay's assumptions about post-transition women hold together.</div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
As an example, for the most part, I live and work with what I call "an open secret". I don't talk about the fact of my trans history with anyone who isn't in my inner circle for a lot of good reasons. That said, if someone were to ask me about it, I certainly do not deny my past either. In fact, I try my level best to be honest and open about it. </div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
One of the reasons I do not deny my past is because in matters of public policy (which is really what Ms. Kay is trying to influence), it is very easy for decisions to be made that directly affect others who are in the midst of their own journeys towards their correct gender. One example of this would be the recent changes to airline boarding rules which could create all sorts of havoc for someone who is trans and needs to travel for any reason. In these situations, it is perfectly appropriate for me to speak out not just as a woman, but also as a person who has been in the very situation that would be affected. </div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
To do less, in my opinion, would be to do an injustice to the rest of the transsexuals who live in our society and do not feel free to speak out for fear of repercussions.</div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
<br /></div>klfhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00523944623131700808noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-410880442107647184.post-59545985096940619512012-01-25T18:56:00.000-08:002012-01-26T17:10:49.034-08:00RationaleSo, why do I keep writing about the nonsense that Walt Heyer throws up?<br />
<br />
Largely, it's because every time he opens his yap on a subject, I end up finding a few more articles written elsewhere that seem to be all too quick to echo his sentiments without bothering to do any real research.<br />
<br />
Take, for example, the article recently published in the Kelowna Daily Courier newspaper entitled <a href="http://www.kelownadailycourier.ca/local-columnists/transgendered-kids-a-bunch-of-baloney.html">"Transgendered kids a bunch of baloney"</a>. Too much of this article reads like the writer has run across Heyer's blog, and or possibly watched one too many Fox News interviews of Keith Ablow who runs around making all kinds of scurrilous claims about transfolk and homosexuals, claiming authority because he has a PhD.<br />
<br />
These kinds of idiotic arguments need to be called out for one simple reason - to fail to do so would be to tacitly accept the lies that they contain.<br />
<br />klfhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00523944623131700808noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-410880442107647184.post-37200364154412651312012-01-25T17:57:00.000-08:002012-01-25T18:00:24.604-08:00Living Full Time vs Trying To Live Full TimeThis is another post challenging some of Walt Heyer's rubric about his failed transition.<br />
<br />
In this post, I'm going to take apart and analyse Heyer's own narrative about his life as Laura a piece at a time, and expose the glaringly obvious problems that contributed enormously to the outcome of <i>his attempt </i>to transition, and explain why Heyer is not an example of typical transitions.<br />
<br />
A big part of the motivation for writing this post comes from the <a href="http://waltheyer.typepad.com/blog/2012/01/insanity-einstein-had-it-right.html?cid=6a0133f43a41d9970b0162fff8016d970d#comment-6a0133f43a41d9970b0162fff8016d970d">following doozy of a comment on his blog</a>: <br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjKsaAN2qAxKV3y0Ggec4mk9N0fyZmzytlNXnwvoUhDorO6fKvXCLu4r70ickUfCNO2EZ5Uj03xz_Frd5hIbLI9ABszBlEJXFk0LwskirNAmparSzRxNj7_L1yfYC_LDqZvymDFli5KXYOn/s1600/WaltHeyer_InsanityPostComment.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="166" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjKsaAN2qAxKV3y0Ggec4mk9N0fyZmzytlNXnwvoUhDorO6fKvXCLu4r70ickUfCNO2EZ5Uj03xz_Frd5hIbLI9ABszBlEJXFk0LwskirNAmparSzRxNj7_L1yfYC_LDqZvymDFli5KXYOn/s320/WaltHeyer_InsanityPostComment.png" width="320" /></a></div>
<br />
<br />
The key quotes I present will be taken from Walt's own autobiography <a href="http://www.amazon.com/Trading-My-Sorrows-Walt-Heyer/dp/160034156X/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1327537232&sr=1-1">Trading My Sorrows</a>, Kindle Edition.<br />
<br />
<br />
Hmmm...so at four years, he was pretty positive about the outcome of his surgery? I'm not so sure about that. In fact, about the only time he seems even remotely happy about the outcome of his surgery is when he woke up in the recovery room after surgery. It all pretty much seems to go downhill from there if I understand his narrative correctly:<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<br />
<a name='more'></a><br />
<i>"I had the most wonderful feeling that the weight of the world had been lifted from me. I was in a place of rest deep within me with no battles, no confusion, no tormenting thoughts. This sense of serenity was unlike anything I had ever experienced before at any other time of my life. I felt good, real good. I was very much at peace, very happy. At forty-two years old, I was finally a woman, or was I?"</i> <span style="font-size: xx-small;">[Location 802, Chapter 7 "The Die is Cast"]</span></blockquote>
I would have expected Walt to feel pretty good immediately after waking up from surgery. The first sign of trouble comes in the form of how Walt set things up prior to surgery, especially with his employer.<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<i>"My boss at Honda granted my request for two to three weeks of medical leave, which I said was for gall bladder surgery. It wasn't a complete lie. I needed gall bladder surgery, so I deliberately scheduled it back-to-back with the other surgery. I figured it made a great cover-up. I had gender reassignment surgery in Colorado on Tuesday, was released from the hospital and flew back home on Friday, then on Monday drove about a hundred miles to the other hospital for preoperative gall bladder preparations."</i> <span style="font-size: xx-small;">[Location 802, Chapter 7 "The Die is Cast"]</span></blockquote>
There are a couple of key points I want to highlight here regarding Walt's GRS. First, he wasn't up front with his colleagues at work about what was happening. This is important, and sets him up for an immediate termination when he reveals his change of status to his bosses later. Putting aside for a moment the very real issues of discrimination that transsexuals face in the workplace for a moment, Heyer's revelation of his change in status will be seen as a huge breach of trust by his bosses simply because he wasn't honest with them about the reasons for the surgery.<br />
<br />
The second vital point that this reveals is that Heyer was clearly not living full time as Laura at the time he had surgery. This is a very important point. One of the most important aspects of transition is what used to be called "Real Life Test" or "Real Life Experience" in which the transsexual was expected to live 24/7 in their chosen gender for an extended period of time, usually at least a full year. This means everything from home and social life to work without "switching back" to their previous role. In my own opinion, if you can't live full-time in your chosen gender, then chances are you have a lot of thinking to do in order to sort yourself out before you are fully ready for surgery.<br />
<br />
The other part that doesn't quite ring true for me is the idea of multiple major surgeries in such a short time. My own experience of surgical recovery from GRS makes me wonder a little bit. At three days after the surgery itself I was doing pretty well, but I was in no shape to drive any distance, much less undergo another surgery. Perhaps Mr. Heyer has much greater stamina than I have, but I seriously question the rational judgment of someone who would do that to themselves.<br />
<br />
While I don't know precisely what kind of documentation the surgeons would have required from a psychologist in 1983, clinic based programs such as those running at the Clarke were requiring at least a year living full time before hormones would be prescribed much less recommendations for GRS. I'm not at all sure how Heyer got a recommendation for surgery if he wasn't living full-time as Laura to begin with.<br />
<br />
Up next, I want to take a close look at Walt's described experience after a couple of years.<br />
<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<i>It was late 1985, about two years after my termination from Honda, a few months after arriving in the loving arms of the Thompson family, with about a year of sobriety. Now I was realizing that I was a man wrapped in a woman's masquerade, a fake, a fraud, a mutilated man. I did not fit anywhere. My manhood had been surgically removed but I was not a woman even though my birth certificate said I was. That was a lie. I didn't want to continue living the masquerade. With the support of a loving family and the help of Jesus Christ, I was truly, with every bit of courage, strength and ability, trying to restore my life to the man named Walt.</i> <span style="font-size: xx-small;">[Location 1037, Chapter 9 "Time to Try"]</span></blockquote>
Bear in mind, this is all of two years after he had had surgery. Barely at the halfway point to when he says in his comment I noted above that he claims he was still pretty positive about his surgical outcome. From this comment in his autobiography, it sounds like he's already seriously considering detransitioning - not exactly a ringing endorsement of his life post-transition, in my opinion. It indicates someone who was not stable in their transition for a variety of reasons.<br />
<br />
In fact, it seems that Walt bounced between living as Walt and Laura quite a lot. Sometimes living for periods as Walt; sometimes living as Laura; sometimes both.<br />
<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<i>... "With your history, there's no way that Toyota will employ you." But he could hire me through a temporary agency to work for a Toyota national recall campaign. I went for it, grateful to be back working with Bill, whom I admired, respected and considered one of my very best friends. Bill was very happy he could help me.</i></blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<i>I continued living a dual life: Walt at work, Laura everywhere else. It seemed that Laura was very territorial. If I was introduced to something or someone as Laura, then I felt most comfortable always presenting as Laura in that situation. When I met ben at my first AA meeting, I was Laura, so I felt most comfortable being Laura living in his home and at the AA meetings. Ben didn't care if I left for work in the morning dressed as Walt. We often laughed and joked about the absurdity of it. </i> <span style="font-size: xx-small;">[Location 1435, Chapter 12 "A Shocking Diagnosis"] </span></blockquote>
<br />
To be perfectly honest, what Walt is describing about living a dual life is what most transsexuals go through in the time prior to going "full time" (or beginning RLE if you prefer) and a full year prior to surgery. There is an enormous amount of change happening during this time, and it's almost a full-time effort just to integrate all the pieces of your life into the social milieu of your chosen gender. The final steps of going full-time, often involving workplace transition, are scary moments indeed. Everything gets put on the line - career, relationships, stability, you name it. It's hard. If you can reintegrate yourself into a social setting where you have support during this time, chances are you'll have a much better outcome than if you simply do not.<br />
<br />
The tragic thing is that it's quite clear that Walt/Laura could not successfully integrate themselves into society as either Walt or Laura. Even more tragic is the fact that Walt discovered this after going through GRS.<br />
<br />
None of this is a real surprise however when you consider what Walt writes about the time before he got GRS approved:<br />
<i><br /></i><br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<i>It's hard to describe how the desire for surgery takes over, especially when combined with the abuse of alcohol. It took on the appearance of an obsessive-compulsive disorder, like a bulldozer pushing me relentlessly and single-mindedly toward surgery, while destroying every obstacle in its way. <span style="font-size: large;"><b>Lying, cheating, and manipulating were my tools of the trade.*</b></span> I became expert at persuading everyone that surgery was the treatment I needed. In my compulsion to have surgery, I plowed right through and over everyone and everything that stood in my way. Too bad hindsight always comes too late for us to see how truly stupid our process is.</i> <span style="font-size: xx-small;">[Location 784, Chapter 6, "The Wheels Start Coming Off"]</span> <span style="font-size: xx-small;">*emphasis added</span></blockquote>
<br />
Key points to note here: prior to surgery, and actually throughout much of his time as Laura, Walt was struggling with alcoholism; further he freely admits to lying in order to get GRS.<br />
<br />
Alcohol addiction, like any other physical addiction, is a horrible condition to have to deal with. It is unfortunate indeed that Walt was able to hide his drinking from his psychologist to a degree sufficient that he was approved for surgery without proving that he was sober first. Like any other addiction, alcoholism can lead people to engage in some astonishingly irrational ways.<br />
<br />
However, one cannot hide behind the cloak of alcoholism entirely. GRS is a major decision, and by his own admission, Heyer engaged in thoroughly dishonest behaviour in order to get the approvals he needed. There are many reasons that Walt Heyer's transition failed so spectacularly. But the responsibility for those failures lies quite firmly in his lap.<br />
<br />
His failures, and his story, are good cautions for those who would undertake transition to be honest with themselves. Evaluate your motives carefully, think clearly and above all work honestly with a therapist while you are trying to adapt to a new gender role. Therapy isn't mandatory, but it will help you ensure that you aren't about to make a Walt Heyer sized mistake with your life.klfhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00523944623131700808noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-410880442107647184.post-83399341860394837602012-01-15T10:28:00.000-08:002012-01-15T10:28:22.703-08:00Sometimes it feels like the "anti-trans" crowd is like a broken record, making the most assinine claims over and over as if repeating their lies will somehow grant them a degree of truth.<br />
<br />
Over at Mr. Heyer's blog of "my failed transition means nobody else should transition", we find him arguing <a href="http://waltheyer.typepad.com/blog/2012/01/hormone-blockers-criminal-experimentation.html">Hormone Blockers -- Criminal Experimentation</a>, and getting it dead wrong.<br />
<br />
<a name='more'></a><br /><br />
Let me start off with something that I want to make abundantly clear. I am very clearly aware that the work of Dr. Spack and others is controversial even within the treatment community that deals with transsexuals. I acknowledge the significant and legitimate ethical questions that his work presents, but I do not believe for a minute that it is ill-intentioned or that it is necessarily doing harm. However, I'll come back to this in a few minutes - after I have taken some of Heyer's commentary to task.<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<br />
<i>In reality it is impossible for a person to change their sex. Our sex – male or female is written on every cell of our body.<br /><br />The
sex change surgeons tell us it is impossible to change genders. Dr.
George Burou, a gynecologist from Morocco and a surgeon who has
performed over 700 SRS operations, admitted: “I don’t change men into
women. I transform male genitals into genitals that have a female
aspect. All the rest is in the patient’s mind.”</i></blockquote>
This is a common argument made by the anti-trans crowd. Because the results of GRS are necessarily limited, they argue that the person who has undergone GRS is "not really a woman" (or not really a man if they are FTM), largely on the basis that such a person cannot reproduce.<br />
<br />
If they are being a little more subtle about it, they try to pull out the argument about chromosomes. Essentially they argue that someone who is XY is necessarily male, and therefore must live necessarily as a man.<br />
<br />
However, this overlooks the key aspect of the transsexual experience. In general, transsexuals are fully aware of their gender status. They are also fully aware of the unshakable experience of <i>feeling</i> that they should be living in the social role of the other gender.<br />
<br />
Dr. Burou is quite correct, 98% of being transsexual is between the ears. Those who transition do so, often after years of struggling to live "as society expects them to", and failing miserably at it. The litany of problems from broken people, failed relationships, failed careers and so on that pile up in their wake as they try to survive without transition is astonishing and sad. <br />
<br />
The brutal fact that the anti-trans people like Mr. Heyer are forgetting is that for transsexuals, it is impossible to shake that feeling. The argument that one should "accept" that if you were born male, you must be a man simply doesn't hold up when you talk to transsexuals who have transitioned successfully.<br />
<br />
When you make the "chromosomes determine all" argument, ask yourself what it is to be a man or a woman in our society. Nobody will argue that biological dimensions play a role, but let's face it, the social aspects of being a woman in society have relatively little to do with chromosomes - at most that affects one's ability to bear children. Everything else is rooted in the roles that play out in social environments. If it is necessary for someone to transition in order to live in the role that feels natural and comfortable to them, why should that be a problem? <br />
<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<i>Transgenders are not formed in the womb–they are the result of psychological or psychiatric issues.<br /><br />Transgenders
need a psychologist not hormone blockers. 75% of transgenders suffer
from psychological disorders, such as schizophrenia, personality, mood,
dissociative, and psychotic disorders, a Dutch study shows.(“Psychiatric
Comorbidity of Gender Identity Disorders: A Survey Among Dutch
Psychiatrists”)<br /><br />I know this is true, I was one of the children
who wanted to become the other gender, yet all the hormones in the
world, freedom of gender expression and even the gender surgery did not
resolve my dissociative disorder. That took a psychologist to help me
resolve.</i></blockquote>
There is so much wrong in this set of assertions, I almost don't know where to begin. <br />
<br />
The first, and most serious error that Heyer makes is the implicit assumption that comorbidity of conditions means that transsexualism is a result of those other conditions. This is not necessarily the case.<br />
<br />
Transsexualism is inherently traumatic for the individual. Imagine, if you will, waking up every day with a body that doesn't match who you are inside. Consider trying to live in social roles where you cannot even begin to understand the rules of the game because you keep getting the wrong rulebook handed to you. Then think about crying yourself to sleep every night, hoping beyond hope that some intervention will happen in your sleep to correct the hurt you are feeling ... and knowing just as clearly that you will wake up again the next morning to repeat the cycle. (Think of the movie<a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0107048/"> "Groundhog Day"</a>, only it goes on for decades)<br />
<br />
Is it possible that such repeated pain could result in other psychological conditions developing that need to be addressed? I would say yes. Just as the stresses a soldier faces in a combat zone may result in the development of serious psychological disorders like PTSD, unrelenting patterns like what I have described above could also result in serious psychological distress for transsexuals. (and then there is the distress that can arise simply as a result of social proscriptions against cross-gender behaviour)<br />
<br />
The <a href="http://www.wpath.org/documents/Standards%20of%20Care%20V7%20-%202011%20WPATH.pdf">7th edition of the WPATH Standards of Care</a> addresses the treatment of concurrent conditions quite clearly:<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
Possible concerns include anxiety, depression, self-harm, a history of abuse and neglect, compulsivity, substance abuse, sexual concerns, personality disorders, eating disorders, psychotic disorders, and autistic spectrum disorders (Bockting et al., 2006; Nuttbrock et al., 2010; Robinow, 2009). <b>Mental health professionals should screen for these and other mental health concerns and incorporate the identified concerns into the overall treatment plan.</b> These concerns can be significant sources of distress and, if left untreated, can complicate the process of gender identity exploration and resolution of gender dysphoria (Bockting et al., 2006; Fraser, 2009a; Lev, 2009). Addressing these concerns can greatly facilitate the resolution of gender dysphoria, possible changes in gender role, the making of informed decisions about medical interventions, and improvements in quality of life.</blockquote>
<span style="font-size: xx-small;">* Emphasis added</span> <br />
<br />
Please note the fact that the language of the SOC is quite careful about not making any statements that infer a causal relationship between co-existing conditions. That's for the very simple, coherehent reason that there is no evidence that suggests that being transsexual is inherently caused by these other conditions. (also known as 'coincidence does not equal causality')<br />
<br />
The last error of reasoning in Heyer's assertions here is the implicit suggestion that <i>his gender identity issues</i> were ultimately best handled by treating a dissociative disorder that this much be true for most other people with transsexual leanings. This is a classic logic error of assuming that what applies to one person is correct for all other persons. <br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<i>The use of hormone blockers is criminal, psychological abuse of children, not a medical procedure.<br /><br />Suppressing puberty with a view to sex-change surgery, when no one knows the side effects, I and others feel <em>constitutes human experimentation.</em> Dale O’Leary writes:<br /><br />"Starting
treatment at age 11 presents many problems. Is a child of that age able
to give truly informed consent to the risks involved in numerous
surgeries required, to the burden of life-long hormone treatments needed
to sustain the illusion of the other sex, and to the permanent loss of
the ability to have children?<br /><br />"Puberty does not just change the
sexual organs; it also affects brain development, bone and muscle
development. No one knows all the potential side effects of
administering puberty-delaying hormones on children; it constitutes
human experimentation. </i>"<em>(<a href="http://mercatornet.com/" target="_blank">MercatorNet.com</a>, “Suppressing puberty with a view to sex-change surgery”, 2 February 2009)</em></blockquote>
Talk about 'appeal to false authority' for an awful bit of logic. Dale O'Leary is not a specialist in the treatment of transsexuals. Dale O'Leary is a religious opinion writer who happens to have <i>opinions</i> about transsexuality. None of which that I have read amount to anything other than uninformed rantings based not in the evidence about transsexuals, but rather are firmly rooted in ignorance of what it means to be transsexual. (The usual arguments about it being "an immoral choice" and other nonsense that more or less mirrors the arguments that "religious" thinkers throw at homosexuality as well) <br />
<br />
I might consider Dale O'Leary an authority on transsexuality if he had actually done some real research on the subject. Publishing from within the echo chamber of "Christian" conservative dogma doesn't count.<br />
<br />
Which brings me around to Heyer's claim that providing puberty suppressing treatment to transgender children until they are old enough to make their own choices on the matter. Acknowledging all of the potential problems that exist in providing such treatment to youth who are suffering from being transsexual (including the trickiness of making the diagnosis accurately at such a young age), the fact is that suffering into adulthood isn't an effective treatment either. <br />
<br />
To date, there are a small, but significant number of people who were able to transition before puberty, and we should be looking at how they are doing as they move into adulthood. Jumping to the conclusion that because we are suppressing puberty in them, we are doing a "bad thing" without actually examining the evidence and the cases available to us - both those who choose to transition fully and those who do not - is irresponsible. <br />
<br />
Children who are transsexual are suffering as much as anyone else who has a serious medical condition. It is even more egregious when we decide not to provide treatment simply to assauge our prejudices about the condition itself.klfhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00523944623131700808noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-410880442107647184.post-58883114217416467362012-01-10T11:37:00.000-08:002012-01-10T11:38:19.473-08:00Walt Heyer: No Discussions For YouApparently Mr. Heyer isn't interested in actually discussing his views. I took the time to make it over to his blog and responded to his post <a href="http://waltheyer.typepad.com/blog/2011/12/so-many-different-issues-drive-the-transgender-to-surgery-.html#comments">So Many Different Issues Drive The Transgender To Surgery</a>, and pointed out how wrong he was to infer from a Swedish study that increased rates of mental health issues among transsexuals meant that transition and GRS were an inappropriate treatment.<br />
<br />
He deigned to allow the first couple of comments to stay, but after that he has just been deleting them. As shown below.<br />
<br />
Step 1, add new comment: <br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEi9jorss0dysN2SPcht8LnDHB4zkBvrqfKArgZDdzFtV7W2xJ0CSPyPrvLhlZNygX7uFWZ9Jp43lJHv55C3Cab1RESNgBiTZMOm46r7b3iLGkQm_zonF8QpXZATRbxnOiXAJcDqre2OouRF/s1600/HeyerDeletesComments.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="275" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEi9jorss0dysN2SPcht8LnDHB4zkBvrqfKArgZDdzFtV7W2xJ0CSPyPrvLhlZNygX7uFWZ9Jp43lJHv55C3Cab1RESNgBiTZMOm46r7b3iLGkQm_zonF8QpXZATRbxnOiXAJcDqre2OouRF/s320/HeyerDeletesComments.jpg" width="320" /></a></div>
<br />
Step 2: An hour later note that the commment has been removed: <br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhx9hrS5l9Q25DuSBnK2bvbkK3ep1xoGsN8mGSJ4rpVEOsATv8v7mJcuK1eO5hEPBGgTp8jz4bABHqhMd7OXt3IU2FAg6YGZUX9BPTIYUjkXgJsHaDXu1px0Gq9GMEWgbu4elNmz7oFQCjY/s1600/HeyerDeletesComments2.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="285" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhx9hrS5l9Q25DuSBnK2bvbkK3ep1xoGsN8mGSJ4rpVEOsATv8v7mJcuK1eO5hEPBGgTp8jz4bABHqhMd7OXt3IU2FAg6YGZUX9BPTIYUjkXgJsHaDXu1px0Gq9GMEWgbu4elNmz7oFQCjY/s320/HeyerDeletesComments2.jpg" width="320" /></a></div>
<br />
Roughly translated, like most other anti-trans wingnuts, Walt Heyer cannot, and will not discuss the problems with how they are mangling data when it doesn't suit their particular dogma.<br />
<br />
<br />klfhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00523944623131700808noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-410880442107647184.post-19686025840134427312012-01-03T17:51:00.000-08:002012-01-03T17:51:17.426-08:00Stunning ... or Stunned? You Decide!In a pattern consistent with the anti-gay junk science of Paul Cameron, we find <a href="http://waltheyer.typepad.com/blog/2011/12/so-many-different-issues-drive-the-transgender-to-surgery-.html">Walt Heyer grossly misconstruing two important studies</a> in the last couple of years about transsexuals.<br />
<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<i>A recent Swedish study reports that having gender surgery increases
suicide attempts and lowers the quality of life. It also points to
increased occurrence of psychiatric issues and depression after sex
change surgery. This research allows us to claim that changing genders
is frequently more folly than effective treatment for the wide range of
gender issues that do exist.</i></blockquote>
Shall we go take a closer look at what that <a href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3043071/?tool=pubmed">Swedish study</a> actually says? Looking at the study in more detail, it claims that suicide among post-op transsexuals is approximately 19 times higher than in the general population. That's bad - very bad by any measure. <br />
<br />
However, before we go diving off the deep end, let's examine the raw numbers a bit further, because they are very informative.<br />
<br />
The Swedish study covers a very long period of time, from 1973 to 2003 - healthy thirty year period which is good for a longitudinal study like this.<br />
<br />
Of these, we find that 10 of the patients tracked committed suicide in that thirty year period. That is 10 out of a total population of 324 - approximately 3% of the transgender population.<br />
<br />
If we go a step or two further, and look at suicide attempts as well as suicides, we have a total count of 39 out of 324 or 12%.<br />
<br />
Both of these are disturbingly high numbers, but frankly any suicide is tragic, and deserves to be addressed.<br />
<br />
However, that's nowhere near the brutal numbers of suicide attempts recorded by the <a href="http://www.thetaskforce.org/reports_and_research/trans_survey_health_heathcare">NTDS Report on transgender health released in 2010</a>. (Unlike Heyer, who merely links to an MSNBC report on the study, I've linked to the study's download page so you can look for yourself)<br />
<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<i><span style="font-family: 'AGaramondPro'; font-size: 11.000000pt;">When asked “have you ever attempted suicide?” 41% of respondents answered yes.
</span></i></blockquote>
Intriguingly, the Swedish study actually demonstrates a significant drop in the overall suicide rate compared to the raw data of the NTDS report. Please recognize that the NTDS report didn't specifically study transsexuals, but rather the entire spectrum of transgender people, so we can't quite make an "apples to apples" comparison, but the numbers are interesting when compared with each other, since the NTDS study would include both pre and post operative trans people.<br />
<br />
Heyer concludes that <i>surgery </i>is not a solution for transsexuals. The Swedes are much more measured in their assessment, concluding that surgery alleviates the gender dysphoria aspects of transsexualism, but does not address other issues that the transsexual may be facing.<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<i>Our findings suggest that sex reassignment, <b>although alleviating gender
dysphoria, may not suffice as treatment for transsexualism,</b> and should
inspire improved psychiatric and somatic care after sex reassignment for
this patient group.</i></blockquote>
While Heyer is quick to leap to conclusions that suit his agenda, they aren't really borne out by reading the studies that he is referring to. He then goes on to claim that transsexuals suffer from a whole host of other conditions, and that the referring professionals are being negligent in their conduct:<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<i>Transgenders suffer from psychiatric issues ranging from dissociative
disorders, separation anxiety to full blown delusional disorders. I
don’t fault the individuals who suffer and eventually request the life
changing surgery. In my view, the responsibility lies with the surgeons
and approving psychologists, unqualified and unfit, who do not care
about the long-term results of changing genders. The approving
psychologists in too many cases are more about giving the wanna-be
transgender anything he or she wants, than in providing effective
diagnosis and treatment for real psychiatric disorders.</i></blockquote>
Yes, there may be comorbid conditions that the transsexual is suffering from in parallel with the gender identity issues. A carefully executed transition will include dealing with those additional conditions. Long term follow-up post-transition, post-surgery is also a valuable support, as transsexuals do face significant discrimination pressures in the world.<br />
<br />
The real issue is one of dealing with the social hostility and discrimination that transgender, and especially transsexual, people face on a daily basis just living their lives. The NTDS report is quite clear about the higher levels of stress and discrimination that transgender people face in society, and it isn't exactly rocket science to understand the connection between discrimination, economic and social, and suicide attempts.klfhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00523944623131700808noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-410880442107647184.post-16272431000263114282011-12-19T09:07:00.000-08:002011-12-19T09:07:28.990-08:00Macy's, Bigots and Liberty CounselI've been a little reluctant to weigh in on the nonsense over <a href="http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/business/2011/12/texas-macys-employee-fired-for-allegedly-violating-stores-lgbt-policy/">the firing of Natalie Johnson from Macy's</a> for denying a transgender woman access to the lady's fitting rooms.<br />
<br />
On one hand, it appears to be fairly cut and dried. Macy's has a policy, and the employee in question refused to comply with corporate policy. <br />
<br />
However, there's a few things that I want to address about the story, especially since <a href="http://www.lc.org/">Liberty Counsel </a>has picked this up and is busy trying to make as<a href="http://www.lc.org/index.cfm?PID=14102&AlertID=1340"> much noise</a> about <a href="http://www.lc.org/index.cfm?PID=14102&AlertID=1337">the subject</a> as possible.<br />
<br />
First, let's take a look at Natalie Johnson's statements in media interviews:<br />
<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<i>“There are no transgenders in the world. A guy can dress up as a woman all he wants. That’s still not going to make you a woman,” Johnson said. “If you’re a man going into the women’s fitting room, I will kindly escort you to the men’s fitting room.”</i></blockquote>
Excuse me? There are no transgender people in the world? Right. Got it. The world is flat too, right? I knew that religion was and excuse to be blind to the realities of the world before, but it's pretty damned offensive when someone basically claims that their religion obliges them to claim that entire groups of people don't actually exist.<br />
<br />
Ironically, over a <a href="http://www.lifesitenews.com/news/macys-fires-woman-for-refusing-transgender-man-access-to-womens-fitting-roo/">Lifesite</a>, the article there has the detail that clarifies Macy's position quite nicely:<br />
<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<i>Johnson retorted that Macy’s doesn’t discriminate against religious beliefs, adding that it would go against her religious beliefs to act on a lie that a man was a woman.<br /><br />“I couldn’t lie and say that he was a woman. I’m going to be accountable to what I say to my Lord Jesus,” said Johnson, a member of Tabernacle of Prayer, to My San Antonio.<br /><br />Johnson says she believes that she was acting for the good of her female customers who she thought might be uncomfortable about having a man in their fitting room.<br /><br /><b>The group demanded to see the manager, who, siding with the transgendered person, pointed Johnson to Macy’s LGBT policy, which allows transgender persons to change in any dressing room of their choice.</b><br /><br />The manager gave Johnson an ultimatum: comply with the LGBT policies or lose her job.<br /><br />Johnson replied that the policy was against her sincerely held religious convictions. She was fired the next day.</i><br /> </blockquote>
Now, let's be clear about how this is NOT a matter of transgender rights conflicting with religious rights.<br />
<br />
The transgender person was trying to use the changing room appropriate to her presentation at that time. Fitting rooms are not locker rooms where people are walking around fully naked. Fitting rooms are usually small individual cubicles, and you would never see the person in the other changing room while they are in mid-change. The transgender person in this circumstance is appropriately using the changing room consistent with their presentation, and in no way is presenting any kind of threat to the other people in the facility. (Not unless you believe that anyone with a penis is automatically a slavering sexual predator unable to control themselves) <br />
<br />
At no time has the transgender woman in question asked anyone to believe anything differently, nor have they demanded that someone who is religious to alter their life or limit their lives in any way. In fact, the transgender woman is simply trying to get on with her life in as normal a fashion as is possible.<br />
<br />
Conversely, Natalie Johnson <i>chose </i>to impose her apparently religiously rooted <i>beliefs </i>upon the transgender woman by insisting that using the women's fitting room was inappropriate. Again, this comes along and runs smack into the brick wall of who is imposing what upon whom? Ms. Johnson's insistence that the transgender woman use the <i>men's </i>fitting room was essentially demanding that the transgender woman not only reveal her transgender status to all around (simply by entering the changing room that is inconsistent with her presentation and appearance), but in doing so put herself in considerable jeopardy (I'll come back to this point). <br />
<br />
Further, Ms. Johnson is imposing her beliefs upon someone who clearly does not share them. Last I checked, a fundamental principle of individual rights is that they do not extend beyond the individual exercising them. In other words, Ms. Johnson is completely free to <i>believe</i> that there is no such thing as a transgender person based on her understanding of the Bible (or the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Necronomicon">Necronomicon</a> if that's what she believes in) all she likes. However, that doesn't grant her the privilege to demand that others live by the credo expressed in that book, which is essentially what she did - in direct contravention of her employer's stated policies.<br />
<br />
Returning briefly to an earlier point I raised, one might ask how entering the men's fitting room places a transgender person presenting as a woman in jeopardy? There are many reasons this is potentially problematic. First of all, as soon as she enters the men's fitting room, she is declaring to the world that she is a transgender person - whether or not they had recognized that she is transgender previously. For many transgender people, this increases the chances of experiencing violent reprisals from others who do not understand transsexuals and consider them a threat, or for that matter just decide that it would be fun to beat up someone who they consider a social aberration. (Anyone else remember the days when it was thought that raping a lesbian would somehow make her straight?)<br />
<br />
Kudos to Macy's for actually having a policy about transgender shoppers, and to their management for taking steps to ensure that the policy is meaningful.<br />
<br />klfhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00523944623131700808noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-410880442107647184.post-5160100206419412212011-11-24T16:08:00.001-08:002011-11-24T16:20:00.139-08:00Speaking of "Walking the Walk"So, Canada's Prime Minister is<a href="http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/harper-hails-libya-mission-as-great-military-success/article2247611/"> waxing poetic </a>over the "victory" in Libya:<br />
<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<span class="Apple-style-span" style="-webkit-border-horizontal-spacing: 0px; -webkit-border-vertical-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-decorations-in-effect: none; -webkit-text-size-adjust: auto; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; border-collapse: separate; color: black; font-family: 'Times New Roman'; font-size: 16px; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; line-height: normal; orphans: 2; text-align: -webkit-auto; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: 2; word-spacing: 0px;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Verdana, sans-serif; font-size: 12px; line-height: 18px; text-align: left;">“So let no one ever question whether Canada is prepared to stay the course in defence of what is right,” he said. “For we believe that in a world where people look for hope and cry out for freedom, those who talk the talk of human rights must from time to time be prepared to likewise walk the walk.”</span></span></blockquote>
I still think that the real story about Libya is yet to be written. We don't know who the power brokers are yet, nor do we know what kind of power they really seek.<br />
<br />
However, I'm going to point out that Harper, and just about all of his caucus voted consistently against<a href="http://howdtheyvote.ca/vote.php?id=981"> bill C-389</a> in the last parliament. He wants to talk about freedom and human rights, then let's talk about the discrimination that trans people in Canada face. Although transgender people are "read in" to the interpretation of Canada's human rights act, the fact is that there are no clear protections in law. <br />
<br />
The fact is that trans people face obstacles in all fronts of life, and Harper is doing nothing about it. In fact, he is standing explicitly against protecting trans people in Canada. klfhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00523944623131700808noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-410880442107647184.post-83691987998611618082011-11-12T06:38:00.001-08:002011-11-12T07:10:46.472-08:00Focus On The Family Lies AgainI see that Focus On The Family has once again opened its yap about matters pertaining to Transsexuals, and <a href="http://www.citizenlink.com/2011/11/09/irs-to-give-tax-deductions-for-transgender-people/">they are lying about it</a>:<br />
<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<i>Dr. Richard Fitzgibbons, who treats children and adults suffering
from gender identity disorder in his practice in Pennsylvania, said the
government is doing transgender people a disservice.</i> </blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<i>
</i><i>“It’s totally treatable and the issue can be resolved,” he said,
noting that some therapists have an 80 percent success rate in helping
people accept their biological gender.</i> </blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<i>
</i><i>“The problem is when you get sex-reassignment surgery, one of the
major principles (of medicine) is ‘First, do no harm.’ With
gender-reassignment surgery, you’re surgically mutilating a healthy
body. And you’re supporting a delusion. Poor body image is a huge cause
of it, and severe psychopathology in parents is a huge cause of it.
That’s the mental health perspective.</i></blockquote>
The first thought that went through my mind was "who the heck is <a href="http://www.google.ca/search?client=safari&rls=en&q=Dr.+Richard+Fitzgibbons+transgender&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&redir_esc=&ei=b4a-TsTWLYKviQKbzqmYAw">Dr. Fitzgibbons</a>?" Sure enough, a brief bit of searching on the web turns up that he is not really an authority on transgender/transsexual people per se, but instead one of the talking heads that <a href="http://www.narth.com/">NARTH</a> likes to put forward to create the illusion of legitimacy.<br />
<br />
He's written papers with <a href="http://www.google.ca/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=dr.%20richard%20fitzgibbons%20transgender&source=web&cd=6&ved=0CEQQFjAF&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.catholiceducation.org%2Farticles%2Fhomosexuality%2Fho0045.html&ei=b4a-TvPSPPLKiAK6j7y1Aw&usg=AFQjCNG2tvc_vP159ushGYaGgnItfz6nGg">NARTH's founder Joseph Nicolosi</a>, <a href="http://couragerc.net/Transsexual_Issues/Sex_Reassignment.pdf">Dale O'Leary</a> and others which largely repeat the standard nonsense arguments about transsexuality that have been long since disproven.<br />
<br />
His comments here about causes of transsexuality are a good example of the kind of silly arguments that we routinely find on the web talking about transsexuals:<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<i>Poor body image is a huge cause
of it, and severe psychopathology in parents is a huge cause of it.
That’s the mental health perspective.</i></blockquote>
This is completely backwards. He's partially correct, transsexuals often do have major body image issues. However, those issues are not a cause of transsexuality, but are in fact caused by being transsexual. <br />
<br />
As for drawing a link between psychopathology in parents and transsexuality in their offspring, that's just ridiculous. Superficially, you can find a lot of people in any population who have screwed up parents. Transsexuals are no different in this regard. However, if 'screwed up parents' were a cause of transsexuality in general (and I have no idea how such a link could possibly occur), then how does someone like Dr. Fitzgibbons explain those transsexuals who come from perfectly normal, stable family structures? Unless he has substantial population statistics that show that normal, stable family structures in the upbringing of transsexuals is somehow "unusual" (which I very much doubt), then it would seem to me that the doctor is quite frankly talking through his hat.<br />
<br />
As for the argument about Gender Surgery and the "do no harm" aspect of things, I will turn to the recently released <a href="http://www.wpath.org/documents/Standards%20of%20Care%20V7%20-%202011%20WPATH.pdf">7th Edition WPATH Standards of Care</a>, on page 55 we find the following statement:<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<br />
<i><span style="font-family: 'ScalaSansOT'; font-size: 11.000000pt; font-weight: 300;">It is important that health professionals caring for patients with gender dysphoria feel comfortable
about altering anatomically normal structures. <b>In order to understand how surgery can alleviate the
psychological discomfort and distress of individuals with gender dysphoria, professionals need to
listen to these patients discuss their symptoms, dilemmas, and life histories.</b> The resistance against
performing surgery on the ethical basis of “above all do no harm” should be respected, discussed,
and <b>met with the opportunity to learn from patients themselves about the psychological distress
of having gender dysphoria and the potential for harm caused by denying access to appropriate
treatments.
</b></span></i></blockquote>
In other words, there is often greater harm being done by denying transsexual patients access to surgery. The harm may not be physical damage, but it is the more insidious psychological harm, something which Dr. Fitzgibbons should not only understand but respect far more than any surgeon.<br />
<br />
His claims that there are therapists out there with 80% success rates "getting people to accept their bodies" is unsubstantiated, and I can find no papers which suggest any such thing. Further, it is important to recognize that transsexuality is a fairly rare condition compared to conditions such as crossdressing. The professionals I have talked to about such things have consistently expressed that only a small percentage of transgender people who approach them for treatment ever pursue medical and surgical aspects of transition. So, while Dr. Fitzgibbons may well be correct that 80% of people who come forward to mental health practitioners with cross-gender concerns are not transsexual, that's quite a different matter from saying that 80% of transsexuals can be "taught to accept their bodies as they were born".<br />
<br />
That Focus on the Family is daft enough to quote someone like Fitzgibbons is no surprise, but it doesn't make their argument any more substantial. It's still firmly rooted in lies. <br />klfhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00523944623131700808noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-410880442107647184.post-12723722441051774392011-11-03T16:57:00.000-07:002011-11-03T16:57:49.359-07:00Wherein Walt Heyer Attempts To Invalidate Transsexuals In One ParagraphI'll give Heyer this much - on the whole, he has tried to stay out of the usual language of invalidation and erasure that is so common among those who claim transsexuals are less than human. However, somewhere along the way, he must have decided that he couldn't turn down the opportunity and makes the following statement:<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<i>It's easy to point out that DNA tells the true story of male or female. In a court of law, you can convict a man of rape and murder just on the strength of a DNA test alone. But a DNA test is never permitted to determine male or female sex gender for transsexuals in court? Why is this? Because a DNA test would prove with absolute certainty the transgender hormone therapy and surgery had failed to change a male into a female, or a female to a male. Transgender activists know using DNA would expose the fraud and damage the social acceptability of changing genders. Therefore, they have successfully prevented DNA from being used as the criteria to identify gender in the courts.</i></blockquote>
Wow. Just Wow. In one paragraph, Heyer has claimed that transsexuals are engaging in deliberate fraud, and on the other hand, the transsexuals out there are so astonishingly powerful politically that they have been able to stop the courts from using a particular piece of evidence to determine sex.<br />
<br />
I'd love to know where this all powerful transsexual lobby is. You'd think that it would be paying more attention to shutting down the malice and discrimination that transsexuals face on a near daily basis. Further, I'm more than a little mystified how a tiny minority of the population which isn't terribly wealthy could hold that kind of clout.<br />
<br />
Ah well. I'm going to chalk that one up to being the fanciful musings of someone who lacks any coherent evidence to explain things more rationally.<br />
<br />
Looking at his other claim about DNA, however, requires a little more careful handling.<br />
<br />
First of all, Mr. Heyer is really referring to <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chromosome"><i>chromosomes</i></a> and specifically Sex Chromosomes. Men have XY chromosomes, and women have XX chromosomes. Or so the general rule goes. Sadly, general rules are prone to strange little things called exceptions. Consider women born with <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Androgen_insensitivity_syndrome">Complete Androgen Insensitivity Syndrome</a> for a moment. A woman born with CAIS has a Y chromosome, and yet developed in utero a female body. To all outward appearances, and socialization, these people are women even though they have a Y chromosome. <br />
<br />
No doubt, Mr. Heyer would claim that an exception could be made in such a situation, after all the person had been born female. (or was declared female at birth, more correctly) His argument would be that such cases are so rare as to be irrelevant, or some such. How rarity of a condition fits into dealing with transsexuals is a bit of a mystery to me - it's not like transsexualism constitutes a very large portion of the population to begin with, so making exceptions based on rarity seems a trifle ridiculous.<br />
<br />
My underlying point is that there are very real conditions which Mr. Heyer's test would not work for, and these are people who are not transsexual themselves.<br />
<br />
However, as<a href="http://aebrain.blogspot.com/search/label/Reference"> other writers have pointed out</a>, there is a great deal of evidence emerging that suggests that transsexuality may well have significant biological factors which influence it. If you are going to make an exception for one case, why would you not make a reasonable exception in the case of a transsexual? Especially in the absence of any conclusive evidence that transsexuality doesn't have significant biological factors involved?<br />
<br />
However, Heyer seems to have fallen for the standard rightwing dogma that transsexuals are "fraudulent" somehow, simply because changing chromosomes isn't possible (yet!). Well, unfortunately for him and his "allies" (I'm reluctant to call the likes of Peter LaBarbera an ally to anyone or anything), there are enough exceptions in the real world that trying to argue against transsexuals on this basis is really quite ridiculous. <br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<i>Allowing the original birth record gender to be altered has unintended consequences. It can be misused, perhaps by a terrorist to hide his identity. Or, some would say it will legitimize same sex marriage. With an amended birth record in hand (changed from male to female), the new female would be free to enter into a legal marriage with a man.</i></blockquote>
First of all, the supposition about terrorists is really quite ridiculous. You don't just walk into a clinic and have GRS one day on a whim. No surgeon would touch you without supporting documentation from a therapist. That's a red herring at best.<br />
<br />
His comments about legitimizing same-sex marriage are equally ludicrous. A gay male is a man who loves other men ... as a man ... having GRS would be anathema to such a person as they would no longer have something that they would consider essential to their masculinity. <br />
<br />
Ah ... the joys of listening to arguments that boil down to little more than a poorly considered attempt at erasure. Sorry, Mr. Heyer, but you just haven't got this one.klfhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00523944623131700808noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-410880442107647184.post-14636438165295258512011-10-27T17:30:00.000-07:002011-10-27T17:31:49.460-07:00Don't Cheer Just YetCanada's Transgender community is being a little too quick to celebrate the <a href="http://frederictonqueery.wordpress.com/2011/10/27/gender-rights-bills-reintroduced/">tabling of Bills C-276 and C-279 in the House of Commons</a>.<br />
<br />
Don't get me wrong, I fully support what these two bills represent. I just happen to think that this is the wrong time for this legislation.<br />
<br />
Why do I think it's the wrong time? Because the Harperites are a form of nastiness that I don't think many people have understood yet. They've shown time and again that they are willing to do the wrong thing for ideological reasons.<br />
<br />
Whether that is ramming through an ill-considered "omnibus" get-tough-on-crime bill which will drive Canada's costs through the roof, or giving the <a href="http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/story/2011/10/27/technology-privacy-commissioner-lawful-access.html">government unfettered rights to snoop on all kinds of communications</a>, the Harperites have one thing on their mind - imposing their will upon Canadians.<br />
<br />
As we discovered in Alberta in 2009, the "social conservative" faction of the current "Conservatives" are plain old malicious. What happened at the provincial level at Ron Liepert's hand can happen again at the federal level - and it will be all the worse then.<br />
<br />
This government can act out of malice, and right now attracting attention from them is bad news - the extreme right wing in both Canada and the US has already decided that the <a href="http://www.xtra.ca/public/National/Sun_News_Network_sees_nothing_wrong_with_ad_pulled_from_print-10961.aspx">transgender community is a far easier target than the much larger GLB community</a>. If the HarperItes move against trans people, they'll move against GLB as well.<br />
<br />
I wouldn't be the least bit surprised if Harper's backbench are working hard right now to pass legislation repealing Gay Marriage, and just for fun any protections that are currently in the civil or criminal laws of this country for GLBT people.<br />
<br />
We've got four years of these goons to get through, and I don't think it's going to be the least bit pretty.klfhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00523944623131700808noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-410880442107647184.post-45992079694059668942011-10-06T16:31:00.000-07:002011-10-06T16:32:06.805-07:00Paper Genders: Taking Down The Arguments Part 2Heyer's next brainstorm argument is to claim that you can't make a woman out of a man with a scalpel.<br />
<br />
<blockquote>
<i>Just the statement "A surgeon and a knife can change a man into a woman" is a bit presumptuous on its own. When you realize it cannot be done, you can only laugh your way into hysteria, except it is not funny when so many die. ...</i> </blockquote>
<blockquote>
<i>It's easy to point out that DNA tells the true story of male or female. In a court of law, you can convict a man of rape and murder just on the strength of a DNA test alone. But a DNA test is never permitted to determine male or female sex gender for transsexuals in court. Why is this? Because a DNA test would prove with absolute certainty the transgender hormone therapy and surgery </i>had failed <i>to change a male to a female or a female to a male.</i></blockquote>
There are more issues with Heyer's assertion in this set of statements than I care to count. However, let me enumerate some of the more obvious points:<br />
<br />
<a name='more'></a><br />
<ol>
<li>Heyer's argument completely overlooks the existence of Intersex conditions which often have some very interesting chromosomal variations. </li>
<li>Chromosomes, ironically, do not necessarily establish whether someone is biologically male or female. (Consider <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Androgen_insensitivity_syndrome">Androgen Insensitivity Syndrome</a> for example)</li>
<li>Male and female are arguably terms with biological meaning; man and woman are more defined by social context. </li>
<li>I can't imagine very many situations where it is essential to establish someone's sex in court. You may at various times wish to establish their gender, but that is knowable simply by looking at how the individual is presenting.</li>
<li>Gender exists as much in the brain as in the physiology. If physical sex is arguably ambiguous, surely it is no big leap to understand that the brain and individual psychology is even more so. If someone can be born with ambiguous genitalia, the sheer variety of people in the world should mean that it is no surprise to anyone that there are going to be a few whose brains are wired in a manner consistent with the opposite sex to what was assigned at birth.</li>
</ol>
Thinking he has "cleverly" demolished the idea that transsexuals can't really "change sex", Heyer moves on to conclude as follows:<br />
<br />
<blockquote>
<i>When medical tests objectively prove the need for surgery, revising the birth record could be necessary. Transgenders do not have a medical need for surgery. Desire does not equal need.</i></blockquote>
Hmmm...we should take a look at a few things, shouldn't we? Since we are dealing with a situation which is assessed psychologically, the objective discussion comes from the psychotherapy side of WPATH's Standards of Care:<br />
<br />
<blockquote>
<i>While many transsexual, transgender, and gender nonconforming individuals find comfort with their gender identity, role, and expression without surgery, for many others surgery is essential and medically necessary to alleviate their gender dysphoria (Hage & Karim, 2000). For the latter group, relief from gender dysphoria cannot be achieved without modification of their primary and/or secondary sex characteristics to establish greater congruence with their gender identity</i></blockquote>
Heyer is, of course, being unreasonably narrow in his interpretation of "medically necessary". Personally, I'm inclined to work with the view of the professionals. Being transsexual may not be physically diagnosable today, but that doesn't make it any less real for those who find themselves living with that state of being. <br />
<br />
But we should remember that Heyer is writing from the perspective of someone who is NOT transsexual, but made a choice to have gender surgery anyways.klfhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00523944623131700808noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-410880442107647184.post-2112979237139667932011-10-05T17:58:00.000-07:002011-10-05T18:00:40.452-07:00Paper Genders: Taking Down The Arguments - Part 1I've already given an overview of Walt Heyer's book<a href="http://www.amazon.com/Paper-Genders-ebook/dp/B0057HZ6X2/ref=sr_1_3?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1317571658&sr=1-3"> Paper Genders</a> in the <a href="http://maplecentrist.blogspot.com/2011/10/book-review-paper-genders.html">Book Review: Paper Genders </a>post. These posts will delve into the details of the specific arguments and themes that Mr. Heyer relies on in making his case. The problems in his arguments come in many flavors - some of them simple factual errors, others are more serious issues that need to be addressed.<br />
<br />
<a name='more'></a><br />
<br />
I've already pointed out the problems with Heyer's apparent insinuation that the astronomically high suicide rate among transgender people is somehow related to GRS. According to Heyer, someone who commits suicide has an untreated, underlying pathology. That may be true, but the evidence is firmly against Heyer's assertion that it is related to post-transition, post-surgical regrets. The latest version of the <a href="http://www.wpath.org/documents/Standards%20of%20Care%20V7%20-%202011%20WPATH.pdf">WPATH Standards of Care </a>is quite clear on the research with respect to outcomes for transsexuals post-surgery:<br />
<blockquote>
<i>Since the Standards of Care have been in place, there has been a steady increase in patient satisfaction and decrease in dissatisfaction with the outcome of sex reassignment surgery. Studies conducted after 1996 focused on patients who were treated according to the Standards of Care. The findings of Rehman and colleagues (1999) and Krege and colleagues (2001) are typical of this body of work; none of the patients in these studies regretted having had surgery, and most reported being satisfied with the cosmetic and functional results of the surgery. Even patients who develop severe surgical complications seldom regret having undergone surgery. Quality of surgical results is one of the best predictors of the overall outcome of sex reassignment (Lawrence, 2003). The vast majority of follow-up studies havevshown an undeniable beneficial effect of sex reassignment surgery on postoperative outcomes such as subjective well being, cosmesis, and sexual function (De Cuypere et al., 2005; Garaffa, Christopher,& Ralph, 2010; Klein & Gorzalka, 2009) ...</i></blockquote>
Somehow, I'm not buying the unresearched claim that Heyer makes that Gender Reassignment Surgery leads to regrets after the fact. Especially not for those whose transitions are thoughtful and honestly undertaken.<br />
<br />
The second line of argument that Heyer attempts to make is more egregious. Heyer basically accuses all of the key figures who are involved in the early days of studying and treating transsexuals of being pedophiles or supporters of pedophiles. Within the context of transsexualism, accusing Dr. Harry Benjamin and others of some kind of connection with pedophilia is tangential at best. At its worst, it may be considered slanderous in some contexts.<br />
<br />
His evidence with regards to Dr. Harry Benjamin is flimsy at best:<br />
<br />
<blockquote>
<i>Dr. Harry Benjamin agreed with Kinsey's views of pedophilia. What is the evidence? Benjamin and Kinsey were close friends with Rene Guyon, a prominent, acknowledged pedophile. Benjamin endorsed Guyon's 1948 book, </i>The Ethics of Sexual Acts, <i>which advocates the normalcy and decriminalization of behaviours such as sex abuse against children. The endorsement reads:</i></blockquote>
<blockquote>
<i>Writing an introduction to a new edition of a book by Rene Guyon is a signal honor ... There is hardly an author anywhere with qualifications comparable to those of Guyon ...</i></blockquote>
<br />
First of all, the accusation that Guyon was a pedophile is not well substantiated. Guyon is noted for arguing that Western cultures have an unreasonably rigid view of sexuality, but I have been unable to find anything that suggests that Guyon himself was a pedophile so much as a very open-minded thinker who was making his observations based on living in an Asian context after growing up in western Europe.<br />
<br />
To infer from the writing of an introduction that Benjamin agreed with everything that Guyon wrote or represented is at best conjecture unless that introduction actually contains explicit endorsements by Dr. Benjamin.<br />
<br />
His attack on Dr. Money is similarly spurious, confusing a clinical statement with advocacy for pedophilia.<br />
<br />
Even if Drs Benjamin and Money were proponents of pedophilia, that has little or nothing to do with the study of transsexuality, which both men are noted for their contributions to. As near as I can tell, Heyer thinks that anyone who even writes about the subject of pedophilia cannot have anything valid to say about other aspects of human sexuality.<br />
<br />
To the contrary, I would point out that pedophilia is arguably a natural (if horrifying) aspect of human sexuality that warrants study. Since both Dr. Benjamin and Dr. Money were groundbreaking in the study of human sexuality, it would hardly come as a surprise that they might have studied pedophilia as much as other phenomena in the often surprisingly diverse field of human sexuality. Clinical study and research is not equivalent to advocacy, nor should it ever be mistaken as such.<br />
<br />
Mr. Heyer's arguments with respect to a connection between these doctors and pedophilia seem to be poorly substantiated, based more on inferences made with respect to indirect actions on various people's parts rather than clear evidence of advocacy for pedophilia, or active pedophilia on anyone's part. <br />
<br />
Further, since gender identity issues have little or nothing to do with sexual identity issues, it seems to me more than just a little bit irrelevant to any reasoned assessment of the situation.klfhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00523944623131700808noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-410880442107647184.post-21828209796964976372011-10-03T17:44:00.000-07:002011-10-03T17:44:31.049-07:00Book Review: Paper GendersI recently read through <a href="http://maplecentrist.blogspot.com/2011/10/walt-who.html">Walt Heyer's</a> book <a href="http://www.amazon.com/Paper-Genders-ebook/dp/B0057HZ6X2/ref=sr_1_3?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1317571658&sr=1-3">Paper Genders</a>. What follows is a summary of my impressions of the book itself, and the validity of its arguments with respect to the treatment of transgender people.<br />
<br />
To be nice about it, Walt Heyer is a man in a great deal of pain. He’s been through a lot, and he bears the scars of some unfortunate choices. Anyone reading his books should recognize this, and weigh his arguments accordingly.<br />
<br />Heyer wants to raise some serious questions and issues related to the whole process of transition and gender reassignment as it is carried out today. Unfortunately, raising serious questions by making bold accusations of professional misconduct and “activist conspiracy” doesn’t exactly make for a compelling argument. <br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
For example, the book starts off by borrowing heavily from a relatively recent study that talked about the high rates of suicide ideation and attempts within the transsexual / transgender community.<br /><br />Heyer’s own interpretation of this seems to be that the suicide rate is a consequence of dissatisfaction with the results of treatment that went down the transition and surgery path.<br /><br />
<blockquote>
<i>The gender change activists would argue the suicides are a direct result of bullying, a popular scapegoat these days. The advocates also say the lack of transgender acceptance and the difficulty of being gender variant in a society of heterosexuals lead to suicides, but as the last transgender support site disclosed, transgenders harm themselves either by cutting or self-mutilation which points to deep unresolved psychological issues.</i></blockquote>
<br />The actual study makes no such inference at all, and in fact is much more clear on the probable causes of suicide ideation and attempts among transgender people than Mr. Heyer’s conjecture:<br /><br />
Actual Study:<br /><a href="http://www.thetaskforce.org/downloads/reports/reports/ntds_report_on_health.pdf">http://www.thetaskforce.org/downloads/reports/reports/ntds_report_on_health.pdf</a><br />
<blockquote>
<i>Those who were bullied, harassed, assaulted, or expelled because they were transgender or gender non-conforming in school also reported significantly elevated levels of suicide attempts (51% compared with 41% of our sample as a whole). Most notably, suicide attempt rates rise dramatically when teachers were the reported perpetrators: 59% for those harassed or bullied by teachers, 76% among those who were physically assaulted by teachers and 69% among those who were sexually assaulted by teachers. These numbers speak to the urgency of ending violence and harassment of transgender students by both their peers and their teachers.</i> </blockquote>
<blockquote>
<i>Education and income both correlate with suicide rates, with those earning $10,000 annually or less at extremely high risk (54%), while those making more than $100,000 are at comparatively lower risk (26%), while still astronomically higher than the general population. Those who have not completed college attempted suicide at higher rates (48% among those with no high school degree, 49% for those with a high school degree only, and 48% for those with some college education) while those have completed college (33%) or graduate school (31%) have sig- nificantly lower rates.</i> </blockquote>
<blockquote>
<i>Those who had survived violence perpetrated against them because they were transgender or gender non-conform- ing were at very high risk; 61% of physical assault survivors reported a suicide attempt, while sexual assault survi- vors reported an attempt rate of 65%.</i></blockquote>
It is disappointing to note that although Mr. Heyer has spent some time pulling his information from a couple of reasonably good community websites (Laura’s Playground, and other Transgender community websites mostly), but does not seem to have been willing to find the actual report itself and reflect upon its contents.<br />
<br />
Perhaps somewhat unique is Heyer doesn’t spend his entire time trying to
accuse transsexuals of being deluded people. Instead, he seems to
reserve much of his ire for the “treatment community”, and engages in a
wholesale attack upon the mental health practitioners, surgeons and
doctors who provide treatment to transsexuals.<br />
<br />
He attempts to discredit some key people in the early days of clinical research into transsexuals by tying them to Alfred Kinsey, and using a rather sloppy 'guilt by association' argument, tries to imply that these people were all pedophiles or supporters of pedophilia and therefore should not be trusted at all.<br />
<blockquote>
<i>The pedophile connection is very difficult to ignore with Dr. Alfred Kinsey followed by Dr. Harry Benjamin, then Dr. John Money, the co-founder of the Johns Hopkins Gender Identity Clinic. All three men, it appears, did not advocate for any other therapies, only for the freedom to switch genders. They set out to redefine how men and women were made and for them it was not in the womb. ...</i></blockquote>
As the <a href="http://www.kinseyinstitute.org/about/contro-03.html">Kinsey Institute</a> has pointed out in its refutation of the attacks on Kinsey, he was not a pedophile. Since it appears that he derives his idea that Kinsey was a pedophile from Dr. Judith Reisman, <a href="http://www.kinseyinstitute.org/about/controversy2.html">I'll point out what happened when she tried to sue the Kinsey Institute after they refuted her claims that Kinsey was some kind of sexual predator.</a> Further, "guilt by association" arguments don't exactly make for terribly convincing reading. They tend to lead me to suspect that someone was desperately reaching for it. <br />
<br />
Heyer also draws upon Dr. Paul McHugh's arguments related to transsexuals as expressed in McHugh's First Things opinion piece a number of years ago. The problems with Dr. Paul McHugh's claims are addressed on this blog in an article called <a href="http://maplecentrist.blogspot.com/2011/08/debunking-dr-paul-mchugh.html">"Debunking Dr. Paul McHugh"</a>.<br />
<br />Overall, the arguments that Heyer makes in his book come across more as an expression of rage and frustration rather than a coherent call for meaningful changes in the diagnosis and treatment of transsexuals.<br /><br />I respect that Mr. Heyer has been deeply traumatized by his experiences, and that this book, along with Trading My Sorrows is a sincere effort on Heyer’s part to give voice to what he has experienced and how it affected him. However, much of what Heyer has said in his book, as I will discuss in more detail later, is almost pure allegation lacking any meaningful grounding in objective evidence.<br /><br />His accusations against the treatment professionals are profound and troublesome, as he does little to provide concrete evidence to back up his claims. Inference and innuendo are his primary tools of attack, with a healthy dose of borrowing from the standard religious right-wing book of accusations against Alfred Kinsey.<br /><br />Although he claims to be an advocate for “better” treatment paradigms, Mr. Heyer fails utterly to even begin the process of exploring what form those treatments might take, a flaw in his overall approach that leaves one wondering just what it is that he has in mind for transsexuals beyond squelching the current treatment paradigms.<br /><br />It is very much my opinion that while Heyer may have set out to raise some significant questions and issues related to the treatment of transsexuality, he ended up seeking an externalized justification for his own actions over the course of his life. Instead of taking responsibility for his own actions and the outcomes thereof, his book reflects an attempt to make someone else responsible for what he has experienced. klfhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00523944623131700808noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-410880442107647184.post-70710182856698842042011-10-02T10:22:00.000-07:002011-10-02T10:22:47.752-07:00Walt Who?Recently, I came across someone who seems to have become the latest darling of the anti-transsexual crowd. His name is <a href="http://waltheyer.typepad.com/">Walt Heyer</a>. Mr. Heyer appears to be one of those unfortunate enough to have attempted gender transition, only to discover that it was the wrong path for them. Unfortunately, Mr. Heyer has decided that blame for his misfortune lies at the feet of the treatment community, and now he has set out to discredit the treatment community. <br />
<br />
In the last few years, he has published a couple of books that I will be discussing in some detail on this blog: <a href="http://www.amazon.com/Trading-My-Sorrows-Walt-Heyer/dp/160034156X/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1317571564&sr=1-1">Trading My Sorrows</a>, an autobiography of his transition and detransition, and <a href="http://www.amazon.com/Paper-Genders-ebook/dp/B0057HZ6X2/ref=sr_1_3?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1317571658&sr=1-3">Paper Genders</a> which is his first attack on the treatment community that deals with <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transgender">Transgender</a> people.<br />
<br />
I'm going to spend more time on Paper Genders in a subsequent series of posts, as the nature of the book requires a substantially more in-depth treatment to adequately address.<br />
<br />
However, I am profoundly concerned with Mr. Heyer putting himself forward as a spokesman for the treatment of transsexual people. There are a few problems with his story that lead me to suspect that while he may be transgender to some degree, he attempted transition in one of the most dangerous ways that is possible. <br />
<br />
Consider the following from his book <a href="http://www.amazon.com/Trading-My-Sorrows-Walt-Heyer/dp/160034156X/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1317571564&sr=1-1">Trading My Sorrows</a>:<br />
<blockquote>
<i>Alcoholics can be baffling and incomprehensible in their way of thinking. I formulated a simple plan for living my life after surgery. I would live as two people, living simultaneous lives. The male, Walt, would continue to work as a male after the surgery, using a male identity. Off-work time would be reserved for the female persona known as Andrea West. This way I thought both the female and the male could each reign supreme, and my conflict would be resolved. This seemed very logical and workable. I thought that I would finally be at peace.<br /><br />It’s hard to describe how the desire for surgery takes over, especially when combined with abuse of alcohol. It took on the appearance of an obsessive-compulsive disorder, like a bulldozer pushing me relentlessly and single-mindedly toward surgery, while destroying every obstacle in its way. Lying, cheating, and manipulating were my tools of the trade. I became expert at persuading everyone that surgery was the treatment I needed. In my compulsion to have surgery, I plowed right through and over everyone and everything that stood in my way. Too bad hindsight always comes too late for us to see how truly stupid our process is.<br /><br />In preparation for the surgery, I underwent a series of plastic surgeries, such as breast implants, buttocks implants, a nose job and removal of my facial hair through the painful process of electrolysis. People at work were starting to look at me funny. They knew something was changing with me, but they were mostly silent. I anyone asked, I made up something in my usual cover-up behaviour</i></blockquote>
Okay, so, by Heyer's own admission he was struggling with alcoholism, was clearly not living full-time in role prior to surgery, and more distressingly had no apparent plans to live full time as a woman post-surgery either. Even more important, we find Heyer admitting to engaging in deceit to get to surgery in the first place. <br />
<br />
To my understanding and experiences of the subject of transition, this is a recipe for disaster. Not only does the candidate have significant comorbid conditions which are arguably likely to impair their judgement (in particular alcoholism), but it's also quite debatable just how honest the individual is being with themselves. <br />
<br />
A key aspect of a successful transition requires the person undertaking the transition to be brutally honest with themselves throughout the process. Further, it is vitally important that the patient be very frank with their psychotherapist about what they experience, especially when it comes to living in the chosen gender role. If, as Heyer says, his "tools of the trade" became <i>Lying, cheating and manipulating</i>, it is hard to believe that he was being completely honest with himself or the treatment professionals he was working with.<br />
<br />
Heyer made a couple of feints at getting Gender Surgery, and for one of them he relays the following story:<br />
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<i>Depending on whom you talked to, I was going on a “business trip” as I told my family, or taking a “vacation” as I told my employer. Lying came so easily to me now. There’s a saying: “How can you tell if an alcoholic is lying? His lips are moving.” My true destination was Trinidad, Colorado. My true purpose was surgery. I shared the details with you earlier: how I panicked and walked the streets of town, torn apart by the conflict raging in my head, and finally I backed out, and returned home to tell my wife what I had almost done.</i></blockquote>
</blockquote>
So, not only did Mr. Heyer lie through his teeth to his employer at this stage, but he also lied to his family. This does not sound to me like someone who is setting the groundwork for a supportive environment as they move into a new gender role. If you are lying to everybody around you, how honest are you being with yourself? More distressingly, Mr. Heyer freely admits to experiencing significant concerns about having the surgery done. This is another sign of someone who is neither ready for Gender Reassignment Surgery or for that matter even living full time as a woman. <br />
<br />
<blockquote>
<i>In mid-October, six months after my surgery, my boss Tom and I met for one of our regular evening meals together. Somehow I managed to get the words out: that I had undergone gender reassignment surgery and my new name was Laura Jensen. As he gasped for air, I thought I may need to call 911 to revive him. He was more than stunned. He asked me to clarify what I had said. I told him again. "I have no idea how to handle this," he said. "I'll need to take this to the president." That seemed reasonable. Having an employee undergo this kind of radical surgery was hardly an everyday occurrence.</i></blockquote>
<blockquote>
<i>About noon the following day, Tom asked me to go home until they could work out the details. I could understand that. They needed to work out the details of how they would handle it with the other employees. Maybe they would move me into an inconspicuous office, away from intense scrutiny.</i> </blockquote>
So, when Mr. Heyer finally did screw up the courage to undergo surgery, he still wasn't living full time as a woman. Nor did he set the stage at his workplace prior to undergoing surgery. This was the early 1980s, and at the time most formal gender treatment programs would have been exceptionally strict about the idea of a one to two year "Real Life Test" (RLT). How he managed to side step this requirement is a bit of a mystery to me, but I don't have his clinical history at my fingertips, so I'll take it as a given that he found a way to do so.<br />
<blockquote>
<i>It wasn't a birthday party. They had their ducks lined up. In return for six months' severance pay, I was to go away quietly. I wasn't ever to tread on Honda property again or discuss my termination with anyone. If I resisted or fought them, they would justify their decision to "lay me off" by saying that my position had been eliminated. They had a document they wanted me to sign. They assured me that fighting the termination would not be in my best interests, and promised that they would make my life miserable if I didn't go quietly. ...</i> </blockquote>
Dropping the idea of GRS on your boss <i>after the fact </i>is not a tactic that is going to win you any friends in the workplace. A successful transition includes workplace transition, as that is a place that we spend a significant chunk of our lives. I don't find it particularly surprising that Heyer found himself in deep trouble work wise after that. Not only had he dropped a significant bomb on his boss's desk, but his boss would also find himself feeling that his employee had been lying to him for an extended period of time. <br />
<br />
<blockquote>
<i>I picked a lady who specialized in dissociative disorder and met with her in her elegantly decorated office on the top floor of a plush Beverly Hills office building for many weeks in order for her to evaluate me. When her evaluation was complete, she called me to come in. Sitting there in her office, she began to tell me I indeed had a dissociative disorder and for the first time, I wanted to know what it meant. She said it was the latest name for multiple personality disorder.</i></blockquote>
<blockquote>
<i>In her view, the combination of the discipline by my mom and dad, the cross-dressing in the purple dress by Grandma, and the molestations by Uncle Fred, all together, were the ingredients for the development of the dissociative disorder, or multiple personality disorder, that I had been suffering from and dealing with all my life. ...</i> </blockquote>
Tragic as this is, we have to recognize that Mr. Heyer admits earlier on that he was not being wholly honest with himself and those around him. It is entirely likely that his interactions with the therapists who ultimately gave the recommendation for surgery in the first place that his deceptiveness was sufficient to hide the symptoms of his conditions from his therapist(s).<br />
<br />
Mr. Heyer seems to have failed a key aspect of transition - namely that of being honest with yourself and your treatment team. The results of that dishonesty, while tragic, cannot be attributed solely to the treatment team. Mr. Heyer needs to take responsibility for his own role in the tragedy of his attempt at transition.klfhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00523944623131700808noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-410880442107647184.post-14837035690624194102011-08-24T16:54:00.001-07:002011-08-24T17:08:59.287-07:00Debunking Dr. Paul McHughOne of the most infuriating things I run across all too often are arguments from religious conservatives that try to bash transsexuals based on the utterances of one <a href="http://www.tsroadmap.com/info/paul-mchugh.html">Dr. Paul McHugh</a>.<br />
<br />
In particular, they like to cite a paper that McHugh wrote in 2004 for the NeoCon magazine <a href="http://www.firstthings.com/article.php3?id_article=398">"First Things"</a>. His article in "First Things" is a doozy - drawing conclusions that are astonishingly subjective.<br />
<br />
<blockquote>Those I met after surgery would tell me that the surgery and hormone treatments that had made them “women” had also made them happy and contented. None of these encounters were persuasive, however. The post-surgical subjects struck me as caricatures of women.</blockquote><br />
The short comment here is that in McHugh's view, transsexuals didn't measure up to his idea of beauty. For a supposed professional, working in mental health, McHugh should have long ago discarded such idiotic believes from his practice.<br />
<br />
<blockquote>First, they spent an unusual amount of time thinking and talking about sex and their sexual experiences; their sexual hungers and adventures seemed to preoccupy them. Second, discussion of babies or children provoked little interest from them; indeed, they seemed indifferent to children. But third, and most remarkable, many of these men-who-claimed-to-be-women reported that they found women sexually attractive and that they saw themselves as “lesbians.”</blockquote><br />
Ummm...wow. There's more assumptions in that one paragraph than a pharmacy has pills. Starting off with the idea that transsexuals are sex-obsessed. In reality it doesn't work that way. Transsexuals have varying levels of interest in sex - and it's all over the map. Perhaps McHugh only remembers the conversations about sex because they piqued his curiousity. As for children, not everybody is cut out to be a parent; and some, are so distressed by their situation that the idea of creating the emotional space to care for a child isn't even a point of discussion. (I know several ladies who have no desire whatsoever to raise a family - period) As for his astonishment that someone might transition and identify as a lesbian, it only goes to underscore Dr. McHugh's limited understanding of the diversity of human sexuality.<br />
<br />
<blockquote>He [sic. Meyer] found that most of the patients he tracked down some years after their surgery were contented with what they had done and that only a few regretted it. But in every other respect, they were little changed in their psychological condition. They had much the same problems with relationships, work, and emotions as before. The hope that they would emerge now from their emotional difficulties to flourish psychologically had not been fulfilled.</blockquote><br />
Transition doesn't cure any problems that a person is dealing with besides the gender identity issues. To assume that it would is foolish and shortsighted indeed. I'll address how deeply flawed Meyer's study is later.<br />
<br />
<blockquote>One group consisted of conflicted and guilt-ridden homosexual men who saw a sex-change as a way to resolve their conflicts over homosexuality by allowing them to behave sexually as females with men. The other group, mostly older men, consisted of heterosexual (and some bisexual) males who found intense sexual arousal in cross-dressing as females.</blockquote><br />
So the idiocy that is J. Michael Bailey starts even earlier than I thought. Unfortunately for McHugh, there are a surprising number of transsexuals who don't fit into either category that he has so narrowly described. <br />
<br />
Yes, it is reasonable to assume that a transsexual exploring the idea of transition would be curious about the sexual experience as a woman, and may well find that notion arousing. What is unreasonable is to claim that the arousal indicates a primary motivation for transition. Among other things, taking cross-sex hormones does all sorts of things to an individual's patterns of arousal. <br />
<br />
<blockquote>Having looked at the Reiner and Meyer studies, we in the Johns Hopkins Psychiatry Department eventually concluded that human sexual identity is mostly built into our constitution by the genes we inherit and the embryogenesis we undergo. Male hormones sexualize the brain and the mind. Sexual dysphoria — a sense of disquiet in one’s sexual role — naturally occurs amongst those rare males who are raised as females in an effort to correct an infantile genital structural problem. A seemingly similar disquiet can be socially induced in apparently constitutionally normal males, in association with (and presumably prompted by) serious behavioral aberrations, amongst which are conflicted homosexual orientations and the remarkable male deviation now called autogynephilia.</blockquote><br />
More or less, McHugh is drawing conclusions from a deeply flawed follow-up study on transsexuals and from a second study which is based on reassignment of Intersex infants. What he completely fails to draw from the Reiner study that he refers to is the logical corollary to the study's findings - namely that a person's gender identity is wired at some fundamental level of the brain, and does not readily shape itself based on social cues. This is in fact the underlying persistence of the transsexual narrative in the first place. Why McHugh fails to see this reality is simply a clue to his view of the world. (and I would feel very sorry for anyone who had to deal with him as a therapist for gender issues)<br />
<br />
While I agree that there is evidence that suggests parallels between transsexualism and various Intersex conditions, I think it is important to point out that for the most part, Intersex people do not seem to describe the kind of psychological distress about gender that transsexuals do. Although some experience something similar if they are inappropriately assigned a gender as infants, in general this does not appear to be the case among IS people. <br />
<br />
Many point to the case of John Reimer as an example, and his case is neither about transsexualism or intersex conditions - and in many respects proves the notion that there is something about gender identity that is profoundly fundamental to us as individuals - and is not subject to being "changed" by our social environment.<br />
<br />
<blockquote>One might expect that those who claim that sexual identity has no biological or physical basis would bring forth more evidence to persuade others. But as I’ve learned, there is a deep prejudice in favor of the idea that nature is totally malleable.</blockquote><br />
I think if McHugh were to park his assumptions that sex equals gender and gender is sexuality for a while, he might come to the realization that just maybe the transsexual is in fact reinforcing a kind of essentialism about gender that he claims the transsexual narrative violates.<br />
<br />
McHugh likes to stand up and brag about how he had the Gender Clinic program at Johns Hopkins shut down in the late 1970s because he didn't think that transsexuals benefited from surgery (or transition, probably) at all.<br />
<br />
McHugh's position flies in the face of <a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000824052737/http://www.symposion.com/ijt/pfaefflin/1000.htm">research spanning close to twenty years</a> before his decision to close the clinic at Johns Hopkins. It relies upon a <a href="http://web.archive.org/web/200012092034/http://www.symposion.com/ijt/pfaefflin/3043.htm">single paper</a>, which is deeply flawed:<br />
<br />
<blockquote>Because this publication is cited frequently by the professional and lay literature it seems important to us to demonstrate extensively why the results of this work are not very enlightening and cannot support the conclusions derived from them.<br />
<br />
The scoring system used by the authors is undifferentiated because it is, for example, not evident if an arrest happened because of cross-dressing or for real crimes; if the partnerships classified as gender-appropriate, resp., as nongender-appropriate were partnerships of operated that existed over the time period of the operation or they were entered into post-surgically; if they are living partnerships or sexual partnerships; if the surgical results permitted to have sexual intercourse or not and if the psychiatric contacts, resp., inpatient treatments, came about exclusively because of the persistent pursuit of the goal sex reassignment or happened because of other psychiatric illnesses. One does not learn, for example, if also the routine contacts to the care-providing psychiatrist are counted or not.<br />
<br />
The valuing done by the authors is absurd because, for example, the gender of the partner with whom a patient lived was evaluated pre-, resp., post-surgically as opposite. <span style="font-weight:bold;">A single who possibly was not capable of having a long-term relationship and not maintain it received a better score (0) than an MFT who had lived for years with a female friend (and had an intimate relationship?) and did this past the time period of the operation, but whose relation after the operation was evaluated as nongender-appropriate (-1). An inpatient psychiatric treatment was evaluated more negatively (-3) than a jail term (-2). The professional of plumber (Hollingshead job level 4) counted exactly as much as post-surgical "gender-appropriate marriage" (+2).</span><br />
The tables and figures shared by the authors do not seem serious because after the scoring table a maximum of only eight minus and five plus points can be achieved, but in the results table (p. 1014) a range from -18 to +19 points is given. How these figures came about remains totally in the dark. The presumption made by Fleming et al. (1980) that every category could be scored multiple times, is negated by the following thought: It is imaginable that with a multiple evaluation a number of 18 minus points can come about - by three stationary psychiatric admittances (3 times -3) plus three jail terms (3 times -2) plus three "nongender-appropriate partnerships" (3 times -1). <span style="font-weight:bold;">It is unfathomable, however, how 19 plus points can be achieved with the scoring system,unless by, for example, five gender appropriate marriages (5 times +2) plus three different academic professions (3 times +3) within a follow-up study period.</span><br />
One asks the question how it came about that a renowned professional publication published such opaque figure material. Meyer & Reter considered the shared data for the, in a sense, most objective data of their sampling and left out as good as all subjective statements of the follow-up study. It is possible that there was more to be learned from them.<br />
<br />
<span style="font-weight:bold;">Not without a problem is also the use of the not-operated as a control group, especially because 40% (14 of 35) of the not-operated had surgery in the course of the follow-up study and the other 21, even if not very decided, further pursued the goal to be operated.</span> If the operated, in the course of the follow-up study, were counted in the partial sample right away of the operated, the average follow-up study period would have been shortened. How the other results could have been changed by this cannot be fathomed; the authors do not have any comments or calculations for this (comp. the remarks to the publication by Edgertom & Meyer [1973] and the critiques by Fleming et al. [1980], Lothstein [1982] and Abramowitz [1986]).</blockquote><br />
In short, McHugh's conclusions are based on even more limited data about transsexuals than normal, and it is based on what are clearly very flawed methods for gathering and quantifying the raw data. <br />
<br />
Meanwhile, by far the majority of follow up studies (at least up to 1990/91) draw very different conclusions than does McHugh. <br />
<br />
Worse yet, by McHugh's <a href="http://www.lhup.edu/~dsimanek/mchugh.htm">own admission</a>, he wasn't going to look at anything to do with transsexualism objectively. His decision was already made by 1975.<br />
<br />
<blockquote>This interrelationship of cultural antinomianism and a<br />
psychiatric misplaced emphasis is seen at its grimmest in the<br />
practice known as sex-reassignment surgery. I happen to know about<br />
this because Johns Hopkins was one of the places in the United<br />
States where this practice was given its start. It was part of my<br />
intention, when I arrived in Baltimore in 1975, to help end it.</blockquote><br />
This is not someone whose opinion is objective at all. He had already drawn his conclusions, and no doubt directives to Dr. Meyer's team resulted in a study that fails the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Null_Hypothesis">'null hypothesis'</a> test and is deeply flawed. In short, McHugh set out to find evidence to support his position, and didn't actually give one whit to the fact that his position was at odds with the conclusions of a lot of other researchers.<br />
<br />
[This article is republished from the now defunct "Cracked Crystal Ball" blog with the author's permission]klfhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00523944623131700808noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-410880442107647184.post-328707729847163462011-08-23T17:08:00.000-07:002011-08-24T19:14:22.021-07:00Dear Ms. "5 Feet of Fury"<a href="http://www.fivefeetoffury.com/2011/08/mentally-ill-castration-fetishist-has-a-newspaper-column-and-i-dont">Fuck You</a><br />
<br />
How dare you attack someone else's success to justify your own lack of it. The arrogance, and ignorance of your attack on Montreal's <a href="http://blogs.montrealgazette.com/category/life/patent-pending/">Jillian Page</a>is appalling, and the lies and distortion in your piece are beyond excuse.<br />
<br />
Okay, you don't like the idea that someone might be a transsexual - and *gasp* have the spine to do something about it. That doesn't give you the right to attack those who do; and it certainly doesn't have anything to do with your own lack of employability outside of Ezra Levant's inner circle at Sun Media.<br />
<br />
Let's take some of Ms. Shaidle's lies apart, shall we?<br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
<i>Alas, the editor of the Montreal Gazette is apparently unfamiliar with the tragic story of Los Angeles Times sports journalist Mike Penner, who was encouraged to live out his transsexual fantasies within the pages of the newspaper, and continue writing post-op as “Christine.”</i></blockquote>Factual error number one. Mike/Christine Penner never had surgery. She was in the middle of what the <a href="http://www.wpath.org/">WPATH</a> <a href="http://www.wpath.org/documents2/socv6.pdf">Standards of Care</a> refer to as "Real Life Experience" when she detransitioned and returned to life as Mike. <br />
<br />
Factual error number two is that Mike Penner continued to write as <a href="http://www.laobserved.com/archive/2008/10/mike_penner_returns_to_lo.php">Mike after detransitioning</a> for a period of time before taking his life.<br />
<br />
Was it a case of transition 'regrets'? The only person that can answer that question now is dead. Being transsexual is no easy path, and not everyone who is transsexual is equipped to deal with the social, economic and emotional challenges that transition brings with it. Perhaps Mike just realized that there was more to his/her story than just being Christine and backed away from transition to sort out some of those other issues - we'll never know. <br />
<br />
For Ms. Shaidle to point to this case as a reason to declare transsexual narratives invalid merely demonstrates that she has never read the WPATH Standards of Care, nor even the Wikipedia articles on transsexuality - much less any of the academic literature on the subject.<br />
<br />
<blockquote><i>We do not encourage anorexics to write newspaper columns chronicling their weight loss, or bulimics telling readers about their trips to the bathroom.<br />
We do not encourage people who think they are Napoleon to write newspaper columns about their imaginary battles, and to refer to themselves as “transhistorical.” </i></blockquote>There's a big difference. People who think they are Napoleon are suffering from delusions; anorexics and bulimics are suffering from eating disorders. Contrary to Ms. Shaidle's opinions, we do write about the struggles that <a href="http://www.cbc.ca/news/background/health/binge-eating.html">such people face</a> - and sometimes they are autobiographical in form.<br />
<br />
There's yet another factual error in Ms. Shaidle's argument. She is implying that a transsexual is suffering from a delusion. Unfortunately for Ms. Shaidle, her argument runs smack into the wording of the differential diagnosis section of the DSM IV TR on<a href="http://www.mental-health-today.com/gender/dsm.htm"> Gender Identity Disorder</a>:<br />
<br />
<blockquote><i><b>Insistence by a person with Gender Identity Disorder that he or she is of the other sex is not considered a delusion</b></i>, <i>because what is invariably meant is that the person feels like a member of the other sex rather than truly believes that he or she is a member of the other sex.</i></blockquote>No, transsexuals are not delusional ... and somehow, I think I'll take the opinion of the professionals that write the DSM based on clinical evidence over the opinion of one extremist blogger who doesn't appear to have even bothered to do the smallest bit of research to back up her opinions on subject that is generally little understood by most.<br />
<br />
<blockquote>And yet here we have the Montreal Gazette, diminishing itself by embracing faddish, fatal delusions.<br />
I would object less except for the fact that this individual is a lousy writer.<br />
He won’t or can’t address a single one of my arguments.</blockquote>First of all, if you had actually met Ms. Page, you wouldn't be so ignorant as to use male pronouns in referring to her. Second, so far your arguments aren't exactly compelling in the first place - they are mostly based on your own bitterness and inability to understand someone who has walked a complex personal path in life.<br />
<br />
<blockquote>But more importantly, his shallow, affected “voice” is so artificially breezy and “gay” that it is obvious to any professional writer that he is using this column to convince himself that he’s happy.</blockquote>You don't know Ms. Page at all, do you? More to the point, you probably don't know anyone who has transitioned well enough for them to let you into their inner narrative. Let me give you a hint - transsexuals who need to transition are often very happy - almost euphoric - after they have reached a place where they can live their lives naturally. If her column sounds like she's ridiculously happy, it could well be because she is after a long, difficult struggle to be real.<br />
<br />
<blockquote>PS: <a href="http://www.firstthings.com/article/2009/02/surgical-sex--35">men who think they’re “really” women</a> are not among “the most courageous people on the planet.”<br />
There are millions of soldiers, nurses, and children with cancer who are truly courageous, to name just a few.<br />
Trannies are pretty much at the bottom of any “courage” measurement system, somewhere below wedding planner and used car salesman.<br />
You are narcissistic, spoiled, overindulged, psychologically disturbed individuals who could only become “heroes” in a decadent, doomed society like ours.</blockquote> Hmmm...so much for arguments that derive their conclusions from providing evidence. Paul McHugh's opinion piece is a work of ignorance in its own right - one that I intend to dissect in more detail in another post.<br />
<br />
Ironically, if transsexuals really were "<i>narcissistic, spoiled, overindulged, psychologically disturbed individuals</i>", the professionals we deal with would almost never approve us for surgery or even hormones based on the Standards of Care.<br />
<br />
No, Ms. Shaidle, I submit to you that you have neither made your case or presented any compelling evidence that there is a problem with transsexuals in our society. I dare say there is a far greater problem to be addressed in dealing with people like you who insist upon judging others harshly without bothering to inform yourself about the realities of the situation.klfhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00523944623131700808noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-410880442107647184.post-60876577424893004272011-08-22T17:15:00.000-07:002011-08-22T17:15:51.497-07:00RIP Jack LaytonJack Layton passed away this morning, and left us <a href="http://www.ndp.ca/letter-to-canadians-from-jack-layton">this letter as an epitaph</a>. I have both agreed with Layton and disagreed with him. During the last parliament, while I agreed with Layton on many issues, I took great exception at his routine willingness to slag the Liberals instead of focusing his wrath on the Conservatives.<br />
<br />
That said, he was probably one of the most positive forces in Canada's political narrative in the last decade or so and will be missed.<br />
<br />
I'm disappointed by the self-serving stupidity out of <a href="http://www.lifesitenews.com/news/ndp-leader-jack-layton-dead-at-61">Lifesite News</a> in response to Layton's passing:<br />
<br />
<blockquote>While Layton was one of Canada’s leading politicians pushing a radical leftist social agenda that included abortion and homosexuality, <i>the pro-life movement responded to the announcement of his battle with cancer with a call to prayer. </i> At his death, Jim Hughes National President of Campaign Life Coalition expressed sorrow and offered the prayer: <i>“May God have mercy on his soul.”</i></blockquote>As if a "call to prayer" is some kind of "favour", especially in light of Layton's stated political positions. The arrogance of the tone of this statement is appalling. Hughes' comment is typical of the religious extremism that has lost sight of the gospel of love and has taken up the mantle of delivering judgement instead.klfhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00523944623131700808noreply@blogger.com0