Ever wondered whether Americans actually believe a pair of boobs makes you worse at your job? Well, now we have the answer:
Steve Stanton loved this city he ran for 14 years. This week, he asked the city to love him back – to accept his plans to pursue sex-change operation and let him keep his $140,000 job as city manager.
It didn’t.
Yep, seems now that Steve Stanton wants to become Susan Stanton, 5 of the 7 members of the City Commission of Largo, FL believe Susan will suddenly be unable to carry out Steve’s duties as a high-level bureaucrat.
Not surprisingly, the Lord was invoked as justification for the position, this time as Arnold Schwartzenegger’s sawed-off-toting sidekick:
“If Jesus was here tonight, I can guarantee you he’d want him terminated,” said Pastor Ron Saunders of Largo’s Lighthouse Baptist Church. “Make no mistake about it.”
It’s really too bad Jesus-as-returning-savior is a myth; it’d be deeply satisfying to watch the fundies be cast down into the pits of hell for all the Roman-style oppression done in his name. In this case, methinks Pastor Ron would get sent to the circle where someone lectures him for hours on end about utterly false and completely offensive — yet somehow still inane — horsepucky until his eyes bleed.
Meanwhile, on the irony tip, the leader of a group called the Liberty Counsel busted out this defense of their anti-liberty policy:
“The city hasn’t changed the work environment. He has changed the work environment,” Staver said. “He has to take into consideration the consequences of that personal decision. I think it would be more difficult for the city to retain this person because of how it might undermine the representation of the city in the eyes of the community. It could become very awkward.”
You know, dude has a point. I was actually planning to visit Miami until I discovered Pedro G. Hernandez was their city manager. I’m sure I don’t have to tell you all the things _that_ guy’s done wrong, am I right? YUCK. When will more American cities realize that the personal politics of their civil servants comprise the primary definition of their identities?
Seriously, though, we’re infected with an ugly social sickness when hordes of people show up at a city council meeting to oust a loyal city employee who, by all accounts, has served everyone quite well for over a decade.
This sentence provides a disappointing punctuation mark on the entire embarrassment:
Commissioner Gay Gentry praised Stanton, but supported his firing.
If we can’t count on Commissioner Gay to stand up for LGBT rights, we’ve really got a long way to go.
I totally loved that New Testament parable where Jesus illustrated how minorities and those looked down upon by society would be smacked down.
Wait, now that I actually type that out, something there sounded wrong! Isn’t that what Jesus did? Smote people that we don’t like or disapprove of? IS THAT NOT FACT?
He meant “turn the other cheek so I can smack you again.”
That Jesus guy was tricky.
He said things like “turn the other cheek”, but we all know he was being snarky. He really didn’t mean it, anymore than he meant that crap about the rich guy, a camel, and the eye of a needle. And what about that stupid stuff about “the meek shall inherit the earth” – who hears something as dumb as that and takes it seriously. “Love thy enemies as thyself”? “Suffer the little children to come unto me”?
Come on. He was just messin’ with people. Duh!…
I personally don’t see how it is sick for a community to have significant problems with a transsexual man in an upper-leadership position. After all, such people are far less mentally stable and healthy than normal people.
As this points out transgender people have a much higher than average suicide rate (16%-37%) and require questionable non-FDA approved hormonal treatments, alongside their genital self-mutilation to restore their “natural” sexual identities.
I think fundamentally that civic officials should be judged on how effectively they discharge their civic duties. Despite possible past effectiveness this man has shown that he is in a major state of personal turmoil – as not to be certain even of his own sexual identity. In the midst of this massive, emotional, social and medical change he is about to go through and in light of the difficulties that a transsexual person would have in managing his disturbed subordinates and of the effect this could have on the city’s image (I think if that Pedro G. Hernandez was a transsexual more people might have heard of him) there is nothing sick or particularly wrong with the city reconsidering their employment of the man.
Isn’t it also illegal to discriminate against people for depression? Am I wrong about that? So, even if Adam is being totally logical, isn’t the city still fucking up?
Isn’t Adam North one of those rape apologist trolls from way back? Ew.
I wouldn’t go there if I was you. Suicide has at best a tenuous connection to oppression. I suggest reading French sociologist Emile Durkheim’s studies on the matter. He found that the groups typically with the highest suicide rates are those with the most independence and wealth. In fact he found that wealthy unmarried Protestant white men tend to have the highest suicide rate – hardly an oppressed bunch wouldn’t you agree? Also the suicide rates for people you might consider oppressed: women, blacks, undocumented workers, secular humanists, vegans – are not anywhere near as high as transsexuals.
The main issue I have a problem with is how you seemed to suggest that anyone thinking this man should be fired is not only wrong but morally “sick”. The fact is that a city council has to act in the interests of its city. This guy has chosen to partake of a very tumultuous change – one in which it is not unreasonable to believe will lead to less effective leadership. Setting aside the genital-mutilating surgery and the hormonal/chemical “adjustments” that this man is putting his body through – there are other issues. Psychologically I would question the health of a man who has been confused about something as basic as his gender for as long as he has. Personally, how is he going to deal with the stresses this will place on his wife and children? Is he heading towards a messy divorce and immense personal difficulty of redefining his relationship to his children? Then there is also the social scorn the man is going to have to deal with being a leader in a conservative community. Perhaps this scorn is inappropriate in the first place but it’s something that city council members need to acknowledge. The fact is that anyone of these things is very likely to affect his job performance – and the city council knows this.
Forced to reconsider a man who is far from certain to continue to be an effective public servant and one who will bring mostly negative attention to the city, I can see why the city council simply elected to find someone else competent to run things – someone without the baggage. This doesn’t make them sick or religious fanatics, anymore than his wife would be sick or a religious fanatic for divorcing him under the circumstances. You might not agree with them – that doesn’t make them morally questionable.
And let’s be honest. This was his choice. The fact is that he chose to do something fairly dramatic that will greatly affect those around him: his friends, family and community. He must accept that there are consequences to ones actions.
Psychologically I would question the health of a man who has been confused about something as basic as his gender for as long as he has.
How about you get your grubby little nose out of other people’s personal lives and get back to jerking yourself off?
Psychologically I would question the health of a man who has been confused about something as basic as his gender for as long as he has.
Then your reaction would stem from ignorance. Same with these morons.
And do you really wish to make the case that a) transgender people are not oppressed in our society when morons like you will question their own identity and that b) that oppression, which they experience from day one, contributes nothing to their suicide rates? If so, I have a study on shoe size and IQ that I think is right up your alley, meep.
No. That’s why I never made the case.
In fact I pointed to the oppression he would likely receive as being another way his job performance could be adversely affected.
I also never said that there is no connection between oppression and suicide rates. I simply said that the evidence out there suggests that such a correlation is very weak. Because it is.
Keep in mind too, that this man chose to upset his life, his marriage and his community. No one is oppressing him because he is something that he was born. They are simply concerned about how his choice to become something he isn’t is going to affect his job performance and their community’s reputation.
his choice to become something he isn’t
You could just say ‘I think transgenderism is bullshit!’, y’know.
I am actually quite surprised that a feminist site would actually come out in support of transgender rights.
It seems to me that transgenderality is fundamentally incompatible with feminist ideology After all feminism traditionally holds that the various differences between the sexes are not born out of innate biological differences but rather socially constructed artifacts.
Transgender people violate this feminist paradigm by defining gender in precisely the terms which feminists rail against. They define gender by what they perceive to be the set social role and essential characteristics of a given gender.
For example, when potential male transsexuals begin their change they frequently start with a transition period – a time in which they adopt what they see to be as appropriate feminine dress and behavior. They start wearing lipstick, dresses and high heel shoes. They act more demure, compassionate and other personality characteristics which they see as being “feminine”. In other words, they attempt to take on what they see as a feminine social role. Later comes the surgery and chemical “corrections”.
What’s important about this is that transgenderism depends upon these type of concrete social roles. It needs social differences between the sexes upon which to function. The whole point of transgenderism is to change what one believes is your gender – defined as what social role you are in, what kind of work you do, how you behave, dress, etc.. to match your sexuality – which is what kind of genitalia you have.
This makes transgenderism an anathema to feminism. If men and women are basically the same then transgenderism is based solely upon artificial differences – differences which, as feminists hold, need to be abolished.
This makes transgenderism an anathema to feminism.
Not really. If we still live in a world where certain gender-based differences are written in stone, and that individual is so unhappy with the role he was assigned that he’d be willing to go through the sex change process, which, by they way, is not exactly easy, then no one here is going to stop him.
Now, maybe in this mythical perfectly androgynous future you claim we’re all working towards, people won’t have to feel they’re the wrong gender and will never ask for sex-reassignment surgery. Of course, by then we’ll be so enlightened that the aliens will finally have made contact and shared their technology and sex-reassignment surgery will become something fun and shocking and easily reversed and the young kids will treat it like piercing is today and we’ll rail at them, shaking our fists at them from our flying cars “damn you hippie kids with your long hair and your sex changes and your bad music! When I was young we kept the naughty bits God gave us! Get a job!”
Until that day, anything that forces people to actually think about sex and gender and where they draw those lines in their head and why – like knowing someone who is openly transgendered – is not a terrible thing. The whole reason people are so freaked out over it is that those roles are still there, deeply engraved in our social fabric. If they weren’t, no one would give a fuck. If we are to view a transgendered individual only through the “how good is this for feminism” lens, he still gets our support because the value of the opportunity for dialouge with his community far exceeds the hit feminism will recieve when he starts wearing mascara.
You’ve missed the point completely, North. Feminism wants people to be happy and comfortable with who they are, without suffering the cruelty of small-minded jackasses such as yourself, even if they don’t happen to fit the roles they’ve been prescribed by society. No one thinks men and women are the same, not even evil hairy-legged lesbian monsters. Feminists think the differences between people shouldn’t lead to some people being treated like human beings while others aren’t.
junk science – “You’ve missed the point completely, North.”
higher up thread: “Isn’t Adam North one of those rape apologist trolls from way back? Ew.”
Junk, I think you’ve answered your own question. Now if we can get Kyso’s “Flash Gordon” trolls back we can all be one big happy family…
We all have a role to play in life. Some elements of that role are decided by us, others are preset for us. Most seem to be preset. We can rail against ourselves, against our nature, take steps to “correct” our state. But often we end up with the realization that none of it did any good. Had we spent all the time and effort on reaching acceptance and peace with our lot in life, we’d probably end up a great deal happier. I understand the notion that a person can be born into the “wrong” gender identity. I understand that it feels wrong, and that everything in the person’s nature can scream to be let free. But the self-mutilation and outright lying that a surgical procedure represents will not lead anywhere helpful. We can change the way we are perceived, fiddle around with the social construct that is gender, but giving in to the lie that we can change our sex represents weakness and cowardice at its most tragic.
“Not really” – Kyso
Yes, really.
Look,, the point I am making is that transsexuals are not pleased with their gender role for entirely different and incompatible reasons than feminists. Feminists want a society where either gender can basically behave anyway they want and have the same opportunities: political, social and economic. Feminists resist typical gender roles because they view them as agents of oppression in society and because they think the few differences between women and men are just not that big of a deal.
Transsexuals don’t go through their changes because they want access to more political rights or jobs. They sure as hell don’t do it for status. They do it because they believe that they are the wrong gender for the bodies they have. They base their identities on that which feminists reject – the notions that women dress a specific and separate way than men, and that there are set personality characteristics for both sexes.
As I said above transsexualism depends on these gender differences – which ARE NOT compatible with feminism.
See for yourself. This link is to a test that would-be transsexuals apparently take to identify what their “true, inner” sex is.
Here are a few examples of the questions asked – almost a case study in gender stereotypes.
1. Describe your relationship with mathematics.
4. You are at a meeting. Everyone at the meeting is the same sex as you. The leader of the meeting announces that it’s time for hugs all around! How do you feel about this?
10. In your early school days, how were you at writing essays, poetry, and reports?
13 You have been visiting a new town for several days. Someone asks you which direction south is. Do you know?
59. You are shown a film of close-up images of the faces of many different people. You are asked to describe the emotions that the people are feeling by the expressions on their faces alone. How well would you be able to tell the emotions of the people?
49. You are trying to describe the complex shape of an unfamiliar object to someone. You are not using your hands, and must rely on words alone. How easy is it for you to convey the shape accurately?
37. How easily do you cry at movies?
Basically you get the idea. If your “real” gender is that of a man you are good at math and direction finding but bad on feelings. If you’re a woman… good at emotions, language and literature, dressing up, etc.
Honestly most of the questions are like that. Check it out. I think you’re kidding yourself that this is either compatible with your movement or constructive to it. Transsexuality might very will bring up discussions of social roles and gender – but its not a discussion that is going anywhere you want it to go.
The COGIATI, as it currently stands, is an amateur attempt, and cannot be considered as medically or scientifically valid. It is my hope that professionals will be inspired by this effort and create a true, clinically valid and useful tool that would accomplish the stated goals of the COGIATI. Something like the COGIATI needs to exist, and being unable to find it, I decided that it fell to me to attempt to create it. I am not fully capable of doing this concept justice. Be alert to that fact, and interpret the results of the COGIATI in that light.
Great example, North. Very convincing.
The COGIATI, as it currently stands, is an amateur attempt, and cannot be considered as medically or scientifically valid. – Kyso
Wow. You really tore up my argument Kyso. Especially the part where I said the test was medically and scientifically valid.
Oh wait… that’s right. I never said that.
What I said is that transsexuality is inseparable from these kind of gender stereotypes – which is what makes it incompatible with feminism. I used the test as an example to show how the language many transsexuals use is rife with these stereotypical thoughts.
Mike Ess:
“Junk, I think you’ve answered your own question. Now if we can get Kyso’s “Flash Gordon” trolls back we can all be one big happy family…”
Why not come back for some fun. You people crack me up with your bad arguments and your random ad hom attacks. Calling people “rape apologists” because they demand proof of a crime is COMICAL, but on to the current issue.
I don’t see what Transgenderism has to do with being a Feminist other than you being glad one more man wants to chop his dick off and join the half of the species you favor. Perhaps the feminists can institute a charity organization that turns men into women. I guess you just can’t settle for emasculating man in the mental sense alone anymore.
While I don’t believe we should hate someone because the decide to become a different gender, I don’t blame the city for firing the guy/girl/thing either. There is evidence that this person will not be able to perform their job duties as required, which justifies their termination. I also think that it would of caused quite a few problems for his fellow employees.
The point here is that people occasionally make decisions with their bodies that effect their employability. For instance, if he came in the next day wearing punk rock clothes and a mo hawk, we would probably suffer the same treatment. While it isn’t wrong to wear punk rock clothing, the choice does have consequences. Same thing goes with drugs. Let’s pretend that the employee starts taking heroin during work hours. Does the employer have the right to fire them then?
In a free society, people should be allowed to make whatever choices about their bodies that they like, but at the same time, because we are free, people are also allowed to think what they want about those choices. It bothers me that you and you’re ideological ilk think that everyone should be forced to see things in your terms. Get over it, you don’t have the right to police the opinions of other people.
Here’s the bottom line: You have the right to do whatever you want to your body, but you do not have the right to dodge the consequences.
Mike, you thought it and they came back. That’s pretty cool.
Kyso, I SWEAR I didn’t expect that! Please forgive me!…
Next time, conjure me a damn pizza.
700 comments, here we come, and boy howdy!
you do not have the right to dodge the consequences.
Being fired by ignorant people for something that is no one else’s business isn’t a “consequence”. It’s bigotry.
Getting fake boobs and asking everyone to call you a girls name is as bad as being a smack addict? I think we may disagree here.
It’s clear that transexuals squick you out, but unlike say, heroin, squicking out tighty-whities such as yourself is not a crime. For some of us, it’s a hobby.
Mike! I’m still waiting! Pepperoni, double cheese and mushrooms! Or chicken and bacon!
Oh my god. And “they’re” even more dumb and boring than before.
“Being fired by ignorant people for something that is no one else’s business isn’t a “consequence”. It’s bigotry.” – Jack “I cite from blogs” Goff
Vultan’s point is that Stanton affected his employablity by choosing to become a transsexual. He made the choice. As we already have both pointed out, there are real and legitimate reasons for thinking Stanton might no longer be effective in his employment, i.e the strain his body will go under, the physiological instabilities of being transsexual, the immense personal difficulties of working things out with his wife, the condemnation of his community, the scorn of his workplace.
Let me call upon the wisdom of South Park. Have you seen the one where Stan’s dad gets Dolphinoplasty? What if Stanton had decided that he was a dolphin trapped in a man’s body and had a fin surgically attached to his back? Would the town still be remiss in reconsidering his employment? After all, it would still be his decision. And he has a had a so-far good record.
Keep in mind also that there are no conclusive scientific findings which even support the notion that a brain can have a different gender than its body.
Oh, I saw it. I was so glad that Adam came down to tell me what feminism was really all about. And I do believe I said that I think that a person who is willing to switch genders and lose their job and take this crap so that we can all talk about it is doing feminism more of a service than not.
You know, the ‘appeal to South Park’ fallacy is one I’ve not seen.
Hey, Jack. Haven’t seen you around much lately.
I would like to add to the point that the said individual is an elected official and public figure. In most service jobs, it is a condition of employment to keep ‘well groomed’, or in other words, inoffensive in appearance to even the most discerning of customers. UPS, for one requires all of its drivers to wear a brown uniform. Male drivers are not permitted to grow facial hair or have long head hair.
It is true that transexuality could not have been a condition specified for termination in Stanton’s employment contract, but the point is that what one does with their body is of paramount importance in any labor of service.
Stanton was a public servant and thus, the public image he projected was an essential part of fulfilling his duties. The way in which he is perceived by any party directly affects the wellbeing of every person in town. That means the reputation of every citizen, the arrival of new jobs in the town, and keeping current employers where they are. If I were an investor, would I decide to build a housing project or factory in Largo which is run by a man/woman who is said to be odd and unstable, or the town next door? It is not a matter of fairness or justice, I am an investor who wants to put his money in what seems the best possible place. That is just one example of why a sex change operation or any other decision to alter one’s appearance in an unusual fashion cannot be easily permitted in a public servant. That is why the worker at your local grocery store can’t show up with a mohawk, piercings, and tattoos.
Yet another point is that Stanton proposed a change that involved in a way, a new identity: A legally changed name, drastically changed appearance, completely changed hormonal balance. As a transexual, Stanton was asking all those around him to accept him/her as a new individual with a new role. In accordance with his wishes the city council reevaluated his/her ability to perform the job of city manager better than any other candidate. The city council was not only entitled to do this, it was obligated to examine the new Susan Stanton as a candidate for the position.
Hail, hail, the gangs all here!
Winter always gets me down, Kyso.
Well, keep commenting. I get all nervous when the regulars drop off the face of the planet. Like elfinity dissappeared and reappeared and I guess she was sick in the meantime and no one really knew- it’s kind of hard to keep track of online friends.
I’m having a lot of trouble reconciling my occasional comments here with the diabolical reappearance of the Zarkoff gang. I don’t feel responsible, but I did bring them up.
Coincidence? God I hope so, otherwise that’s a lot to carry on ones conscience…
I dunno, Mike – although I do find the fact that they all showed up at the same time to be kind of odd. Supernatural even. And I do blame you.
We’ll forgive you this time, but these guys are still boring so next time conjure up something more fun.
“It’s clear that transexuals squick you out, but unlike say, heroin, squicking out tighty-whities such as yourself is not a crime.” -Kyso Kisaen, March 4th anno domini 2007
Tighty-whities now is it? You all on this forum love to talk about bigots and racists, but now you go around making slurs against white people. After all that sanctimonious talk and you are the ones to assault people based on their racial identification. There is also the fact that you made this insensitive statement without even knowing if any of us are white.
In fact, you happen to be right. All of us know each other, or know of each other in real life. We are all white males and we are proud of our Anglo-Saxon, Irish, German, French, Scottish, Scots-Irish, whatever else is in there heritage. While we take pride in our ancestry, as Americans, it is our custom to judge each individual on their individual characteristics and merit.
We are about sick and tired, however, of those who try to blame society’s ills on white people. People who happen to be born with white skin are no more or less moral than anyone else and those who share that characteristic without doubt are responsible for a disproportianate amount of society’s most wonderful advancements. People with European heritage look to the strongest literary and musical traditions any culture has ever known and the foundation of modern science.
In America today, there are channels like BET(Black Entertainment Television) which are full of raunchy standup routines making fun of white people. Popular modern cartoons on television and syndicated in newspapers such as ‘The Boondocks’ also satirize and ridicule whites. In fact, I saw an episode of Boondocks in which one of the characters was ridiculing the way white people talk and saying how annoying he found it.
White people aren’t going to found a huge movement and protest even though we’re a majority in this country and could do so to great effect if we wanted. But perhaps there ought to be an Anglo-Saxon Station (ASS) to offset BET. ASS TV would be an inspiration to untold millions of white youth and instill pride while making jokes here and there about other peoples.
ASS TV? Are you guys trying to be a bad parody of blog trolls?…
Kyso, Kyso, Kyso….
How would a discussion on transsexuals help feminists exactly? I mean I’ve already explained that your goals are completely inimicable to each other. Simply provoking the discussion on an issue hardly guarantees advancement of your position on the thing. Maybe a discussion on transsexuality will yield knowledge that women do have a natural tendency towards a certain subdued social role?
The fact is you haven’t really made any argument to counter my legitimate concern that feminism and transsexuality are inherently opposed to each other – in the long run at least.
Mr. Cites from Blogs speaks again. I committed no fallacy. I simply used the South Park scenario as an example – not a reason that I was correct. In any case, if I am wrong you need to create an actual argument. You won’t though, because you don’t have a point.
Guys, I am noticing a trend that happened last time. We brought evidence, argumentation and reason.
They brought insults, (and now hate speech) and literally every fallacy known to man. They then accused us of being boring… and “Godwinned” the thread when it became too embarrassing for them. I was amused when I looked the term up on wikipedia to find this It is considered poor form to raise arbitrarily such a comparison with the motive of ending the thread. There is a widely recognized codicil that any such ulterior-motive invocation of Godwin’s Law will be unsuccessful (this is sometimes referred to as “Quirk’s Exception”.)[4]
All of us know each other, or know of each other in real life.
You’re obviously all very close. Joined at the hip, it seems.
Ah, the boondocks. Certainly no commentary on the black community there, oh, no. Just makin’ fun of whites.
Actually, I thought the Boondocks was one of the best-made animated shows I’d ever seen on Adult Swim, or even ever.
I mean I’ve already explained that your goals are completely inimicable to each other.
Which is complete horseshit, as close ties between the LGBT community and the feminist community show. There are very few feminists working to degrade transgender people the way you and the people of Largo are.
Hail, hail, the gangs all here!-Kyso
NOW we’re all here. And in strict observance of the usual policy: JackGoff, you’re a peice of shit.
i before e, meep.
There are very few feminists working to degrade transgender people the way you and the people of Largo are.-Jack—I cite from blogs—Goff.
Jack would you mind explaining exactly how the people of Largo are “working to degrade” transgender people?
Stanton isn’t just risking divorce, mockery, his reputation, possible permanent sexual dysfucntion, and his reputation. Hormone reassignment also carries the risks of venous thrombosis, breast cancer, prolactin producing tumors, cardiovascular disease, cerebrovascular disease, embolism, baldness, marked increases in obesity risk, hypoandrogenemia, elevated triglycerides, decreasing serum levels of HDL-C, and diabetes mellitus. See citations below.
So let me make sure I have this right….If a city questions the mental state of their elected official when he (1) decides he is now a woman after living for 48 years as a man (2) decides he is a woman despite his choice to have a wife and kids and (3) is willing to risk life-threatening complications to make his body feminine…then the city is obviously full of unenlightened bigots whose sole aim is to oppress him…her? Yeah thanks for clearing that up for me Jack.
Guys, I am noticing a trend that happened last time. We brought evidence, argumentation and reason. They brought insults, (and now hate speech) and literally every fallacy known to man. They then accused us of being boring…-Adam North. Well look to the bright side Adam, atleast “pizza conjuring” is funnier than chanting “2%, 2%, 2%”.
Gooren, Louis J. G. (1999) Hormonal Sex Reassignment. IJT 3,3, http://www.symposion.com/ijt/ijt990301.htm
Jamie Feldman, New Onset of Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus with Feminizing Hormone Therapy: Case Series, http://www.symposion.com/ijt/ijtvo06no02_01.htm.
Fredrick C. W. Wu and Arnold von Eckardstein, Androgens and Coronary Artery Disease, http://edrv.endojournals.org/cgi/content/abstract/24/2/183.
Stanton isn’t just risking divorce, mockery, his reputation, possible permanent sexual dysfucntion, and his reputation.
The risk of which are basically all predicated (except divorce) on bigotry and ignorance. Sexual dysfunction is BS. Are you saying that transgender people do not have sex after surgery?
And the rest, well, if you think people should be fired on the basis of whether or not they have a risk of obtaining certain diseases, then you’re going to have a mess on your hands. As well as a lot of lawsuits. Which people will win.
And the rest is bigotry, unsupported by the APA. Good job.
when potential male transsexuals begin their change they frequently start with a transition period – a time in which they adopt what they see to be as appropriate feminine dress and behavior. They start wearing lipstick, dresses and high heel shoes. They act more demure, compassionate and other personality characteristics which they see as being “feminine”.
You’re wrong: adopting an artificially feminine style comes before transition for those male transsexuals who bother. You could even say transition starts when they decide not to go through the charade any more.
Even if these allegedly close ties between Transsexuals and Feminists exist – which a lot of transsexuals would contest – it hardly refutes my reasoning.
After all, history is full of groups with completely different agendas working together against a “common enemy”. The fact that some transsexuals and feminists view themselves as being oppressed by mainstream society (and so have a common link) doesn’t change the fact that they are based on completely different notions of gender identity.