“An intersex person appears to be defined as someone with at least one sexual incongruity. If brain sex can give rise to such an incongruity then, legally, we think that there may be no difference between an intersex person and a transsexual person.”[Citation]
I exist in a rather precarious and not always well-supported place as an activist of social and societal change not only because of my ideologies, but also because of the much needed changes that I seek to bring to the transgender community. Because I am trans and most especially because I was assigned male at birth there’s a number of feminists and lesbians who will never accept me as an ally; all due to their seething hatred for all things male and all things with a penis. Whether that’s deserved is a debate for another day. Also because I am trans, there’s a huge number on the conservative right and the evangelical end of religion that will also never allow me to be an ally in like-minded causes, because they also hate all things transgender. Their bibles and teachings say that their are only males and females despite all of the intersex babies that are born each day. And because of my harsh views against blocking puberty, the sterilization of trans children and adults, and the surgical mutilation of our transgender community members, I am also often at odds with many of the self-appointed leaders of the trans community. These are people that have been complicit in or responsible for leading us into this dark era of of modern-day transgenderism. As one journalist that I gave a lengthy in-person interview to remarked: “oh, so you’re like an island then” about this situation.
Summarizing me as existing on a metaphorical island in all of this is a fair and reasonably accurate portrayal of my existence. And I have no problem with often having to function and operate seemingly alone like this when necessary; because it’s really no different than life was during my long military career. Because as a military leader I had to make unpopular decisions and implement courses of action that frequently upset my subordinates. I also had to guard against other service members becoming overly friendly with me for reasons of personal gain. As an enlisted leader I couldn’t associate with lower ranking people or officers because of fraternization rules and the penalties for doing so. Nor could I associate with other leaders that were my peers without worrying about my big secret getting out that I didn’t agree that I was just a male. The higher I climbed in the ranks, the lonelier it became. So I was literally an island. And the military literally prepared me to continue to exist as one whenever necessary.
“Genderqueers may be perfect plaintiffs for the kind of law we would like to create, but are they the perfect plaintiffs to present to a judge or jury? Genderqueer people are demographically younger, which may mean some people would be more likely to think that genderqueers are simply confused or going through a phase.”[Citation]
Before my court appearance I did a lot of studying. I studied the trans community and it’s strengths, weaknesses, and flaws. I studied myself and my own strengths, weaknesses, and flaws. I studied the feminists and the radical feminists and their ideologies. I studied the desisters that supposedly didn’t exist, but did. I studied what the conservatives and the religious communities said about people like me. And I studied legal briefs on transgenderism. That’s how I knew the person who would break the gender binary should be someone that’s older, because not being of a younger age group was listed as one of the ingredients that would be convincing to a judge. That’s how I knew that someone born male would have a better chance of breaking the gender binary than someone born female. That’s how I knew what legal arguments to make if my lawyer didn’t and it came down to me having to make them in that court room. And that’s how I knew that my military service record would cause an ethical dilemma for the conservatives if they chose to attack me for breaking the space between male and female wide-open.
Over the past several years as the war over bathrooms, identity, and transgender children has been fought there’s been a lot of strange alliances formed and made. These aren’t exactly normal times when people who openly identify as lesbians are openly joining forces with conservatives and religious elements in order to shut down the gender and surgical clinics that are transing children. These strange bedfellows have found common-ground to unite in this particular battle, while still warring with each other on other fronts and issues.
As a former military person who fully understands the perils associated with coalition building, I totally understand the risks and dangers in forming or building these types of alliances. Because some of the groups and parties that radical feminists and others such as myself have formed alliances with in this fight aren’t exactly gay friendly. But like many of our military partnerships against terrorism in the Middle East with allies that treat women horribly and think nothing of marrying extremely young girls off to older men as child brides; these alliances sometimes must be made for the greater good and for the end result of the greater cause. In this case it’s saving these trans kids from those that think mutilation and sterilization is their cure for gender dysphoria.
“You coined the term autogynephilia, which refers to a man who is aroused by the thought of himself as a woman. This term is kind of your baby. Is it going to make it into the DSM-5?”[Citation]
But what some elements of the lesbian, feminist, and radical feminists communities fail to understand in the battle over gender identity is that they are also putting sexual orientation at risk as well. An example of this is in their endless use of autogynephilia to discredit trans women. It’s a battle tactic that shouldn’t even be used because of it’s origin and roots, which are equally detrimental to them.
“The doctor likes to flout political correctness, he can’t resist an off-color joke, and his ideas about gender and sexuality are archaic, even by the standards of the peddlers of pathology at the APA. It has been 40 years since homosexuality was removed as a mental illness from the DSM. But given a clean slate, Blanchard said he would still classify homosexual sex as abnormal.”
“I would say if one could start from scratch, ignore all the history of removing homosexuality from the DSM, normal sexuality is whatever is related to reproduction. Now you have everything else. I would distinguish between behaviors which are anomalous and benign vs. those that are malignant. So homosexuality would be not normal but benign. Whereas something like serious dangerous sadism would be a malignant variation.”[Citation]
Using autogynephilia as a means to harm trans women is a zero sum gain battle tactic in this fight because the same person who coined the term also says that any sex beyond sex for reproduction is in their opinion abnormal. And if you want to quote Blanchard about autogynephilia, then as a lesbian or gay man, you need to be prepared for Blanchard quotes about your sexuality and sexual practices to also be used against you.
“He says: “The signs were refusing to wear girls’ clothes. I dressed up in my brother’s clothes. I only liked rough and tumble games like football.”[Citation]
With this fatal flaw in your next social media or opinion or writing piece having now been pointed out: do you really still want to quote Blanchard and use autogynephilia as a weapon against trans women? And if so, then why the silence whenever it’s pointed out that female to male transsexuals, who have mothered multiple children, divorced, and then ran off with a woman have routinely engaged in what’s been described and categorized as autogynephilia behavior also? It’s things like this that expose things that are done solely because of hate. And claiming “well, they do it less” isn’t a defense.
It’s interesting to note as well that while I see endless attacks on transgender women by feminists for what’s best described as trashing their marriages and leaving behind a house full of their own biological kids, so that they can run off and pursue life as their “authentic selves” because of their gender identity; I see no such attacks at all on the gay men or lesbian women that do the exact same thing because of their sexual orientation. In fact, and quite to the opposite, I’ve actually seen some of the latter celebrated and turned into speakers for the cause for this exact same behavior.
“When I once asked her if she would like to go to Singapore for a sex change operation, she told me, ‘You really do not understand. I am the third sex, not a man trying to be a woman. It is your society’s problem that you only recognize two sexes.'”[Citation]
Another issue that I keep running into with some elements of the feminists and radical feminists communities is while they endlessly spout off about the erasure of females and the erasure of lesbians; they fail to see or acknowledge the erasure of the Third Gender/Third Sex. This has been taking place for centuries. Even worse, some of them even seem to like or support it and want it to continue. These same folks want everyone to believe that their sexual orientation is a real and biologically innate thing, but at the same time they also want to condemn gender identity and anything beyond their rigid definitions of male or female as a fraud. This behavior is no different than the biblical element of religious conservatism in that it also fails to acknowledge the existence of intersex people.
In doing these things, these people fail to see the clear danger in what they’re doing. At the same time, this same group also complains about things such as the appropriation of their spaces; while failing to understand that if they don’t allow a third gender space, it will result in their spaces being appropriated as a consequence. And they can further be accused of enforcing groupthink in their own social media circles by banning articles from certain websites. Which by the way is the exact same groupthink behavior that takes place in some transgender social media circles to enforce the adoption of their ideologies. Controlling information and discussion for a group of people can and should be defined as cult-like behavior. Reddit is the perfect place to witness this playing out each day.
“Page 21: “All the time I was growing up, I knew that there was something really problematical in my relationship to manhood. Inside, deep inside, I never believed I was fully male—I never believed I was growing up enough of a man.”
“Page 22: “The idea of the male sex is like the idea of an Aryan race.”
“Page 23: “The penises exist; the male sex does not. The male sex is socially constructed.”[Citation]
As a person who’s not afraid to question or critically analyze things, I’m perfectly willing to point out that ideologies shouldn’t be built, shaped, or created by any one person. For example, the beliefs of radical feminist John Stoltenberg are much different than the ideologies of many of the female radical feminists that have taught me their own brands of feminism.
A lot of what Stoltenberg says highly resonates with me. But then again, some things don’t. I don’t view biology and sex as a social construct. I view biological sex, sexual orientation, and gender as all being on a spectrum. One only has to look at race for a common-sense comparison point in this. Bits and pieces of the ideologies and theories of those that came before me have been put into the melting pot that formed me and what I believe. I take what I think I need and what makes sense and throw the rest away. My ideologies remain malleable. My absorption of information is systematic in that I can easily take what I need from multiple sources and filter out the unneeded info as background noise.
I do however think our current use and definition of gender identity is misguided. I believe that gender identity is real, a valid thing, and biologically based. But I disagree with it’s use as the sole means to determine someone’s sex. Because essentially what’s been done with gender identity is to equate being masculine with being male and being feminine with being female, which is toxic. I’m comfortable with the words masculine, feminine and neutral because we have to have language to describe what we feel, or think we feel.
“She also explains her decision had much to do with the discomfort that came with tucking away her penis.”[Citation]
But is there also danger and controversy in allowing a select group of individuals to decide what’s normal? But at the same time however, do we not need some kind of agreed upon yardstick or means of measurement to decide what to base normal on. For example: If I were to implement Blanchard’s thought process, I would say that wearing women’s clothing as a male can be normal. But cutting your penis off to make women’s clothing fit better or because you’re tired of tucking it would be abnormal. But in our crazy world of transgenderism, the cross-dresser is painted as an abnormal pervert that’s constantly hated upon and never given the media stage, while the transsexual that cuts their penis off is celebrated by that same media as normal and constantly paraded around as an example of normal.
Some people have questioned the validity of statements I’ve made in social media circles about being able to feel masculine, feminine, or neutral, but I really can feel these things. I can literally get shaved smooth, don a wig, and slide into a sexy dress and feel tangible emotions of feeling highly feminine. Likewise I can slip into a pair of heavy jeans, a flannel shirt, and a pair of boots suitable for hunting, construction, or the outdoors and feel tangible emotions that I can equate with being masculine. Of course I realize that these emotions and feelings are ultimately based on societal constructions of what I’m supposed to feel by these things. But nonetheless, I can feel them.
I can move and effortlessly switch with graceful fluidity between being masculine or feminine, or in being the dominant or the submissive. I can lead or I can follow. My sexuality is just as borderless and fluid. I’m equally comfortable and equally excited by men, women, or trans people in my sexual pursuits. Maybe it’s autism. Or maybe it’s a unique gift from nature that I possess to feel these things so intensely and to be able to traverse these worlds so fluidly, but I can. And it’s real. The danger however is in assigning a sex to these things or behaviors based on what I feel.
In a recent talk with one of the women that works as a privacy and safety advocate for females and children at an organization that’s highly hated by some members of the trans community, I confided that the Army leadership manual had taught me to always do what’s right for the military and for the nation in my actions and deeds; even in the face of adversity and even if it conflicts with the opinions or desired actions by peers or subordinates. I was honored when she in turn confided that my value system mirrored and reminded her of those held and expressed by Miriam Ben-Shalom, another former enlisted military leader.
The Army’s leadership lesson of course meant not to allow such actions as troops being allowed or encouraged to burn villages, towns or historical sites; or to harm innocent civilians during military actions. But the same lessons apply to activism and advocacy. The test of what you’re doing should be whether or not you are harming others in your actions.
Females can clearly and easily point out the harm that transgenderism and putting transgender women under their cisgender umbrella has caused them. It’s as simple as pointing their fingers at women’s sports or the invasion of spaces they consider as their own. They’re also not allowed to point out the obvious, such as getting a neo-vagina created from a penis isn’t the same thing as having the one they were born with. To do so makes them transphobic. In all of those endless culture war and ideological battles lies the beauty of being non-binary and in the restoration of the third gender to North America. Because while some radical feminists will always hate me for nothing more than having been born male; they can’t accuse me of doing them any harm by existing in the historical third space that I’ve restored for the trans community. What was erased from the soils of my nation has now been recreated and restored.
“Sharmin tells BBC Culture, arguing that “hijras can be considered to fall under the umbrella term transgender, but many prefer the term third gender”. She describes hijras as people designated as male at birth but with feminine gender identity, who eventually adopt feminine gender roles.”[Citation]
Our world history as members of the third gender is not one of medical experiments, forced or voluntary sterilization, and surgical procedures to make us into caricatures of the opposite sex.
“The notion that a child could be “born in the wrong body, creating such a sense of misery that the child and his or her family sought relief via medical intervention—is there any archeological or documented evidence of that amongst the ancients?”[Citation]
Our history is living as feminine males or masculine females or androgynes that have not lost site our biology, it’s capabilities, and it’s limitations.
Throughout my life I’ve heard people talk about a person’s mission in life or their accomplishments being described as someone’s destiny. Or that someone was put on this Earth for the purpose of doing certain things in their space in time. I’m undecided on the validity of those statements and beliefs, but if they’re true, then I can only assume that my destiny was to lead the trans community out of this dark era of sterilization and medical mutilation that we’ve been led into. And that all of my years of military leadership training and the tests of my strength by subordinates and society were the supporting foundation of the island that is now me.