WTF!!! You have a d--k??!!!

[whatsername]

no one is BLAMING the Transsexual for this situation

if you go around meddling in the water with sharks for fun then dont be surprised when your ass gets bitten.

In my opinion, these statements contradict each other.

support does not include telling somone to get all feminist about a situation that could be very very dangerous.

You'll please notice I did not once advocate a course of action for anyone but for US as we are responding to these incidents and holding people responsible as a wider community.  And in fact that I went on at length about the compromises we make to stay safe.  I'm sorry if it wasn't clear but I was supporting those compromises, but I was advocating understanding them for what they are, and taking actions as a wider community to work towards a day when they are not needed.

I also continue to reject the idea that any trans-person is "lying" about who/what they are by not disclosing their entire history.  If you are a woman, presenting yourself as one is not a "lie".

[Kate]

But no, noone is absolutely OBLIGATED to be honest. Its just the right thing to do to ensure your safety and the other parties contentment.

It's just that "honest" word that's bugging me. I have this hangup about honour and honesty, so for someone to think I was dishonest... well it just really makes me feel awful.

But this all sounds like I'm dishonest by default, that the INSTANT I flirt with a hetero guy I become a dishonest person right up to the point I "come clean" about my past. It makes me feel like I'm a sexual predator who's moved into the neighborhood where everyone needs to be "warned" of my presence first.

But I haven't done anything wrong! I AM female, I can provide the heterosexual relationship that I'm "representing" just fine. Sure, a guy might freak out if he found out my past. But he might freak out that I root for the Eagles or have to wash between every toe or my world will end (bit OCDish) too, ya know?

Yea, I know you're right. It's just NOT fair though

~Kate~

[whatsername]

But this all sounds like I'm dishonest by default, that the INSTANT I flirt with a hetero guy I become a dishonest person right up to the point I "come clean" about my past. It makes me feel like I'm a sexual predator who's moved into the neighborhood where everyone needs to be "warned" of my presence first.

Exactly.

*hug*

And that's why I can't accept this "honesty" argument.  Oh yes, I am a fan of full disclosure, I think it is the best method by which to find someone with whom you're truly, truly compatible.  But there are some really vicious elements to that argument in this context, that to me question the "truth" of one's very identity and that just doesn't sit right.

But yes, for the record, to stay safe I do advocate deciding what compromises you can live with and making them.  Just as I don't go out alone at night unless I have to.  *shrug*

[Sephirah]

That is up to you. My only scruple about that is if your NOT going to reveal your past, you better hide it damn well because if he finds out and he's one of those nutcases who will freak out,

Hmm... if he's 'one of those nutcases who will freak out', why wouldn't the warning signs have been there long before it ever got to the stage where saying anything or not became an issue?

The trouble I have with this is that anything in life is inherently dangerous. Crossing the road is dangerous. But we don't go around telling everyone to stay on one side of the street because there's always the chance that some nutjob could be tanked up on drink or drugs and go ploughing into you. We assume that most drivers aren't nutjobs and obey the rules of the road.

These emotionally unstable... individuals... who perpetrate violence and murder based on little more than insecurity about their masculinity or heterosexuality, surely they aren't representative, either. Otherwise prisons would be full to bursting with 'aggrieved' men who felt it was right to take their anger out on someone in such horrific ways for not telling them about an aspect of their past that, to them, no longer features in their life.

The anger, and expression thereof, is the issue that needs addressing, not the trigger that set it off... because to have that capacity hints at an inherent disregard for humanity, transsexual or otherwise. If you asked a hundred guys, in complete confidentiality, what they would do if they found out a woman they were dating had a transsexed history... how many would say "I'd kill her without a second thought"? I'm betting not many.

You don't tell an abused wife/girlfriend: "Well really it's your fault, you should have told him beforehand that you don't always remember to keep the fridge stocked with beer."

Perhaps the best thing to do is to get to know someone first, without dating them. Find out what sort of a person they are. I refuse to believe that these instances are anything other than the exception rather than the rule, and that most guys are like that.

Failing that, learn self-defence and/or get a big-ass can of pepper spray... or a stun-gun... and keep it in your purse.

I think that it's a very sad day for humanity if we have to go around wearing a little badge that says "I'm a transsexual, please don't kill me."

[Kelley Jo]

Crossing the road is dangerous. But we don't go around telling everyone to stay on one side of the street because there's always the chance that some nutjob could be tanked up on drink or drugs and go ploughing into you.

Comparing crossing the street with changing your sex and all the ensuing reality? Hehe, I got in trouble for making such analogies.

[Kelley Jo]

I'll show you mine...

[Catherine]

That is up to you. My only scruple about that is if your NOT going to reveal your past, you better hide it damn well because if he finds out and he's one of those nutcases who will freak out,

Hmm... if he's 'one of those nutcases who will freak out', why wouldn't the warning signs have been there long before it ever got to the stage where saying anything or not became an issue?

The trouble I have with this is that anything in life is inherently dangerous. Crossing the road is dangerous. But we don't go around telling everyone to stay on one side of the street because there's always the chance that some nutjob could be tanked up on drink or drugs and go ploughing into you. We assume that most drivers aren't nutjobs and obey the rules of the road.

These emotionally unstable... individuals... who perpetrate violence and murder based on little more than insecurity about their masculinity or heterosexuality, surely they aren't representative, either. Otherwise prisons would be full to bursting with 'aggrieved' men who felt it was right to take their anger out on someone in such horrific ways for not telling them about an aspect of their past that, to them, no longer features in their life.

The anger, and expression thereof, is the issue that needs addressing, not the trigger that set it off... because to have that capacity hints at an inherent disregard for humanity, transsexual or otherwise. If you asked a hundred guys, in complete confidentiality, what they would do if they found out a woman they were dating had a transsexed history... how many would say "I'd kill her without a second thought"? I'm betting not many.

You don't tell an abused wife/girlfriend: "Well really it's your fault, you should have told him beforehand that you don't always remember to keep the fridge stocked with beer."

Perhaps the best thing to do is to get to know someone first, without dating them. Find out what sort of a person they are. I refuse to believe that these instances are anything other than the exception rather than the rule, and that most guys are like that.

Failing that, learn self-defence and/or get a big-ass can of pepper spray... or a stun-gun... and keep it in your purse.

I think that it's a very sad day for humanity if we have to go around wearing a little badge that says "I'm a transsexual, please don't kill me."

I think you would be quite suprised at how many Men would have a seriously bad reaction to finding out that a sexual partner was transgendered. I dont think they would say they would kill the person but I would expect a lot to say they would give the woman a good beating.

[Janet_Girl]

This is why I advocate that pre-op should date within our own community.  Once you are post-op then it would be a different story.  If you were a bio and had had a hysto, are you obligated to tell a potenical mate you can have kids.

OK may be that wouldn't get you killed, but like Kate said do we get to live a 'Normal' life.

[Kate]

If you asked a hundred guys, in complete confidentiality, what they would do if they found out a woman they were dating had a transsexed history... how many would say "I'd kill her without a second thought"? I'm betting not many.

That's the hypocrisy that makes me crazy. I'm betting that if most guys knew they could "get away with it," meaning have a relationship with someone they knew was TS...  but be absolutely 100% sure that no one ELSE would ever find out her history... he'd be fine with it.

Or am I wrong?

Is it REALLY homophobia? Or is it "OMG, what if my buddies find out I slept with.. a... a.. ex-man? They'll make fun of me! How DARE I be made a fool of!"

~Kate~

[Catherine]

If you asked a hundred guys, in complete confidentiality, what they would do if they found out a woman they were dating had a transsexed history... how many would say "I'd kill her without a second thought"? I'm betting not many.

That's the hypocrisy that makes me crazy. I'm betting that if most guys knew they could "get away with it," meaning have a relationship with someone they knew was TS...  but be absolutely 100% sure that no one ELSE would ever find out her history... he'd be fine with it.

Or am I wrong?

Is it REALLY homophobia? Or is it "OMG, what if my buddies find out I slept with.. a... a.. ex-man? They'll make fun of me! How DARE I be made a fool of!"

~Kate~

I think you are wrong. Most Hetro men would run a mile from a relationship with a TS.

I know there are a lot who would have a relationship but they are in the minority.

[Kelley Jo]

Plus he has the added benefit that you understand perfectly his need to sit around watching sports and eating Cheetos in his underwear all day Sunday.

[NicholeW.]

If you asked a hundred guys, in complete confidentiality, what they would do if they found out a woman they were dating had a transsexed history... how many would say "I'd kill her without a second thought"? I'm betting not many.

That's the hypocrisy that makes me crazy. I'm betting that if most guys knew they could "get away with it," meaning have a relationship with someone they knew was TS...  but be absolutely 100% sure that no one ELSE would ever find out her history... he'd be fine with it.

Or am I wrong?

Is it REALLY homophobia? Or is it "OMG, what if my buddies find out I slept with.. a... a.. ex-man? They'll make fun of me! How DARE I be made a fool of!"

~Kate~

The bedrock of homophobia is simply that, Kate, the unerring fear that someone might discover it (my desire) and feel like I am less-than.

We seek, most often, the conformity of the basest opinions out of fear of what others might "think of me." Without the fear a thing is simply a like or dislike, easily embraced or left alone.

Nichole

[Kelley Jo]

The bedrock of homophobia is simply that,

I don't see where this comes in to play in the situation at all, except for maybe being a cheap blame shifting tactic.

[NicholeW.]

The bedrock of homophobia is simply that,

I don't see where this comes in to play in the situation at all, except for maybe being a cheap blame shifting tactic.

Well, we see what we are capable of seeing.

Nichole

[Kelley Jo]

Well, we see what we are capable of seeing.

Nichole

Or, we see what we are predisposed to see according to our best interests at the moment.

[Sephirah]

The bedrock of homophobia is simply that,

I don't see where this comes in to play in the situation at all, except for maybe being a cheap blame shifting tactic.

From whom to whom?

Whichever way one slices, spins or twists it, there is never any excuse or justification for hate-fuelled violence and cold-blooded murder. None.

That's the fundamental essence of everything here. Regardless of who said what or didn't say whatever and when, and "oh, well if you'd done this at this time then you'd have been okay"... at some point people have to take responsibility for their own actions and not look for convenient scapegoats to absolve themselves of guilt.

"Oh, XXXXX drove me to it! She should have said something beforehand! Then it wouldn't have happened."

Well... no one forces a person to pick up a gun/knife/fire extinguisher/whatever. No one forces a person to physically attack another human being in those situations. The actions are those of the individual and the individual alone. And they are the one responsible for them.

There is only one person to blame when someone is beaten or murdered, whatever the 'reason', and that is the person who commits the act. That's all there is to it.

[NicholeW.]

Kelley, having read a lot of your commentary I am well aware that you are not likely to see what I think I see. I don't believe in any way that that makes either of us more or less valid in any way.

As a CD who lives life as male you are going to have a different place to see from than I have.

Phobia's are always about "fear." That's why they are called "phobias." At the base of a social "fear" is the fact that the person with it will somehow not fit in, be held in regard by his peers and friends. He tends to base his life, or she hers, on that idea: that a particular behavior or set of thoughts is somehow anathema and will lead to horrid consequences.

The resulting anger that builds with the recognition that they have managed to find themselves at such a pass often makes for a desire to eradicate the "reason" for the fear. That often comes down to an eradication of another human being who very likely had no desire to tumble the fearful one's self-belief. 

Those us us wih that same "fear" tend to be understanding of the person who experienced the fear. That tends toward a justification of ourselves and our notion of how "we might act" in the same situation. No blame of any sort, simply the delving into a possibility of where these phobias come from and what makes them so deadly in so many cases.

Otherwise they would simply be likes or dislikes: such as whether or not one would choose to eat tapioca or forego it. I really don't think most of us see that sort of like or dislike as a reason to kill or harm.

Now, how was that "shifting blame?" You've pretty-much argued throughout that Angie Zapata had an obligation to reveal "the real truth" about herself. If Ray Andrade hadn't experienced a blow-job would that somehow have saved her life? Or is it possible that he would have had the same reaction over just corresponding with someone he felt was a man and he felt attracted toward?

It seems to me like whatever "blame" there is, is very rightly down to his phobias. Not that she didn't have any. She simply showed she was not irritated with things about him to the point she felt she had to kill him to keep herself safe from him. He, on the other hand, showed quite graphically that he didn't feel that way.

I have the impression from some of your comments that you might feel much the same as he did. But, no one is shifting any blame to a place it doesn't belong, except, imo, in regard to those who argue that his actions in killing another human being out of his own "fear" of how he'd be seen is somehow not a shifting of the blame to the dead woman from the live man.

Nichole

[Kelley Jo]

Whichever way one slices, spins or twists it, there is never any excuse or justification for hate-fuelled violence and cold-blooded murder. None.

That's the fundamental essence of everything here. Regardless of who said what or didn't say whatever and when, and "oh, well if you'd done this at this time then you'd have been okay"... at some point people have to take responsibility for their own actions and not look for convenient scapegoats to absolve themselves of guilt.

"Oh, XXXXX drove me to it! She should have said something beforehand! Then it wouldn't have happened."

Well... no one forces a person to pick up a gun/knife/fire extinguisher/whatever. No one forces a person to physically attack another human being in those situations. The actions are those of the individual and the individual alone. And they are the one responsible for them.

There is only one person to blame when someone is beaten or murdered, whatever the 'reason', and that is the person who commits the act. That's all there is to it.

Nobody on this thread has said that there is an excuse for violence. Judging from the way you write I'm pretty sure your reading comprehension level is such that you got it.

You know the point that's been made. You can argue it all day and maybe you will feel comfortable and secure in the knowledge that you are right. But one thing is certain, if you indulge in that particular behavior you are putting yourself at risk. It's not about being right or wrong, it's about your safety. It's just common sense. Argue with that enraged ->-bleeped-<- as he is beating the crap out of you, tell him he has latent homosexual tendencies because he has a problem with a transgirl. I doubt it will change how he feels.

Wouldn't the better course of action be to not put yourself in that situation to begin with?

[NicholeW.]

The point of the blog, lest you've forgotten, was how much one can sympathize with Mr. Andrade's reaction. Should one do some things to eliminate the possibility of violence against her? Well, yes.

But, if violence seeks her out should she be damned for leaving her home? Having a job? Perhaps running a red-light when a "phobic" cop is sitting at the corner waiting? I might do that if I felt I had to justify the cop's actions if he slew her or maimed her or beat her down. But, finally, we all live our lives.

And we cannot know for a certainty or even a probability when violence and hatred will discover us, or by what means.

Trust me, I have no desire to bed at any cost any guy. Just not going to happen. I find them too fragile in their egos and with a notion that they will somehow not be at fault for injuring me if I should tell them my history.

Is that a snark on guys? Well, I suppose it could be read that way, but honestly I put it at the feet of how guys get raised and the bs we pass along to them and allow them to cling to. If my ego is gonna be so got out of joint by going to bed with a trans man that I feel I have to kill him afterwards to protect myself, then it strikes me that the problem is in me, not him. Of course the converse of that would be true as well.

N~

[Kelley Jo]

Nichole,

Thank you for the thesis on phobia. I still fail to see how homophobia has anything to do with a hetero guy's rightful anger at being deceived. His instant feelings about it are totally valid. He does not need to examine his own sexuality as deeply as you do, after all, he's just a regular guy who is happy with his body and his sex life.

The problem lies in the fact that a choice was denied him, that is just the inescapable fact. The bottom line is that it is stupid to put yourself in that situation. And yes, his violent reaction would be wrong and criminal. But is it worth your safety to be right?