Susan's Place Transgender Resources

November 9, 2010
He/she/it goes to college
By Jamie Freeze

http://www.renewamerica.com/columns/freeze/101109 (http://www.renewamerica.com/columns/freeze/101109)

Imagine the following scenario. Susie graduates from high school and is accepted to a women's college. Susie goes to college, but during her sophomore year, Susie decides that she no longer identifies with the female gender. Perhaps this came after a revelation in Professor Smith's class on Gender Identity, or perhaps it came from exploring "alternative lifestyles" in an effort to "discover" herself. Regardless, Susie decides to abandon her womanhood and become a man. By Susie's junior year, she is now a he and goes by the name David. Now, David is demanding that the women's college accommodate him. This is not a farfetched story; it was the storyline of a recent CNN article.

snip

I went to a liberal co-ed university where challenging gender norms were an integral part of most classes — from anthropology to sociology to history to English classes — so this came as no real shock. But it still irritated me. Why should a same-sex college be forced to defy their mission and scope to accommodate a confused student searching down the wrong road for self-fulfillment? The sad thing is that many of these colleges are bending over backwards in an attempt to support these students.

I do not agree with the tone and language of the article but I wonder, 'why would a TS/TG person want to attend a single gender school that coresponds with their birth gender'.
Would kinda make stealth harder having a degree from an all man school when one is living as female.
just my 2 centavos

Quote from: cynthialee on November 10, 2010, 09:38:48 AM
I do not agree with the tone and language of the article but I wonder, 'why would a TS/TG person want to attend a single gender school that coresponds with their birth gender'.
Would kinda make stealth harder having a degree from an all man school when one is living as female.
just my 2 centavos

I have to agree - once I got passed the journalistic artifice, writing in a rather sensationalist and provocative tone I have to say I rather found myself agreeing with the underlying thought processes.

If you are Trans, then DON'T go to a single sex college in the first place, unless of of course you are already transitioned and reassigned and you end up going to one for your target gender.

Simples!

Quote from: rejennyrated on November 10, 2010, 10:00:31 AM
I have to agree - once I got passed the journalistic artifice, writing in a rather sensationalist and provocative tone I have to say I rather found myself agreeing with the underlying thought processes.

If you are Trans, then DON'T go to a single sex college in the first place, unless of of course you are already transitioned and reassigned and you end up going to one for your target gender.

Simples!

So, if you are trans then don't get married, don't have children, etc, etc. ? Don't some trans folks try and live their life as their birth gender? Wouldn't going to a gender specific school apply as well?

Yeah, I really can't see anything wrong with the example of a trans guy going to a women's college before he's out (and may not have even come to terms with it himself), and I definitely think a college should let someone in that situation stay. If someone  who's already transitioned applies to a college that only admits their birth gender, that's different...but does it even happen?

Quote from: Dana Lane on November 10, 2010, 12:05:55 PM
So, if you are trans then don't get married, don't have children, etc, etc. ? Don't some trans folks try and live their life as their birth gender? Wouldn't going to a gender specific school apply as well?

You are slightly putting words into my mouth I feel... I think the point is that if you know in advance that you are going to transition, as many of us do, then it would probably be foolish to do any of those things. Yes some do try to live in original gender, but I don't personally think that is usually a good idea, but at the end of the day we all have to do what we think best I guess.

Gender specific schools are not within our control (they are usually chosen by parents) so that can't be helped. By college age however, we can choose for ourselves.

Quote from: rejennyrated on November 10, 2010, 12:18:30 PM
You are slightly putting words into my mouth I feel... I think the point is that if you know in advance that you are going to transition, as many of us do, then it would probably be foolish to do any of those things. Yes some do try to live in original gender, but I don't personally think that is usually a good idea, but at the end of the day we all have to do what we think best I guess.

Gender specific schools are not within our control (they are usually chosen by parents) so that can't be helped. By college age however, we can choose for ourselves.

I was only trying to show a different perspective and didn't mean to try and put words in your mouth.

I can't relate to the thought process that results in trans men finding themselves in women's colleges, on women's sports teams, or generally in women's spaces, and all of a sudden deciding they need to come out right then and there and start living as male in a women's space. Something about that bothers me. But I don't think they should be prevented from doing it - I just think they ought to be aware that it's kind of rude. And that in the case of women's colleges, if they choose to stay, they'll have to list a women's college on their resumes for the rest of their lives.

Really, I couldn't do it. I'm uncomfortable enough in a women's locker room. And it's not really a situation where I can say "not my thing, but more power to him" because the truth is that a man in a women's college is (a) taking up space that could be occupied by women and (b) undermining the purpose of the institution of women's colleges. I don't think these guys should get kicked out, but I think they should seriously evaluate their impact and the appropriateness of their presence. It's not like there aren't coed schools to transfer to.

Just wanted to throw in that if I remember correctly he got a scholarship to go to that school so I don't know if he chose to stay because he could not find a scholarship elsewhere and that he is putting off hormones until he leaves the school.

While I myself like Kyril cannot imagine living in an all girls college and agree that it seems slightly rude, if that's what he has chosen more power to him.

perfect example right here on Susans,

https://www.susans.org/forums/index.php/topic,87130.0/topicseen.html (https://www.susans.org/forums/index.php/topic,87130.0/topicseen.html)

I'm inclined to think a student who decides to transition at a school that caters exclusively to the opposite gender really ought to look into transferring for their own benefit-if for no other reason than it doesn't help them very much to socialize exclusively with their birth gender!

Also finding myself agreeing with Cyril; it's kind of rude. And this is why I agree...
I'm choosing to be blunt here; sorry if it ticks y'all off, but I will probably continue to look vaguely female, so this is my social reality...
FtM's usually pass very well after hormone replacement...and are no longer going to suffer from quite as much economic discrimination as they would have in their cisgendered life.

Now, scholarships and colleges for women are meant to address systemic inequality...and if a transguy takes advantage of that...it's not exactly fair, is it?  Because they will be getting a male hiring advantage when they apply for a job.

I found the transphobic tone of the article really nauseating, though:

QuoteThese colleges need to send a strong message to their students: You do NOT have the right to be comfortable. You do NOT have the right to live above criticism. You do NOT have the right to make others conform to or accept your deviant lifestyle. You do NOT have the right to challenge cultural and societal norms without facing resistance.

I'd like to send this Jamie Freeze a message: 

You do NOT have the right to treat other people like crap for living their own lives.  You do NOT have the right to enforce conformity to your norms through ostracism and violence.  You do NOT have the right to deputize yourself a Culture Cop.  You do NOT have the right to have your environment sanitized to avoid offending your delicate Conservative sensibilities.  You DO have the right to grow up and get over yourself, because if you're offended, you need to get out more often.

AAAAnd in one of her earlier posts, she talks about doing what is right out of "Christian Love." Oh, yeah, I can feel the love, alright.

Oh, I agree, the article is disgusting. But this is one of those situations where I end up disagreeing with both "sides" of the argument...the transphobes are revolting, but the trans men taking up women's space...at the very least are not 100% in the right, and should probably consider others' needs very carefully before putting their own first.

This is the e-mail I sent to ms Freeze, if she has the ovaries to reply I will post that as well:

Thoughts on your  latest blog posting, which I found linked elsewhere:

-What someone wishes to do to their own body becomes your business how?
-How someone chooses to live their own life affects you how?
-Wishing to force your norms on others fits in with your ideals of Christian love (which you expressed on June 23rd) how?

Now, oddly enough, I agree if you are attending a university that caters to one gender...and find you are, in fact of a different gender, you really owe it to yourself to transfer to a coed campus anyway...for good personal reasons as well as social coherence...

But you called another group of people, other human beings, whom you believe to be beloved of God...IT???

The step from dehumanization of an entire class of people to wholesale slaughter of them's not a big one. As someone who's had the privilege of seeing Auschwitz, you ought to know it's the ordinary folks like you and I who can commit horror.

Have a good day.

I don't like the whole women's and men's spaces thing.  Gender segregation is bad, m'kay.

Quote from: rite_of_inversion on November 10, 2010, 08:53:00 PM
I'm inclined to think a student who decides to transition at a school that caters exclusively to the opposite gender really ought to look into transferring for their own benefit-if for no other reason than it doesn't help them very much to socialize exclusively with their birth gender!

Also finding myself agreeing with Cyril; it's kind of rude. And this is why I agree...
I'm choosing to be blunt here; sorry if it ticks y'all off, but I will probably continue to look vaguely female, so this is my social reality...
FtM's usually pass very well after hormone replacement...and are no longer going to suffer from quite as much economic discrimination as they would have in their cisgendered life.

Now, scholarships and colleges for women are meant to address systemic inequality...and if a transguy takes advantage of that...it's not exactly fair, is it?  Because they will be getting a male hiring advantage when they apply for a job.

I found the transphobic tone of the article really nauseating, though:

I'd like to send this Jamie Freeze a message: 

You do NOT have the right to treat other people like crap for living their own lives.  You do NOT have the right to enforce conformity to your norms through ostracism and violence.  You do NOT have the right to deputize yourself a Culture Cop.  You do NOT have the right to have your environment sanitized to avoid offending your delicate Conservative sensibilities.  You DO have the right to grow up and get over yourself, because if you're offended, you need to get out more often.

AAAAnd in one of her earlier posts, she talks about doing what is right out of "Christian Love." Oh, yeah, I can feel the love, alright.

She will respond to you. I sent her an email complaining about her 'It" reference. She is willfully ignorant about this being offensive and defended using it. She is really not that bright but she certainly thinks she is. I finally gave up arguing with her.

I sent Ms. Freeze an email as well. To which, I also received a response from her. It was a very pleasant reply. Characterizing her reply; I have to say that I do not think her ignorant. She vociferously proclaims not to be anti-gay/transgender. Mostly her intent was to point out the idea (which has mostly been agreed with here) that the school, being a private same-sex school should not be "required" to accommodate in cases such as this.

The use of the term "it" was a point of contention I raised as well and the dehumanizing factor it represents. I have to say, she does a poor job of defending the use of "it" as an illustrative example to bring awareness to those not familiar with the trans populations!

In total, I feel she may think she's stepped on a landmine due to the numbers of emails received in which she's been villain-ised. And not necessarily undeserved. However, I have to give her a benefit of doubt at this point in which I think some of the condemnation she received via email claiming her to be bigoted just a wee bit strong.

In reading the reply she sent to me, it appears there is hope that she will review her thoughts, alter her perspective and refrain from the use of derogatory terms referencing the trans community. One can only hope!



Dawn   

She hasn't replied to me yet...*drums fingers in impatience*

QuoteSadly, we have created a culture that demands individual rights over common sense. We have a culture that sacrifices what is right at the altar of being comfortable. Enough is enough.

Of course we have created a culture that demands individual rights over common sense, because there is no common sense.  We have sacrificed the right of the individual on the alter of short-sighted bigoted all control right wing morons.

The right of the individual would only be necessary when the society does not recognize that the individual has a right to live their life as they see fit.

QuoteThese colleges need to send a strong message to their students: You do NOT have the right to be comfortable. You do NOT have the right to live above criticism. You do NOT have the right to make others conform to or accept your deviant lifestyle. You do NOT have the right to challenge cultural and societal norms without facing resistance.

Well we are forced to accept the deviant life style of the right wing idiocy of this woman, and people like her.  Renaissance is one thing, but when the resistance become so radical that it costs live, then the cultural and societal norms needs to be changed.

This what happens when you let a religion run a country.  It is no wonder that some countries see America as the Great Satan.

Mr. Garduld,
The first 3 questions you posed are completely irrelevant to the column I wrote. However, I will answer them as a courtesy.

1. It doesn't...unless they want to force me to accept it or accommodate it.
2. It doesn't...unless they want to force me to accept it or accommodate it.
3. If my norms come straight from the manual on Christianity (the Bible), they fit beautifully with the ideals of Christian love. Do not equate love with blind acceptance.

You agreed with the entire point of my article: "Now, oddly enough, I agree if you are attending a university that caters to one gender...and find you are, in fact of a different gender, you really owe it to yourself to transfer to a coed campus anyway...for good personal reasons as well as social coherence..."

I used "it" to encapsulate the confusion not only of the identity crisis, but the confusion the general public has regarding transgendered/sexual issues. You read it for dehumunization. Not me. "It" is a gender neutral pronoun that can refer to people of unknown gender.

If you want to compare the Holocaust to asking transgendered people to exercise personal responsibility, that is your call...but the two don't compare.

Best, Jamie Freeze

Edited to add my reply:

Please note:

  The pronoun "It" is generally used to refer to inanimate objects...not people, and very few humans do not find it dehumanizing.
If you've taken any psych classes, you might have learned that devaluation of "the other" is a psychological necessity for doing things to them.
If you view a different group of people as humans, unles you're profoundly sociopathic you wouldn't be able to do the sorts of things the Nazis did to the victims of the Holocaust.

Therefore I found the term "it" extraordinarily chilling, in ways you seem not to consciously accept.
Admittedly, there is no gender-netral pronoun..but "it" is very insulting at best.

Dawn said
"In reading the reply she sent to me, it appears there is hope that she will review her thoughts, alter her perspective and refrain from the use of derogatory terms referencing the trans community. One can only hope!"

No, Dawn, I'm sorry, I think this young woman is far too arrogant and self-righteous, far too much of a spoiled princess.   I'm afraid if she ever changes at all (unlikely), it'll be life throwing her some major badness...something that really breaks and re-forms her at a core level.

I hadn't checked the particular e-mail account in 10 days that I used...Ms Freeze is still spouting claptrap at me.

I'm afraid this may be one of those meetings between two people who have a deep-seated, immature, primal desire to get the last word in.  ::)  I dunno if I'm going to keep posting her continued B.S. here...
But for your reading displeasure...And it'll be either angering or triggery, so don't read it if you aren't prepared...

Ms Freeze wrote:

You admit there is no gender-neutral pronoun. In its absence, what do you propose we use to refer to people of unknown or undetermined gender? If people choose to mutilate their genitals, ingest chemicals (hormones) that are designed to alter the body's chemistry, dress in the manner of the opposite sex, etc., how should they be referred to? If a man transitioned to a woman, "he" isn't appropriate, but "she" isn't accurate either. (>:( )Therefore, to succinctly and accurately describe the situation the person CHOSE to put themselves into, a gender neutral pronoun must be used. Currently, "it" is the only gender neutral pronoun accepted in the English lexicon. It may irritate a psychologist or sociologist, but it is the only pronoun we have. Again, if you actually read my column, you'd understand that dehumanization was not a part of my argument. After all, it's really hard to exercise personal responsibility if you aren't a person....


Best,
Jamie Freeze


On Fri, Nov 12, 2010 at 9:34 PM, Jamie Freeze <j.l.freeze@juno.com> wrote:

Mr. ______

QuoteYou admit there is no gender-neutral pronoun. In its absence, what do you propose we use to refer to people of unknown or undetermined gender?

The pronoun that seems to be slouching towards official use is third person singular "they."  It's ugly, true, but English does not seem to respond well to attempts to create words.

QuoteIf a man transitioned to a woman, "he" isn't appropriate, but "she" isn't accurate either.

That constitutes another bigoted statement.

You may have a law degree, and great pride, but I see no love in your heart for anyone who does not fit your narrow definition of what constitutes acceptable behavior, or any patience for things you have no understanding of, and that disturb you.

You arrogate the act of judgement to yourself-which is something your Bible tells you to leave to God: "Judge not, lest Ye be Judged, " I believe I remember correctly?
This is something I and my wife find terrifying about the current Christian Warrior set...quite frankly, I think extermination of the different is easily something the movement is capable of.
And as one who, though not inclined to tell others what to do, isn't inclined to line-towing...well, the future is looking a bit dim for yours truly. 

What camp or prison will you have me put in, Miss Freeze, when you hold the reins of power? Or can I successfully escape the tidy new America you propose? We'll see, I guess.

I don't suppose we could convince Ms Freeze to use gender neutral ze and hir  >:-)

Z

having been forced to go to a single sex school (guys only) which didnt become co-ed till my last 2 years there... I would say the experience was a painful nightmare & although I do have a few good memories I just want to forget everything that happened there ...

I cannot understand why someone would want to put themselves through that willingly unless there are some other ulterior motives or they are finding it difficult to let go of their former self...  :-\

Quote from: rite_of_inversion on November 22, 2010, 06:56:55 PM
I hadn't checked the particular e-mail account in 10 days that I used...Ms Freeze is still spouting claptrap at me.

I'm afraid this may be one of those meetings between two people who have a deep-seated, immature, primal desire to get the last word in.  ::)  I dunno if I'm going to keep posting her continued B.S. here...
But for your reading displeasure...And it'll be either angering or triggery, so don't read it if you aren't prepared...

Ms Freeze wrote:

You admit there is no gender-neutral pronoun. In its absence, what do you propose we use to refer to people of unknown or undetermined gender? If people choose to mutilate their genitals, ingest chemicals (hormones) that are designed to alter the body's chemistry, dress in the manner of the opposite sex, etc., how should they be referred to? If a man transitioned to a woman, "he" isn't appropriate, but "she" isn't accurate either. (>:( )Therefore, to succinctly and accurately describe the situation the person CHOSE to put themselves into, a gender neutral pronoun must be used. Currently, "it" is the only gender neutral pronoun accepted in the English lexicon. It may irritate a psychologist or sociologist, but it is the only pronoun we have. Again, if you actually read my column, you'd understand that dehumanization was not a part of my argument. After all, it's really hard to exercise personal responsibility if you aren't a person....


Best,
Jamie Freeze


On Fri, Nov 12, 2010 at 9:34 PM, Jamie Freeze <j.l.freeze@juno.com> wrote:

Mr. ______

The pronoun that seems to be slouching towards official use is third person singular "they."  It's ugly, true, but English does not seem to respond well to attempts to create words.
 

That constitutes another bigoted statement.

You may have a law degree, and great pride, but I see no love in your heart for anyone who does not fit your narrow definition of what constitutes acceptable behavior, or any patience for things you have no understanding of, and that disturb you.

You arrogate the act of judgement to yourself-which is something your Bible tells you to leave to God: "Judge not, lest Ye be Judged, " I believe I remember correctly?
This is something I and my wife find terrifying about the current Christian Warrior set...quite frankly, I think extermination of the different is easily something the movement is capable of.
And as one who, though not inclined to tell others what to do, isn't inclined to line-towing...well, the future is looking a bit dim for yours truly. 

What camp or prison will you have me put in, Miss Freeze, when you hold the reins of power? Or can I successfully escape the tidy new America you propose? We'll see, I guess.

"IT" is going to be a lawyer one day. Obviously "IT" doesn't have the ability to look at other facts. Only the one that supports IT'S bigotry.

She is really hard headed in a bad way. Maybe you should send her some quotes from her bible. Leviticus would be good. That is where she gets her anti-gay thoughts from.

"Leviticus, Chapter 20:9
For every one that curseth his father or his mother shall surely be put to death: he hath cursed his father or his mother; his blood shall be upon him.

Leviticus, Chapter 20:10
And the man that committeth adultery with another man's wife, even he that committeth adultery with his neighbor's wife, the adulterer and the adulteress shall surely be put to death.

Leviticus, Chapter 24:16
And he that blasphemeth the name of Jehovah, he shall surely be put to death; all the congregation shall certainly stone him: as well the sojourner, as the home-born, when he blasphemeth the name [of Jehovah], shall be put to death."

Jamie Freeze is toying with us all here to satisfy her own egocentric idiocy. She really is not interested in learning about the trans experience nor does she care who her writing offends. She is simply enthralled at the idea that she has created such attention to be brought upon herself at our expense.

If you're interested, here is a compilation of emails sent between her and I that I've compiled in a google document. To date she has not replied to the last email and I really do not expect she will.

Dawn

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1N-F9uEdKFB49DYCcaXWH_RXR3uHfDg8sfsgxlhlloEg/edit?authkey=CP3p7qQL&hl=en#

that B****! since she is not bothered by people calling her that I don't think I am going to be bothered calling her that either...

Honestly, how self-centered, egoistic and bigoted can one get? the greatest example of someone who had a similar mindset was someone we largely blame for starting World War 2 and sending millions to their deaths in cold blood... (we all know who that is .. ) and by encouraging people to refer to transgendered/transsexuals as it she is only making things worse!

Quote from: Vibes6 on November 23, 2010, 12:12:12 PM
that B****! since she is not bothered by people calling her that I don't think I am going to be bothered calling her that either...

Honestly, how self-centered, egoistic and bigoted can one get? the greatest example of someone who had a similar mindset was someone we largely blame for starting World War 2 and sending millions to their deaths in cold blood... (we all know who that is .. ) and by encouraging people to refer to transgendered/transsexuals as it she is only making things worse!

Yup!! I truly don't think she understands (or cares) how dangerous this type of mindset really is.


Dawn

Quote from: Dawn D. on November 23, 2010, 12:38:07 PM
Yup!! I truly don't think she understands (or cares) how dangerous this type of mindset really is.


Dawn

She doesn't care.

I sent her this a minute ago-then immediately blocked her! I HAZ LAST WORD!!!BWAHAHAHA!
(yes...definitely not being mature this evening...)
>:-) >:-) >:-)

Message:

I support your right to your inflammatory rhetoric, yes.  Have I denied that? I don't think so.

I support the right of the KKK to march, too.  But I find it very worrisome for both myself and my nonwhite, non-straight neighbors that our entire neighborhood was leafletted with recruitment flyers for a chapter of said organization last week.
(I do have to say-for people who advocate for English-only, they shouldn't mangle it so badly.)

We are worried for ourselves, as well as our nonwhite neighbors, and are generally keeping the guns handy...because while, yes, you can say anything and not mean violence by it, other people can, and will take your rhetoric as a justification for violence.
(The KKK may take lots of things as a justification for violence, meth will do that to you.)

Personal responsibility...yes, a person is responsible for what they do. And what they say, and post.

I, for one, would never use inflammatory rhetoric that dehumanized another person, not online, not anywhere, not even anonymously, because of the thought that I might inspire someone to act out in violence.  Not that I'm a total pacifist-obviously not.

It's because other people may take what I say more seriously than I do, because they aren't as peaceably-minded.  This sort of thing happens all the time.  I'm a very guilt-ridden person, and if I shoot someone even in the most justifiable circumstances, it's going to haunt me.  That won't stop me, but it makes me look for alternatives to violence.

As I was a very serious Christian at one point...I don't believe myself to be taking that Bible quote out of context at all.   It implied that Jahweh takes to Himself the right to judge all humans, and that therefore followers of Jesus were not to punish sinners, but instead to be living examples as best they can of God's love, and to allow God to do what it was that God wished to do to that person. As the saying goes, "Let go, let God?"

I draw analogies to when Gautama (Buddha) was officiating a huge argument over a point between some of his followers and another group: He told his students, "Just tell them they are wrong, and let it go."

And that is now what I am about to do to you. You are determined to not understand that what you send out to the world in terms of speech can and will have unforseen consequences.  You will not accept that your vitriol can cause indirect harm to others.
You can wreak harm and you may already have done so.

And you refuse to hear it, therefore I'm wasting my time on you, young lady.
------
(BTW, we really did have a KKK flyer in everybody's driveway, and we really are keeping the guns loaded...)

I feel the student in this story lacked foresight in joining the school (which is forgivable), but I also feel that the school could have let her/him continue to attend on a technicality. At worst his credits and tuition should have had the option of a full transfer.

Here is how the argument would go down:

"There is a man in our all-girl school!"

"He used to (or still does) have a vagina and ovaries."

"Oh."

I started a petition to hopefully urge her or RenewAmerica to change it. Please help

http://www.thepetitionsite.com/1/request-jamie-freeze-to-remove-offensive-dehumanizing-headline-in-her-story-titled-hesheit/ (http://www.thepetitionsite.com/1/request-jamie-freeze-to-remove-offensive-dehumanizing-headline-in-her-story-titled-hesheit/)

http://transgenderhate.blogspot.com/2010/12/call-for-action-jamie-freeze-and.html (http://transgenderhate.blogspot.com/2010/12/call-for-action-jamie-freeze-and.html)

Replying to the discussion of transgender men in women's spaces, I tend to feel the same way that kyril does. I don't understand why a guy would want to be in a gender-segregated space, even if I understand exactly how it happens. Not everyone knows that he or she or ze is trans from the age of 3.

I think it's important to think about why the women's space is being provided in the first place, though, because not all gender-segregated situations are identical. Sometimes it is about creating 'sisterhood.' Sometimes it is about providing opportunities that did not exist due to prior discrimination. Sometimes it is about providing opportunities due to existing discrimination. In the sports context, it is often about limitations of biological sex and not gender.

As a result, the search for a blanket rule makes no sense, independent of context. When women's colleges existed to counter-balance men's college or because women were discriminated in for admission, it might have been different than now.

Today, it seems pretty clear that there is a particular purpose and environment being promised by historical women's colleges and whether you agree with this mission or not, it really should not include transmen. Now, if they want to exclude transwomen, I'd have a problem with that.

On the flip side, I worry that FTMs who wish to stay in women's spaces or claim entitlement if they have not "medically" transitioned actually harm the FTM community by suggesting that we are not 'real' men or do not become men until X about of time on HRT or surgery.

Thanks for starting the petition Dana. I signed it. It will likely fall on already deaf ears. However, the more noise the better!


Dawn

Quote from: Dawn D. on December 30, 2010, 05:37:54 PM
Thanks for starting the petition Dana. I signed it. It will likely fall on already deaf ears. However, the more noise the better!


Dawn

Thanks for signing!

Jamie Freeze tweets about my petition.

http://transgenderhate.blogspot.com/2011/01/jamie-freeze-tweets.html?spref=tw (http://transgenderhate.blogspot.com/2011/01/jamie-freeze-tweets.html?spref=tw)

If you haven't signed it yet, please do!

I signed it.  Thank you for doing this.  This sort of person infuriates me!!! >:(

I think I know who the Aaron person is that posted that offensive comment in my blog. Not going to identify the person in public but I am pretty confident who it is.