Susan's Place Transgender Resources

Jasper: Face of Transsexual Womanhood 2009.

http://sophiaofthescythes.wordpress.com/2009/09/11/jasper-face-of-transsexual-womanhood-2009/ (http://sophiaofthescythes.wordpress.com/2009/09/11/jasper-face-of-transsexual-womanhood-2009/)
9/11/09

There is nothing like someone in the LGBTQ lobby doing the Cupid Stunt (If anyone remembers Kenny Everett) routine to really get transsexual women angry. Jasper Gregory has this belief that transsexual women should be "Out and proud" and "Accept they were born men" and he justifies this by saying that unless people "Think out of the box" and as transsexual women "Call themselves men in public" they are not going to gain "Visibility" his idea is that transsexual women should "Embrace their male femininity in a positive way".

1: According to Jasper, Transsexual women are really "Genderqueer males" expressing male femininity.

-------------

Jasper's wardrobe: This Is What A Transwoman looks Like
http://jasperswardrobe.wordpress.com/ (http://jasperswardrobe.wordpress.com/)

I am actually sickened by reading this confused persons Blog.

http://jasperswardrobe.wordpress.com/2009/09/10/this-is-what-a-transwoman-looks-like/ (http://jasperswardrobe.wordpress.com/2009/09/10/this-is-what-a-transwoman-looks-like/)
OMG he got his ears pierced and that makes him a transwoman? WTF.

I am not elitist but the only biology I share with him is that I am human that is it!
Please stop trying to say that you have the "trans condition" when you aren't trans-anything! Effeminate man, Gender variant yes, but trans? NO!
OMG then he goes on to say that transition is a choice! Again WTF!
http://vodpod.com/watch/2144312-transitioning-is-a-choice-radically-genderqueer-7?pod=jaspergregory (http://vodpod.com/watch/2144312-transitioning-is-a-choice-radically-genderqueer-7?pod=jaspergregory)

I am so sickened, so sickened now!

Eh everyone has theyre own opinion. We all know that hes an idiot.

Quote from: Matilda on September 12, 2009, 11:32:20 AM
The mindset of a Tee-Gee person at its finest.  Kuddos to you, Jasper!

What do you mean by that?

There are GG women who suffer from the severe heartbreak of hirsuteness.  Many go through the painful process of electrolysis to overcome the terrible mistake that nature has bestowed on them.

Others proudly display their faces and say that those who give in to the vanity of facial clearing are superficial.

So it is superficial to be made fun of in school because of a condition that you have no control over.

It is superficial to endure heartbreak after heartbreak because no man wants to date or be seen with a "bearded lady".

It is superficial to not want to walk down the street and be taunted by epithets that they should go back to the carnival.

To those that can endure that, and worse, my congratulations to you, but you are few and far between.

Just like this guy (yes I said GUY).  He lives in SF!  Not to say that he isn't in danger, but his chances of getting offed from some beer gut redneck homophobe are much less than, say, Tallahassee.

Also he claims (from his position of relative safety) that my feelings, my beliefs, my turmoil that I had to endure is superficial, yet his take on the world is more accurate.

You go "girl"!

It's the first time my computer wanted a rape shower and it wasn't from reading something from Peter LaBarbera!

-Sandy

I'm kinda disheartened by this thread. You don't have to be disagreeable, to disagree.

Quote from: Laura91 on September 12, 2009, 01:57:03 PM
With all due respect to you, I can't agree with that statement.

And that's your right. But I'm not about to try and dictate how another person self identifies. Where's the line here, and someone who says transwomen aren't women?

Quote from: Matilda on September 12, 2009, 11:57:19 AM
Read the blog commets (including Sophia's).  You will find your answers there.


(https://www.susans.org/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi572.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fss161%2Fmatilda23%2F061.gif&hash=8f2301193b0dc73bb2e3c64f938f2048ea1a0591)

I checked 3 pages of those posts and found only one tangentially related comment by a 'sophia'.  My reason for asking is that the way you use it, to me it seems to have a disparaging tone.

Quote from: Matilda on September 12, 2009, 03:04:49 PM
Let me get this straight.  You read Jasper's comments, possibly watched his (yes I said HIS) videos too, and you find my comment "disparaging".  Ha! Way to go, Ketsy!  ::)


(https://www.susans.org/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi572.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fss161%2Fmatilda23%2F061.gif&hash=8f2301193b0dc73bb2e3c64f938f2048ea1a0591)

From what I saw, he refers to himself as both male and woman so i dont care what pronoun you use.  And I wasn't SURE if you were or were not being disparaging, which is why I asked you, only you then redirected me to something else so I stated my opinion directly,

Second, IF I was right (which I don't state with certainty), then your comments are no better than his as they both attack a wide group of people, most of whom you (and/or he) don't even know.

But I might be wrong, so again I ask, what did you mean by the line I quoted?

Quote from: Matilda on September 12, 2009, 03:21:48 PM
He (Jasper) is a woman-hater, period. 


(https://www.susans.org/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi572.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fss161%2Fmatilda23%2F061.gif&hash=8f2301193b0dc73bb2e3c64f938f2048ea1a0591)

So you saying:

QuoteThe mindset of a Tee-Gee person at its finest.  Kuddos to you, Jasper!
 
...

You're indeed the archetype of a transwoman/Tee-Gee woman, Jasper.  Yes, you are!

Equates to Jasper being a woman hater?  The only conclusion I can draw from that is that 'transwomen' and 'Tee-Gee' women are also women haters?

If you think Jasper is being an ass then just say that.  Couching your insults behind bold and italics only serves to make you seem self-congratulatory.

Sarcasm doesn't come across well in letters on a screen.

:/ on topic again.

That guy needs therapy. >.<

For heaven's sake, people.

First of all, so you know where I'm coming from, let me state my opinion about gender variance (in the broadest sense, as in any behavior that varies from the gender assigned at birth):

Being trans is a condition more like cancer than sickle cell anemia, in that there's not just one way that it can happen, there are different levels of severity, that there is no way to make a uniform cutoff that says this is malignant and that's benign, and it affects everyone to some extent, even though in many people it is to such a small extent that it doesn't matter. I don't think that transsexualism is a totally different condition, just a much, much more severe case, to the point that the implications are very different.

Maybe I'm wrong, but there just isn't any research that has the ability to differentiate between the transsexualism-as-disctinct or the trans-spectrum theories. My opinion is a hunch based on how complicated the human brain is and the diversity of experience I observe in the world. I haven't read anything that seemed like anything stronger than a hunch, the various brain-sex studies included.

Given that, both sides of this debate (i.e. the WBT versus the Tee-Gees, so snidely dismissed as NOKD, hating on transsexual women who have a firm gender identity and choose stealth -- how charming on both sides) need to get a grip and realize that you're not all that special and other people might be simmilar to you, even if they are not the same. Jasper's offensive opinions (as presented in that critical blog post, I'd surely admit they are offensive) only prove that there are offensive jerks among those who describe themselves as "TG." Kinda like there are offensive jerks among the "spectrum" people, the "WBT's," the "AG/HTS," and every other constituency.

Jasper is a jerk, at least as portrayed in the blog, but hardly representative of the many self-identified TG or GQ folk I have met in his dismissal of those who transition as fully as possible.






edit -- It might seem I'm insinuating that Jasper's views were misrepresented; that's not my intent. I just didn't feel like watching those YouTube videos on my lousy slow collection, so I'm just trying to make clear what i'm basing my opinion on; i.e., the blog post.

I read some of the stuff in his blog and I didn't find anything particularly jerkish, but I admit I didn't read all of it.  What I saw was occasionally interesting and most of the time wrong (IMO).

What I found interesting: the idea of 2 sort of categories for sex, somatic and behavioral, which results in 3 for sex/gender:

somatic sex
behavioral sex
gender

The first two of which he claims are biological though not necessarily the same.  His idea, and where I think he goes wrong, is that transexuals fit as male somatic sex, female behavioral sex, female gender.  He then categorizes himself into that group (at least in the specific posts I was reading).  The issue is that he says to embrace the male body + female behavior as transsexual/transwoman which justifiably drives a lot of us crazy since for male bodies are the thing we hate most!  But here's where Jasper went wrong: embracing ones own male body is a *male* behavior -- whether by sex or gender is irrelevant.  Jasper does say there can be middle grounds in all those categories so in my opinion he more fits as male sex, male/female behavioral sex, male/female social gender, which means that 99% of what he says is irrelevant for people who consider themselves women by gender/behavioral sex and unfortunately born with XY genes (or a close approximation to that idea).

Thinking about it more, 'behavioral sex' just seems like a different word for brain sex, so I guess what we're left with is the wacky idea of embracing a male body despite identifying as a woman so whatever, I don't know.

Personally I prefer to think of male/female/man/woman/boy/girl/vanilla/chocolate/strawberry as descriptive words rather than anything that speaks to the "essence" of something or someone, but that's just me.

The problem is the argument of Identity.

Jasper identifies as a woman.  Expressly, as a Transwoman, in very specific terms.

Jasper knows about those blogs because they are where he gets a great deal of his information -- TS-SI is one of his favorite locales.

I have watched all those videos and read all the posts, all the way back to his first few where he was more concerned about clothing and how it sexually charged him.  The stuff about how women seek to be women because they want to be an object of desire is not something many will want to read.

Anyone can identify as anything.  Nothing wrong with it.  But arguing on the basis of identity, well, what about those people who identify as dogs?

No, not in the same stupid sense many of us have heard, I mean literally.  Think Furries.

If you are snickering or giggling or getting a bad feeling when I say that, not that that is the effect of identity politics and arguments.

They do not do anyone any good, and actually serve to obscure not only the actual meaning of the social nature of Gender (which is NOT an issue or question of identity), but the ability to argue around it.

Jasper can be described -- accurately -- as a man.  Descriptively, he doesn't even fit the social understanding of what transgender is -- outside of his small circle, no one in the general public is actually going to buy his spiel, because he doesn't even appear to be trying to transition (and, in fact, a part of his claimed identity is that he is non transitioning).

I am not a "friendly" to the WBT/HBA/TS crowd, but in this case, their arguments are closer to the truth as Jasper speaks it, than to the reality of the situation.

Jasper's self defense post is dismissive, passive aggressive, and disjointed -- he is reacting emotionally to reading there (and here, as he remarks on this thread's presence).

If identity wins out, and the deconstruction of gender is a valid goal, then he is a face of those who are not transsexual, but otherwise transgender.

His claim, though, goes beyond himself, and is asserted over others.

He is appropriative, sexist, cisprivileged, and very annoying.

He's welcome to his identity.

But that doesn't mean I can't describe him as otherwise.

What pisses me off is that he suggests he knows what's the best course of action for "all" transsexuals.
He doesn't say "here's what I choose to do, it's right for me", he says "it would be better if everyone did it my way".

Quote from: Miniar on September 13, 2009, 07:10:17 AM
What pisses me off is that he suggests he knows what's the best course of action for "all" transsexuals.
He doesn't say "here's what I choose to do, it's right for me", he says "it would be better if everyone did it my way".

That is what lit me up.  He presumes to know my situation better than I do and that I was deluding myself by saying I am a woman.

He can do anything he bloody well wants, I don't deny him his own identification.  But when he tries to re-identify *me* we're going to have issues.

-Sandy

Quote from: dyssonance on September 13, 2009, 03:12:22 AM
The problem is the argument of Identity.

Jasper identifies as a woman.  Expressly, as a Transwoman, in very specific terms.

Well, gender is a social construct, and in that it means there's a societal aspect to gender. In terms of defining what a transgender woman is, you have to look at how each gender is socially constructed, or how we all see gender. When I look at pictures of Jasper, I see someone, from my view, that is gender fluid or genderqueer.   

Quote from: dyssonance on September 13, 2009, 03:12:22 AMJasper knows about those blogs because they are where he gets a great deal of his information -- TS-SI is one of his favorite locales.

I have watched all those videos and read all the posts, all the way back to his first few where he was more concerned about clothing and how it sexually charged him.  The stuff about how women seek to be women because they want to be an object of desire is not something many will want to read.

I'm not sure why anyone would not want to talk about it, since it has a name:  ->-bleeped-<- (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/%20-%3E-bleeped-%3C-). I do think there are such persons, I just think I am not one of them.

Quote from: dyssonance on September 13, 2009, 03:12:22 AMAnyone can identify as anything.  Nothing wrong with it.  But arguing on the basis of identity, well, what about those people who identify as dogs?

No, not in the same stupid sense many of us have heard, I mean literally.  Think Furries.

If you are snickering or giggling or getting a bad feeling when I say that, not that that is the effect of identity politics and arguments.

They do not do anyone any good, and actually serve to obscure not only the actual meaning of the social nature of Gender (which is NOT an issue or question of identity), but the ability to argue around it.

Well, I might consider him a dog, if he was socially ACCEPTED or VIEWED as a dog. Just because he identifies as one doesn't mean that the world thinks of him as one.

Quote from: dyssonance on September 13, 2009, 03:12:22 AMJasper can be described -- accurately -- as a man.  Descriptively, he doesn't even fit the social understanding of what transgender is -- outside of his small circle, no one in the general public is actually going to buy his spiel, because he doesn't even appear to be trying to transition (and, in fact, a part of his claimed identity is that he is non transitioning).

Exactly!

Quote from: dyssonance on September 13, 2009, 03:12:22 AMIf identity wins out, and the deconstruction of gender is a valid goal, then he is a face of those who are not transsexual, but otherwise transgender.

Except that it makes no sense to say that you are gendering yourself if you are seeking to destroy gender.

What bothers me in this post are things said like:

Quote from: Laura91 on September 12, 2009, 12:05:24 PM
It's safe to say that Jasper is a braindead fool.

or

Quote from: Kyle :3 on September 12, 2009, 11:20:46 AM
Eh everyone has theyre own opinion. We all know that hes an idiot.

It's not far from "he's not really a woman" or "that's a man." There's no data or information to parse, it's just a verbal assault. It's like saying "we all know he beats his wife". I wish more people would bring their big girl and boy panties/underwear and debate issues and not engage in the politics of personal destruction.

Its funny, I've seen this person about.  Can't miss him.  First of all old Jasper is almost always in too-short shorts in a city where half the people don't even own shorts cause you can't wear them that much.  Also, Jasper tends to look like a rainbow threw up on him a little, and looking at his pictures, he tends to like that look.  I guess that's why I'm not in any of them, my idea of adding color is to put a bit of gray on to accent the black - still...

What is interesting is Jasper's assertion - rare in the community that is being depicted (that Alt. deal where Burning Man crosses with the Radical Faries and the Steampunk people and the hipsters) is that we are all like that.  Very few in that crowd think or believe it - much more the opposite, that they are on a higher evolutionary plain of radical self expression and its decidedly not for everyone, and that most people should not do it.

But perhaps within that cocoon, and Jasper is in that pretty deep, it begins to look like everyone can, and perhaps should live that life.

Far from being right or wrong, most of this just proves that San Francisco is 49 square miles surrounded by reality.

What is kinda funny to me is how people without much of a life, can criticize old Jasper, who if nothing else, is out and about. Sure, Jasper might well be playing the fool, but at least there is an awareness there that that is what is going down.

I am a Right Wing Fundamentalist Apparently.

http://sophiaofthescythes.wordpress.com/2009/09/13/i-am-a-right-wing-fundamentalist-apparently/ (http://sophiaofthescythes.wordpress.com/2009/09/13/i-am-a-right-wing-fundamentalist-apparently/)
by sophiaofthescythes
9/13/09

Jasper Gregory, like one or two others, has decided that I am a right wing fundamentalist extremist. No doubt I am sitting here, listening to Wagner while planning the next Jasp-hunt,
I bet Jasper is thinking he is going to find a burning cross on his doorstep. The number of times I have been mis-characterized that way I must have lost count of. But they do seem determined to make that image stick for some reason, yep been there before, the truth is however very different.

What I did was sit down and write a critique of Jasper Gregory's views. and because I have come to the conclusion that Jasper is a misogynist, his response is:

"That has to be that funniest thing I have read. Hate has clearly adled Sophia's brain. Whatever"

Quote from: Natasha on September 13, 2009, 09:22:15 AM
I am a Right Wing Fundamentalist Apparently.

I disagree with his response, but I'm not sure how he's wrong in his assertion of you.

Forgive me if I am incorrect, but you if I remember correctly, you do believe that:

1. vagina=woman=female. Essentialism is most certainly a "right wing fundamentalist" strong hold. I'm not aware of any "left of center" people that hold to this belief.

2. Given your post op status, you are not trans-anything. Again, this leads to penis=man, vagina=woman, essentialism.

Now, to me "right wing fundamentalist" isn't a smear, it's the location of your political beliefs on a spectrum. You do consider yourself part of the HBS, WBT, or "classic transsexual" crowd, don't you? If not, I apologize. But if you were plotting out gender politics (http://sophiaofthescythes.wordpress.com/2009/08/31/when-gender-politics-goes-really-bad/), you're certainly not a liberal/progressive/left wing/, are you?

Quote from: mzmartipants on September 13, 2009, 10:08:03 AM
I disagree with his response, but I'm not sure how he's wrong in his assertion of you.

Forgive me if I am incorrect, but you if I remember correctly, you do believe that:

1. vagina=woman=female. Essentialism is most certainly a "right wing fundamentalist" strong hold. I'm not aware of any "left of center" people that hold to this belief.

2. Given your post op status, you are not trans-anything. Again, this leads to penis=man, vagina=woman, essentialism.

Now, to me "right wing fundamentalist" isn't a smear, it's the location of your political beliefs on a spectrum. You do consider yourself part of the HBS, WBT, or "classic transsexual" crowd, don't you? If not, I apologize. But if you were plotting out gender politics (http://sophiaofthescythes.wordpress.com/2009/08/31/when-gender-politics-goes-really-bad/), you're certainly not a liberal/progressive/left wing/, are you?

i think you are confusing me with sophia.  i'm not her.

"I am a Right Wing Fundamentalist Apparently." is the title of sophia's latest blog entry.

but to answer your question:

Quote from: mzmartipants on September 13, 2009, 10:08:03 AM
You do consider yourself part of the HBS, WBT, or "classic transsexual" crowd, don't you?

yes i do.

If you google his name, you can get to his flicker site.  Once there you'll find that at most of the places he is at, he is one of the least flamboyant persons there.  And those events are not a once a year deal in the Bay Area, they are constant, ongoing and even more lively then the pictures would suggest. Most of those people would define themselves, as I'm sure he does, as a 'cultural radical' if they were into such definitions (and I assure you they are not) and if they were not having such a good time being out and just being themselves.  That he writes in some sort of royal we is more a product of his education than his beliefs I think, all he is trying to say is, like Frank Zappa:
Do you know what you are?
You are what you is
You is what you am
(A cow don't make ham . . . )
You ain't what you're not
So see what you got
You are what you is
An' that's all it 'tis


And that's where the radical self expression comes from.  That idea that you should be what you are, and be happy and creative and expressive in that, and that ought to be good enough.

Contrast This piece of Jasper's writing:

QuoteThis is a serious critique of the biological wing of transfeminism from a standpoint I call constructionist transfeminism. The biological wing says that that transgender is a birth defect. This thinking is totally incompatible with a pro-genderqueer positions. The biological wing is deeply invested in the gender binary and often views attacks on the gender binary as personal attacks. This is why I suggest a theoretical split between the biological and constructionist wings of transfeminism. As genderqueers we need to be able to theorize and challenge gender without the self censorship required by our investment in transgender politics.

Against these questions:

QuoteDo I need to modify my body in order to be a "real" woman? Can body modification make you a "real" woman, or is body modification a social act which attempts to end the dissonance between behavioral sex ?

And this observation:

Quote6) Lesbian sex – I was fortunate to meet A. She is an ex-dyke and is exploring a straight identity. Together, we discovered a way of 'doing' sex which looks like lesbian sex, but with a penis involved. I learned to relate to my own body as a 'non-male' body. We discovered that my erogenous body had been severely limited by internalization of 'male' identity. If A. treated my 'male' body as a 'female' body it ceased to be either a 'male' body or a 'female' body. I feel like the erogenaity of the heterosexual 'male' body is repressed. The 'male' learns to disassociate from his sensuality and displace it into ejaculation.

And then include this one:

QuoteYou see, before I started using the frame of transgender to talk about my travels, I was motivated by 'being the object of desire', being sexy. I have always wanted to feel sexy and desired and simultaneously felt shame about this. I experienced it as a taboo. It conflicted with my idea of the manly gender. Lesbian discourse use the term 'adore.' One partner adores the other. In Butch/Femme the butch adores the femme, sometimes exclusively. In straight relationships I feel like it was my role to adore, to be turned on, to pursue to kiss and stroke. The adorer is active and the adored is passive. Somehow the configuration of my identity did not allow me to function as the 'object of desire.' In my sexual interactions with (ex-)lesbians this position was negotiated, and I have let myself be adored through 'lesbian sex.' This has changed how I relate to my own body and to my lover. My fashion experiments have also focused on integrating the 'sexiness' which I as male had forbidden myself. Slutty, trampy and sexy. These are all terms for women who dress in a way to 'reflect' (masculine) desire.

Those are going back n time to earlier this year, the last one being shortly after he read Butler.

What it paints is an interesting picture from a social psychology viewpoint, but in terms of the practical, it shows that he's still learning stuff.

About himself, about what it means to be trans, about gender, about sex identity, and more.

He's completely new at this.

He does not know what he is, and does not have the language tools to express it.

IT helps to know that his earliest understanding came from Michael Valentine, as well.

He expressed this at one point:

QuoteI do not recognize any claims to the truth of a gender. All genders are constructed. From this standpoint I see hormones and SRS as body modifications. That is great. Tattoos piercings and hormones. You have control over your own body. But I consider someone who explores a gender outside the binary to have an equally 'true' gender as someone who uses medical technology to take on a 'classical' gender.

Which does indeed dramatically illustrate how little he understands transsexual narratives, and how he is only now starting to see the difference that does exist between transsexuals and transgender folks.

At the end of December last year he expressed things this way:

Gender transition is a confusing process for me. I have long periods of movement towards femme. Then suddenly I find myself in a period of retrenchment. I am at war with myself. I have been going to parties in femme or high femme and I have felt completely accepted, more accepted than I ever felt in butch. I feel euphoria. Then the next morning I wake up and face the prospect of going out in the world and I get deeply depressed.

SO when looking at him as he moves through the various stages of his life, be aware that he really and truly doesn't know what he's talking about.

He is learning, and the best thing for him, ultimately, is to be helped to learn it.

Tall order, absolutely -- he's defensive, he's dangerously partially informed (for example, he has not existentilist underpinnings and his understanding of gender is highly faulty), and he has a lot of annoying quirks.

Lastly, remember that he is a deconstructionist right now. He wants to tear down and erase the basic constructions of what is male and female, man and woman.

From a binary transsexuals perspective, that's essentially attacking a huge part of their personal identity as false, and create an erasure of the basic idea that we know what we are.

As a binary individual myself -- known for opposition to the HBS crowd, and for being a huge annoyance to the "TG" crowd they so love to hate on -- I find his ideas to be quite wrongheaded and highly offensive.

But I do that from having taken the time to get a feel for his world view.

One of the outcomes of the strict interpretation of Gender Expression laws is that Jasper can, if he so chooses, enforce his role as woman, and walk into a women's restroom.

Which is exactly what the opponents are waiting to see, exactly what they are looking for, and all they need to keep people from being willing to pass it.

Most ciswomen who encounter him are not going to see him as a woman.  And since even at the best, the sum total of everyone that could possibly be T isn't more than 12 million in a country of 300+ million, for good or bad, he will not be what he claims.

And that is the main issue that is being talked around.

He is, in short, a political liability, and in a population as small and socially ostracized as this one, each one has a magnified degree of importance.

As I am bowing out of all this trans nonsense, along comes Jasper as a living example of what I have been saying for more than a decade.

Ms. Jasper is the one in the ladies room next to your daughter, mother, sister.
Ms. Jasper is now adding claims to being intersexed like an infamous TG new media reporter
Ms. Jasper takes the gender deconstructist viewpoint all the way to it's illogical end, more than I ever dared to do.
Ms. Jasper is the face of Butlerian gender deconstruction, the "anatomy don't mean poop" school of thought, the whole I'm a woman because I say I am mysogyny.

And kudos to Marti who is the only opponent I've had over the years honest enough to acknowledge Jasper and who understands that those who mis-gender Jasper are total hypocrites if they embrace the gender deconstruction world view.  For years I've been held to the standard of using female pronouns for those I do not see as remotely female or who even identify as female except on weekend outings.......sauce for the goose anyone?

Jasper Gregory

http://womenborntranssexual.com/2009/09/14/jasper-gregory/ (http://womenborntranssexual.com/2009/09/14/jasper-gregory/)
by Suzan
9/14/09

There is a misogynistic dick trying to make a name for hmself by running around claiming to be a lesbian.  Of course he also claims to be "transgender" without showing any signs of living 24/7/365 as a member of the sex not commonly associated with his current genitals.  Perhaps he is female bodied in which case he has the misogynistic pig part of maleness down perfectly.

Marti, my apologies for not responding earlier

Quote from: mzmartipants on September 13, 2009, 07:30:27 AM
Well, gender is a social construct, and in that it means there's a societal aspect to gender.

And the nature of gender as a social construct is that its predicated not on how we see ourselve, but on how others see us.

In other words, since gender is a social construct, the people who determine our gender are everyone else -- not us.

THis is reversed by the politics of Identity -- "I am such and such, how dare you question me on what i know to be true".

THat's Identity, not actually gender.

THis is one of the reaosn why when having the discussion, one should use gender not as a short hand for the concepts in encompasses, but the full terminology:

Gender role, Gender Expression, etc.  Each aspect is distinct, and all of of them -- including Gender Identity -- deal in how the greater society views the subject of consideration.

Quote from: mzmartipants on September 13, 2009, 07:30:27 AMIn terms of defining what a transgender woman is, you have to look at how each gender is socially constructed, or how we all see gender.

Since transgender is primarily a term of political discourse when involved in the Trans Community as a whole, that definition is inherently going to involve some aspect of Identity.

Its much easier to describe him as transgender -- except then one is suggestng he apperas, to the general population, as if he is somehow ttansitioning, simnce that's how the general public comes to understand it.

In short, the moment you remove the political Identity from him, he becomes just a man who likes to wear clothes that he personally perceives as feminine looking.

Quote from: mzmartipants on September 13, 2009, 07:30:27 AMWhen I look at pictures of Jasper, I see someone, from my view, that is gender fluid or genderqueer.

I don't -- but my own expereince in this area is admittedly lacking.

Quote from: mzmartipants on September 13, 2009, 07:30:27 AMI'm not sure why anyone would not want to talk about it, since it has a name:  ->-bleeped-<- (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/%20-%3E-bleeped-%3C-). I do think there are such persons, I just think I am not one of them.

WHile I agee there are such persons, since such is not only not a diagnostic position one can take at this time, and it's fundamentally flawed even as a hypothesis (outside ofthe whole BS argument going on around it) I'm unwilling to us the term at this time as a descriptive, since it is almost as political a position as transgender is.

That is, it lacks any significant social strength or authority, and, therefore is without much practical value except as an Identity, and Identity can only be claimed, not ascribed.

Quote from: mzmartipants on September 13, 2009, 07:30:27 AMWell, I might consider him a dog, if he was socially ACCEPTED or VIEWED as a dog. Just because he identifies as one doesn't mean that the world thinks of him as one.

Which is the nature of the conflict between Identity and description.

Indeed, its exactly what we are running into here, and if those of us who are politically motivated to make changes such as ENDA at national and local don't find a way around this argument of identity, the we will, indeed, have trouble acheving the goals -- at the very least on the local level if he is spread out or remains uneducated.

Quote from: mzmartipants on September 13, 2009, 07:30:27 AMExactly!

So now that we know that, what's the next step?

Quote from: mzmartipants on September 13, 2009, 07:30:27 AMExcept that it makes no sense to say that you are gendering yourself if you are seeking to destroy gender.

Save that he isn't gendering himself.  Gender is not an identity, it is a description.

He is claiming an identity, and asserting a gender on the basis of that claim.  SInce he's not meeting the social expectations of that  description, he will continue to have problems with this.

IT is here that his flaws leap out the most, and where most of his education needs to focus and his greatest offenses are found.

Quote from: mzmartipants on September 13, 2009, 07:30:27 AMWhat bothers me in this post are things said like:
or
It's not far from "he's not really a woman" or "that's a man." There's no data or information to parse, it's just a verbal assault. It's like saying "we all know he beats his wife". I wish more people would bring their big girl and boy panties/underwear and debate issues and not engage in the politics of personal destruction.

The reason for htat is that too many people are worried about infringing on someone's identity.

Identity extends to the edges of one's skin. The only person who can infringe on one's identity is one's self.

If people take offense, well they are getting butthurt because something the other person has said makes them question some aspect of their ownsense pof identity -- which, ultimately, is their prblem, not the other person's.

And the only way to avoid the hurt feelings and bickering and such is to step away from identity and shift into description.

Havng been doing this now for about a six weeks, I can say one thing that sums up the experience:

Good luck.

Tragically, the issue becomes an echo chamber.  Thus magnifying what he says, the people he is saying it to, and the audience in general to levels that otherwise would not exist.

The trouble with using a strawman to make arguments is that you inflate their surreal ideas (often wrong) into a very real thing.

Really, how many people would have read his blog?  2?  If that?  Now he has hits on top of hits, because people are talking about it.  What's it that Oscar Wilde said?  The only thing worse than being talked about is not being talked about?

I would have (and in fact have, as I've seen him out and about) written him off as yet another eurotrash-pseudo-intellectual playing out his fantasy in San Francisco. He'll get bored and go away.  They all do. But in arguing with him you give him the very legitimacy he so desperately seeks.  He wants to be the center of attention (like the shorts, people here don't wear them, much less that short) and you're giving him exactly what he craves.

I fail to see the good in that.

Quote from: tekla on September 15, 2009, 11:14:20 AM
Tragically, the issue becomes an echo chamber.  Thus magnifying what he says, the people he is saying it to, and the audience in general to levels that otherwise would not exist.

The trouble with using a strawman to make arguments is that you inflate their surreal ideas (often wrong) into a very real thing.

Really, how many people would have read his blog?  2?  If that?  Now he has hits on top of hits, because people are talking about it.  What's it that Oscar Wilde said?  The only thing worse than being talked about is not being talked about?

I would have (and in fact have, as I've seen him out and about) written him off as yet another eurotrash-pseudo-intellectual playing out his fantasy in San Francisco. He'll get bored and go away.  They all do. But in arguing with him you give him the very legitimacy he so desperately seeks.  He wants to be the center of attention (like the shorts, people here don't wear them, much less that short) and you're giving him exactly what he craves.

I fail to see the good in that.

It sure as hell generated a lot of churn here, that's for sure!

-Sandy

Sure, it's like throwing chum to the sharks, particularly when the cardinal point of his argument is that of most of the people disagreeing with him.  I always find that cute.

But lets go way back to 1988.  A fairly young director, who had had some success decided to make a very personal movie.  He could afford it, after all Mean Streets, Taxi Driver, Raging Bull, The Last Waltz and the boffo box office hit, The Color of Money all had done well, why not do something personal?

So this young director took a book by Nikos Kazantzakis and made a 164 minute film about what Jesus was thinking about when he was on the cross.  The movie had no fights, no car chases, no space toys, no wiseguys, no major stars, no nuttin.  And 164 minutes is a very long film.  It's distributor was having trouble getting it booked into Art Houses - showing it in First Run Houses was out of the question.  It had zero box office potential.

Then, then the Xians got their knickers in a twist over it.  First it was noted that the book that was the basis for the movie was placed on the Roman Catholic Church's highly popular and very interesting, Index of Prohibited Books (Index Librorum Prohibitorum for you Latin scholars) alongside Kepler's New Astronomy, and Kepler's World Harmony, along with writers like Jean Paul Sartre, Voltaire, Jean-Jacques Rousseau, David Hume, Rene Descartes, Francis Bacon, John Milton, John Locke, Galileo Galilei, and Blaise Pascal.  Talk about pallin' around with terrorists!

Then it was denounced as heresy, blasphemy, anti-Christian and just about everything else by so many Xian leaders that eventually Time, Newsweek and other popular publications began to take note and wrote about it.

The end result was that a movie that they were having trouble booking at off-beat theaters was running at all the major ones, and receiving major acclaim. 

They should have learned to STFU, and left it at that, I'm sure outside of some movie buffs, no one would have noticed it at all.

Hmm... I've never heard of this guy until now (hence Tekla's argument coming to pass).  I only watched the video about "this is what a transwoman looks like".  Based on that alone, he and I have a lot in common in the way we view ourselves and our gender expression.  However I haven't gotten to read some of his more racy stuff yet.

I feel that I am transgendered - that transition would have worked for me in the end, but I, like him apparently, am experimenting with the idea of maintaining my male identity.  But unlike before transition when I was living as a male, I'm more open and honest about myself with myself and with others.  I don't shy from feminine desires, and make openly non-socially-male-appropriate statements.  In that way I am accepted more in the social role I desire even if my gender doesn't automatically lend itself to that role.  My friend's most common response to people who don't know me who are like "what is with this guy" is, "Oh that's just, Inter, he's really a girl."  That works for me.

Sure the idea of transition is super appealing still, but I think if this path works for me, it will result in a lot less stress and heartache.  I wonder if Jasper has found the same thing but is making ungainly assumptions...  I'll have to read more.

That Jasper thinks what he wants, but frankly I don't feel I'm a "male genderqueer", I don't feel like a male at all, so my opinion is that he is plain wrong.
Now he says what he wants on his own blog, whatever.

OMG little Miss Jasper is now rambling about divine predestination and the WBT crowd on his latest vlog.

"So, this is my message to every Transwoman who I have offended

If you recognize my authenticity I will recognize yours!

If you deny my authenticity I will deny yours!"

Seems you and Jasper have discovered a divergent path,
from the "norm", where you have found an decidedly different way
to deal with your gender variance.

If that was meant as some sort of 'if I knew how to write that would be an insult' insult to interalia, I just gots to tell you that I have far more in common with her point of view, than in yours.  Like her, I have struggled with it all (well from about six years old on) my life, and never found a perfect answer. I've gone far beyond where you are now - and I know that interalia has also, only to come back and seek some sort of other path, some sort of middle path - just some other damn way.

Your are only discovering this and letting it go rather late in life - imagine if you will, what's its like being pretty much out about this since 16, and 16 being almost 40 years ago.

There are less than zero shortages of ways to go through this, and, at that, they change.

When y'all get to the next level, or perhaps the level beyond that - you might begin to understand that where people are, is just where they are.  They might not even be there for long.  So don't sweat it.

Everyone is entitled to their opinions.  Period.

Ultimatums to who?  Who exactly - which morons, other than you? - were listening to this when he said it in the first place?  I had seen this guy, and still remained pleasantly ignorant about his views until someone posted them here.

I KNEW HIM, and didn't know this till someone posted it here.  Wise move.

Yay! My dial up connection is actually working for me to be able to post again.

I apologize if my previous statement kicked up some (more) dust.

I have read more of what Jasper has written.  I don't know a lot about a "transgendered movement" as opposed to a "transsexual movement" (something that seems to become a topic of his blogs) although I'm certainly familiar with the title and identity wars about who is and isn't real, etc.  I realize also it isn't a simple issue.

All said I think he has some observations that match my experience as well, but I don't think I go quite to the degree to believe that those who are actually attempting to integrate wholly with society (call it stealth or whatever) are doing us any harm.  They might not be doing us any good, but I don't think they are hurting us as (I think) he seems to.

One of my very very best friends is 100% stealth (except me and her family).  We were partners in crime 10 years ago transitioning together.  I love her dearly.  I see her incredibly happy and we often talk and make life comparisons with one another.  She didn't understand my experiment when I undertook it all that time ago, but she did respect it - as she does to this day.  She was worried about my happiness, but she has come to realize that this works for me even if I could have continued the path she walked.

I cannot believe my friend, by her wanting to conform to our culture's rigid gender constructs, is hurting me or Jasper.  Perhaps she is in a way yet unseen by me, but I don't see it now.

---

Post Merge: September 15, 2009, 10:05:14 PM

---

...Everyone else seems to have thrown their thoughts about this guy in here, why not me? I'll keep it simple and get straight to the point, agree or disagree I don't care...

He is annoying and knows nothing...

That is all


Removed suggestion of violence. ~ Miniar

Quote from: Carolyn on September 16, 2009, 03:57:30 AM
...agree or disagree I don't care...

He is annoying and knows nothing...

WTF?!?!  He doesn't agree with you so he deserves to die?  You do understand the nature of polarization don't you?  I hope to goodness none of his more militant friends (if he has any) takes what you say and generalizes to other TS who THEY disagree with.  Agree with him or not, you just added a mountain of fuel to his fire should he find it.  What the freak were you thinking?!!

No offense meant by what I am about to post but I don't understand how someone can claim to be a non- transitioning transsexual. To me that is an oxymoron.
Wouldn't that mean you have GID but you are ok existing in your present state?
When you actively take steps to change to your target sex (hair removal, HRT...) wouldn't you then be considered transsexual? You know Trans-sex.
Maybe someone can clear this up for me?

Quote from: Jonni on September 16, 2009, 12:31:30 PM
No offense meant by what I am about to post but I don't understand how someone can claim to be a non- transitioning transsexual. To me that is an oxymoron.
Wouldn't that mean you have GID but you are ok existing in your present state?
When you actively take steps to change to your target sex (hair removal, HRT...) wouldn't you then be considered transsexual? You know Trans-sex.
Maybe someone can clear this up for me?

He does not claim to be a transsexual. He claims to be a transwoman.

In this case, the read is transgender woman instead of transsexual woman.

However, either way, the gender performance is still masculine -- ergo, that's not crossing a gender line.

http://ariablue.wordpress.com/2009/09/16/transgender-spokeswoman-crossdressers-are-authentic-women/ (http://ariablue.wordpress.com/2009/09/16/transgender-spokeswoman-crossdressers-are-authentic-women/)

There have been various instances in this thread veering close to violations of TOS. Expressing opposing viewpoints is fine, but remember, in particular;

Quote10. Bashing or flaming of any individuals or groups is not acceptable behavior on this web site and will not be tolerated in the slightest for any reason.  This includes but is not limited to:

    * Advocating the separation or exclusion of one or more group from under the Transgender umbrella term
    * Suggesting or claiming that one segment or sub-segment of our community is more legitimate, deserving, or more real than any others

and

Quote
15. Items under discussion shall be confined to the subject matter at hand, members shall avoid taking the other users posts personally, and/or posting anything that can reasonably be construed as a personal attack.

If they continue, I will lock this thread.

Thanks!

Zythyra

Well actually he did say he was transsexual in this article.
I agree with Jasper living the way he wants if it works for him. But I simply don't beleive he has the right to tell all transwomen who they are.

Quote from: Jonni on September 16, 2009, 12:31:30 PM
No offense meant by what I am about to post but I don't understand how someone can claim to be a non- transitioning transsexual. To me that is an oxymoron.
Wouldn't that mean you have GID but you are ok existing in your present state?
When you actively take steps to change to your target sex (hair removal, HRT...) wouldn't you then be considered transsexual? You know Trans-sex.
Maybe someone can clear this up for me?

Well being one of the only intentionally non-transitioning transsexuals on here and probably the most outspoken, I will try to explain.  Transsexuals experience gender dysphoria.  Most, if not all, seek some way to fix it so that it is not so debilitating and all consuming.  Transition is the avenue most take to fix it as it seems to have the best results.  Some choose to deal with theirs another way other than transition.  That would make them non-transitioning, but no less in need of a fix/correction than those who transition.

I'm not against transition for others, I only wished to find another way to deal with the gender dysphoria.  Perhaps this doesn't make me a transsexual, but I believe I fit the mold in every other way that does make one a transsexual with exception of how I treat my dysphoria.

Going back some 50 years ago, it was recognized that transition or even full time were not for all transsexuals.

Indeed, about the only thing that was universal back then was the benefit received from hormones.

However, to be a transsexual, the dysphoric aspect must be clinically significant in terms of impact on one's life.

Those of us on the board who are qualified psychologists and psychiatrists may have some serious questions about that part.

And likely more than a few disagreements.

Hello,

I just wanted to say how i feel as a woman after reading Jasper's blog. In it, he attacks transsexual women because they try to explain politely at first, that they are in fact very much women. What Jasper or others wish to express or experience is theirs to do but they should not think they have the right to belittle and vilify women who were born with transsexualism.

I have never suffered from any GID though i have suffered from the bigotry and prejudices of others. For me, transsexuality is a biological condition and there is  mounting evidence supporting this and it's now a matter of time before this is made even more clear. I've been through transition years ago and live as i always should have, simply as a woman.

I don't hate on Jasper or others, but i do say that it's my feeling that there seems to be more and more transsexual women taking a stand against having their lives erased.

http://ilseofcirce.wordpress.com/ (http://ilseofcirce.wordpress.com/)

Thanks Interalia!  :-*

Ok, I have read Jasper's homepage, listened to his video.

What is the big deal?

We all are allowed to have our own opinion and all he has stated is His own opinion.  Agree or disagree, but leave it at that, check your emotions at the door.

This can be a sensitive issue, but the debate over who gets to define womanhood has been going on since the first transgendered/transsexual person evolved.

Transgendered is an all encompassing term:

https://www.susans.org/forums/index.php/topic,54369.msg337984.html#msg337984 (https://www.susans.org/forums/index.php/topic,54369.msg337984.html#msg337984)

(Transgender: an inclusive umbrella term which covers anyone who transcends their birth gender for any reason. This includes but is not limited to Androgynes, Crossdressers, Drag kings, Drag queens, Intersexuals, Transsexuals, and ->-bleeped-<-s.)

I have seen several requests for this thread to be locked, and it will be if people don't calm down and state their opinion objectivily without personal attacks.

Sarah L.

The one thing that consistently rears it's head in this sort of thread is that people agree and disagree -- but there's hell to pay if you disagree.

Jasper manages to do something as old as Cadmus, with much the same effect. He tosses a rock or three into a mass of transsexing/transsexed women, crossdressers, genderqueers and assorted personalities who make their lives on the internet and creates a tumbling, rambling argument amongst those who say they disagree with him. All the while he stands and watches the mayhem and reaps the benefits of blog-hits.  :laugh: :laugh: Seems like he may just have it together, regardless of his views.

Good on Jasper. He's getting, as has been pointed out, exactly what he wants. Strangely, he's also managed to give his opponents what they wish as well: another chance to have a go at one another.  :laugh: That never takes even as much effort as he's gone to though.

Finally, the arguments seem to matter more than anything else.

Someone wants to be stealth, HBS-political, HBS-biological, Genderqueer, active or passive? Then do so.

The one true thing about internet is that everyone can and does have an opinion.

To allow another's opinion to get that far inside one's own head as to make this roiling mass of anger and argument ... well, just seems sorta useless to a visitor who came to answer a PM.

Is all of this truly that important to anyone?


Yes, Dyss, my friend, for someone to qualify as having a disorder there is that niggly little matter of the effect on one's ability to negotiate one's daily life in a way that allows them to work, have some social interaction and to be able perform daily tasks. By those standards probably no one who's rendered an opinion on this thread has ever been truly badly disordered. At least, not yet.

Dear Jaspmin ooops !

http://sophiaofthescythes.wordpress.com/2009/09/17/dear-jaspmin-ooops/ (http://sophiaofthescythes.wordpress.com/2009/09/17/dear-jaspmin-ooops/)
by sophiaofthescythes
9/17/09

I have to take everything at face value so the following comment appearing on Jasper's blog (And quoted in the previous post) can either be an actual comment from some woman or Jasper is up to his tricks again. Yes Jasper your tricks are so outlandish and funny I cannot actually bring myself to despise you. (Said Freyja to Loki!)

But read the following and see what is being said.

Quote from: Matilda on September 16, 2009, 07:38:01 PM
Oh, it's rather amusing to see how quickly people have changed their views since this Jasper person appeared.  I remember not too long ago when I was being called an "elitist" for making the distinction between transsexual and transgender, between transwoman and woman of transsexual history.  It only required one Jasper for people to finally get it, huh? *chuckle*

As someone from outside that whole arena, there's something I don't understand - but I'm sure someone can enlighten me...

Why do some post-op people get so possessive about the term transsexual only being used for post-op (SRS) folk like them, as if you're only a "true" transsexual if you've "gone all the way" and yet, in the next breath (metaphorically), get all pissy about being called "trans-anything"?

I realize I may be the fool commenting on the emperor's new clothes but this whole issue seems to be a spectacular melodrama over something that, from my admittedly ill-informed perspective, seems to be utterly inconsequential.

I could understand a sense of mild indignation about some random character trying to assert their own categorization on others but, when compared to each of your individual situations and challenges, I'm still struggling to see what the big deal is.

bingo, finewine

What a misogynistic creep!  Somebody that hates post-op transsexual women that much has to be a ->-bleeped-<- ->-bleeped-<-.  Sorry we haven't got what you want creep!

One comment I'd like to make for clarity is that men and women born with the transsexual condition do not experience "GID" in the sense that it is used with respect to transgender issues.  "GID" most properly describes people who do not have the transsexual "syndrome", and whose problems seem to orbit around "gender roles" and "gender presentation".

I think this is another source of confusion that facilitates the mixing of two separate conditions, transsexual and transgender, together.  For the transsexual-born, societal gender is a consequence of the physical condition, not the cause.  I'm not certain what causes a putative "transgender" condition.  It is a condition that causes a person significant distress which we currently don't understand fully.  This of course has nothing to do with bohemian types who simply do not care about societal standards, aka "genderqueer".  These are three separate things that people have a tendency to mix together. 

I've modified my views on "GID" since my initial belief it was a freedom-of-expression issue.  I've come to believe that there are people who do experience serious problems with their "gender" that go beyond the role strain that everyone feels at one time or another in a restrictive society.  At the same time, this is not related to the problem of those who are born differently, aka transsexuality. 

It does everyone a disservice to ignore the truth, because that ignorance feeds an atmosphere of denial and leads away from getting the proper help to those who need it.  Physical transition is not a panacea for "GID", and the current practice of pushing hormones and surgery as a solution for it is harmful.  We need a better understanding of what causes GID before psychology or psychiatry can address it.

Quote from: Matilda on September 18, 2009, 07:05:23 AM
Nothing screams TROLL louder than a  non-transsexual man who spends hours and hours on TG/TS forums/blogs commenting on subjects that don't apply to them (i.e, WBT, stealth, SRS, post-operative life, etc).  Yes, I understand that everyone wants to have their opinions heard, but hell, if they haven't walked one mile in our shoes, the best thing they can do is to STFU and go drink beer with their "buddies" or something. 

(https://www.susans.org/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi572.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fss161%2Fmatilda23%2F061.gif&hash=8f2301193b0dc73bb2e3c64f938f2048ea1a0591)

hahaha ;)


i'd like to have dinner with a troll.  i'd like to ask them a few questions:

--how do you pick the forums you troll?

--do you really think this is going to help the fact you have no friends and no life?

--do your imaginary friends get upset when you ignore them for so long?

--why do you need this kind of attention?  did you not get enough hugs?

--do you, by any chance, like the movie 'the matrix'?

Topic locked!