Reverse Psychology Part 1

"Hontas, See it for What it is"

It seems a row blew up between Curtis Hinkle of the American and Canadian OII and Hontas Farmer over the way transsexual folks are allegedly misrepresented by Curtis Hinkle (According to Hontas Farmer).

But what happened next was something I did notice. As a member of OII-UK, I tend to notice things when OII as a whole come under attack from the Clarke/Northwestern Clique.

Let's read the line from Hontas that struck me as interesting.

"Face it Mr. Hinkle. Oii does NOT really have the best interest and well being of the whole transsexual community at it's heart. Only that of a privileged few who wish to retain their privilege."

There is the "P" word, and:

"* This quote is actually from a "transsexual womans success story”. Surely you would not accuse Maria (a.k.a. Junita), and Lynn Conway of pathologizing transsexual adults by telling their true life stories. I mean heck it seems clear that Maria was quite gender variant from a young age... For that matter so was Dr. Conway (She like myself has some pictures to that effect)."

A Clarke/Northwestern tactic, that is to tell the person you are attacking that those who you believe are allies are really unhappy with what you are doing and you are guilty of being "Un Mutual" (Oh sorry my childhood history crept in there).

Let's start with the Allegation Hontas Farmer makes. She says that Curtis Hinkle made the following statement:

"Since as we have discussed, transsexualism cannot be identified in childhood, it's abusive that this change of transsexualism in adulthood to GID of adulthood uses homosexual boys to pathologize adult transsexuals."

I agree with Hontas Farmer insofar as I also know of many people who were transsexual who were clearly feminine when being raised as boys. But I belive in the broader context Curtis Hinkle was saying that Zucker is using the title of "Homosexual boy" to define such children as "Male" as opposed to female. In Fairness to Hontas Farmer, I read the self same passage before Hontas Farmer even mentioned it and felt a bit uneasy about it. (I have 5 alpha of course I will feel uneasy about it, similar comments are made about that).

The thing is I would ask Curtis Hinkle to elaborate on this, disagree with him if I felt it was wrong and then open it up for discussion. What I would not do is come out with what can sound like Clarke/Northwestern sound bites aimed this time at Hinkle and OII:

"Face it Mr. Hinkle. Oii does NOT really have the best interest and well being of the whole transsexual community at it's heart. Only that of a privileged few who wish to retain their privilege."

This is a good one, There are a small cadre of academics (The Clarke/Northwestern Clique) who are well heeled, middle class and often white, consisting of some very interesting characters who preach some "American Ideal" and who have written plenty about various sexual minorities who challenge their notion of a nice society in which they, the Academics, called "The Clarke Northwestern" have a very privileged status. I mean let's face it. Kenneth Zucker is on more "Expert boards" than there are grains of sand on the average beach.

I don't get that. And I really would like Hontas to take the time to explain that really. It is interesting that the Clarke/Northwestern Clique feel the need (often) to define those who do not agree with them as the very things that define the Clarke/Northwestern Clique itself.

This struck me as interesting:

"Contrast these with the symptoms and behavior of many transsexuals who try to claim to be intersexed (at least before they went an invented a condition with no physical symptoms and that can only be diagnosed by intropection, HBS.) They mature into grown adult males with all the seoconday sex characteristics, they have children, they are the picture of the manly ideal. Then they claim not KS (at least a little plausible some KS'ers are asymptomatic), they claim that a doctor created a penis out of their vagina when they were a baby. That the doctor created a full functioning penis and testicles with no sturctural, or functional abnormalities. Right. The state of genital surgery decades ago could not achieve that, nor could it achieve that now. These claims cheapen the struggles of actual intersexed people who are left with non functioning genitalia after these normalizing surgeries are done."

You see the problem with "Assigned Male" and "Thus a lying trannie" is that Hontas is not talking about transsexual folks who are made to feel as guilty as hell (By none other than the Clarke/Northwestern Clique) and who end up saying "Oh, I am intersex really". While yes I will say, having met macho men who sired 30 children and had 20 wives, and said to me while wearing a frock "I am intersex really" does stretch the bounds of credibility a bit. Hontas is talking about OII and claiming that OII consists of such people. You see I was "Assigned male" and spent most of my childhood almost actually wishing the surgeons had succeeded in giving me fully functioning male bits, given the joke that I was stuck with that was "Fashioned" in the hope it would grow to be a penis. It didn't and all the "Socialization" that came with this "penis" was something I rejected outright, purely out of spite against the doctors and later society. You see while a little Hontas was wearing mummies make up, at about the same age I was limping around with piss bags attached, calling men and women "Breeding scum" because I was angry about what they did to me. This is the problem with the Clarke/NorthwesternClique. They seem to think (As Hontas correctly points out) there was surgery that can procure a fully endowed male adult, with 20 foot penis and the ability to make babies with 20 wives. (A wife for each foot I suppose). Sadly the reality of "Male assignation" was very different. The surgery was a joke at best, no "Strange scars" (Loved by Clarke Northwestern Trolls)  but atrophying tissue, kidney infections and the threat of dialysis machines loomed large when kidney reflux happened. And the "Penis" would be little more than a plug holding all the puss and bacteria inside bladder. And yes Hontas some quacks do inflict nasty stuff like that on some children. I may as well also point out the brutal reality of "Male assignation" in that such surgical vivisection (Which can involve as many as 30 visits to a hospital) pales into insignificance when compared to the brutality involved. It is called "Toughening up" The favorite of the school bullies was to kick the piss bags and see me rolling on the floor in agony. While I must never "Cry" because that was "weak". Let's just say it is a bit more than being brainwashed over dead rabbits.

Hontas continued:

"The problem with what you are saying Sophia is that people who have KS generally show signs and symptoms. A well known transsexual known to have KS would be Caroline Cossey. This is not unbelieveable just because she is pretty. Caroline has the signs and symptoms of KS (+ usage of early feminizing hormones and a pinch of surgery)."

And this is the problem, "Signs and symptoms" It may be worth mentioning that Cossey's "Signs and symptoms" were seen by her as an advantage, she gets to be tall and with a bit of pruning, (As Hontas says) ends up as a model. I don't consider such things to be an advantage; they are just accidents of genetics. Everyone went on about Cossey as the ultimate woman, who "was a boy". Hardly an advantage considering that when Cossey started out on her career that was the very last thing she wanted.  When she finally published her second work "My Story" she mentioned in one chapter about having a "Bucle test" (Buccal Smear Test, now there is a term ripe for comment).

The thing is, why have a test at such a late age if she was aware of having Klinefelters? She went public after the News of the Screws (News of the world a UK Paper) published an article about her in the James Bond Movie "For Your Eyes Only" (I am trying to keep a straight face). The News of the Screws naturally had these rumors appear where Roger Moore said "Hey I kissed a guy" (Creak went the eyebrow). What happened was not unusual in the British Media. I do know how they work, (Being a bit of a fan of the UK's gutter press myself). They will take a shock, horror storyline, juice it up a bit, hire a lawyer and then you will get the targeted celeb running to Max Clifford (One of the media crowd in the first place) and the story runs, often for about three weeks (Unless it is self sustaining) with the usual H.M. Bateman "Expressions of shock and horror" all over the place and then it dies down. When they feasted on Cossey there was no Max Clifford to run to so she responded with her first book "I Am a woman" not "I am someone who is transsexual but have Klinefelters really". But the visits to the clinic to get a smear test (See told you, curious play on words) were inevitable given the grief she was getting because she was seen (By the News of the Screws) as a transsexual (I believe they hyphenated it in prurient artificial disgust to "Trans-sexual").

Hardly surprising then that to some transsexual folks a diagnosis of "intersex" is seen as a get out clause. So I don't know where the likes of Bailey get off writing books that make the News of the Screws look tame and then saying in pretentious disgust "Oh they seek to legitimize themselves as women by saying they are intersex Why do they do this? It is wrong!". The answer to Bailey's question would be, the likes of Bailey, who take tabloid style writing and put it into a "Scientific" book.

But the issue is "Does OII have such transsexual folks as the membership?" Well my answer to that would be "So What?" OII (Unlike ISNA) has a "Trans freindly policy" because we found that often people who are intersexed were put through the medical grindmill (Usually when assigned "Male" and ended up in GICs.

But whatever Caroline Cossey has in terms of an underlying condition like Klinefelters is her business really, as far as I am concerned she is just female and that is it. She is not involved in OII, ISNA, The Clarke/Northwestern Clique or anything else, so I cannot comment beyond that really.

But I can comment on the strangeness of the Clarke/Northwestern Clique. They talk utter claptrap quite frankly. They like to set a situation up "Trannies are perverted men who should be gassed" and then whine when some of them logically go looking for an intersex diagnosis. (To get away from the Clarke/Northwestern Clique).

But people in OII are not in that situation. I am not. It was plainly obvious what was going on with me when I was a kid, like were the catheters, piss bags and obsessions on the part of shrinks with "Making me accept maleness" all just because of a "hernia"? I don't think so, and besides, yes I had the mess they made removed when the opportunity arose and I gleefully threw it in their faces.  If the medical experts want to call me a "Transsexual" because they are so vain they cannot make a willy properly but claim they can, then fine. You should see how ungrateful I really am when calling them names. Hontas doesn't get that bit. Like she does not get it when I say "I agree it is harder to make a pole than a hole, so why did they try it, fail, and then cover their nasty little vivisecionist tracks? by using terms like Transsexual and then using that as another stick to beat people with. What? How perverted is that?"

But then that is just it, a highly intelligent woman like Hontas Farmer seems to have been drawn in by all this Clarke/Northwestern bullshit, this is the bit I don't understand. There is Hontas Farmer, a young woman who could get the Nobel Prize for physics if she wanted to (Yes Hontas I do believe what you say on that. While many don't, I do). But there she is defending people who despise her (For being a transsexual woman, Well a woman basically, I choose not to get pedantic, who is a genius, who is also African American). What they see is someone they consider "inferior". What I see is a woman with Nobel Prize potential.

I don't get it. Why does she defend them? But let's have a look at how the Clarke/Northwestern Clique operate. Shall we? Can I say something many have said in private but never in the open for fear of the Clarke/Northwestern wrath? That all Bailey considers to be "Geniune" in terms of transsexual is what he considers "Attractive" (There is a less publishable way of putting it). They get to be called "homosexual transsexuals" (Oh goody) and they also get to everso wonderful and elusive title of "Transkid" (And look what Zucker has lined up for them, Homo Erection).

I have even formulated this theory that somewhere in a deep dark room in the Northwestern university, there sits a computer with a virtual woman running on it, and she is the standard by which Bailey and Blanchard measure transsexual folks that come to them for help. (More on her in part two).

You see Hontas, I grew up with considerably more than a few "mysterious scars" to contend with, I didn't say "I am a woman" I said:

"Take this joke you call masculinity, I call medically imposed non-consensual vivisection and shove it where the sun doesn't shine, you stupid arrogant brain dead normborn quacks!... (The rest is unrepeatable)"

Vicious that it is. That is word for word what I said (With expletives removed) and they then responded by calling me a "personality disorder" because the "Trans-whatever" label was not going to stick. The thing is Hontas, they know where they stand with me. I said "No!" and mean it.