It hasn’t been but 2 days since I reviewed the disguising way in which TS Separatists have taken up abhorrent fallacies and used it as a weapon against an oppressed people. If that wasn’t enough to expose this ideology as being morally bankrupt, the following exchange should settle the debate.

Suzan is another opinion leader in the TS Separatist movement. Responding to my article, in an aptly titled post, “Which Side Are You On”, she addressed me personally. I will link to the post here if you would like to see the unedited back and forth. The following ideological pustule is as shocking as it was abhorrent. I’ve chosen to share this to ensure that all will see with clarity, the disgusting ideology that represents the underpinnings of TS Separatism:

“Identity with out actions that actually change your sex is meaningless, nothing more than a con game played by penis people who want to violate women’s privacy.”

Violate women’s privacy? Are you suggesting that crazed crossdressers are going to be kicking in stall doors? Following this same line of reasoning, are you suggesting that all FTM’s should be forced into the women’s restroom? They were assigned female at birth, generally menstruated (some still do), some gave birth, all were socialized as females in a patriarchal society and many still have a vagina… so, according to your logical house of cards, the best thing for women is to have Buck Angel hanging out in the women’s bathroom and a pre-op Isis hanging out in the men’s restroom? Are you suggesting that pre-op transsexuals should be forced to use the men’s restroom until they have vaginoplasty? I get that you’re so irate that you can’t even get your facts straight about what I did and didn’t say, but it would be helpful it you’d deal with the particulars of exactly how this genital-based ideology would work in the real world.

What is it with Separatists and their need to reduce women to walking, talking vaginas?!?

As for F to Ms they are not my concern. I put the interests of women first.

The big problem with the Transgender ideology is that it requires us to ignore the crazies (and anyone who has ever gone to a TS or TG support group has met at least one seriously crazy scary person) that no woman wants to be faced with meeting in the rest room.

“As for F to Ms they are not my concern. I put the interests of women first.”

*facepalm* What a disgusting thing to say. You should be ashamed of yourself. This statement is below your obvious intellect. My god… you are better than this!

“The big problem with the Transgender ideology is that it requires us to ignore the crazies (and anyone who has ever gone to a TS or TG support group has met at least one seriously crazy scary person) that no woman wants to be faced with meeting in the rest room.”

If I wanted to ignore it, I wouldn’t have used [Dana] Taylor’s propaganda in my public response.

And let me wind up by restating my actual original position… a position that you’ve chosen to ignore:

Her fatuous, contemptible and downright abhorrent rhetoric is appalling. I’ve based these conclusions upon her use of one of the most repugnant – and seemingly favorite – tools of bigots throughout history: the “some sicko can be associated with a population and therefore the entire population should be viewed as being suspect” reasoning. Literally everyone from Hitler to the Klan used this logical fallacy and it is repugnant and more than worthy of scorn and public admonition.

Why should I be concerned about the interests of F to Ms? Seriously…http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/2011/08/a_y_chromosome_is_worth_the_sa.php Becoming male is a move up on the class status ladder. Becoming female is a move down.

Putting women first is what makes me a radical feminist.

Emotional pleas will get you no where with me.

Dana Lane Taylor: it is very entertaining to watch someone stand up for those poor, oppressed men. You know, the men who control pretty much everything?

Suzan: Oh really… I’m at a point where I think the only solution that would help the working people is a revolution where we treat the rich oppressive pigs the same way the French Revolutionaries treated the freaking royals. Or to paraphrase Denis Diderot “Mankind will only be free when the last rich pig is strangled with the entrails of the last McMegaChurch Televangelist”
It’s a good thing I’m in a generally more pleasant mood than I was in the 1970s when I would have quoted Valerie Solanis to you.

Oh. My. God. You’ve utterly repulsed me. What sort of warped heart cannot respond when transmen are bullied, bashed and murdered? And you dare deride transgender people as being selfish? Selfish you say? In the face of such cold and abhorrent disregard for the 14th amendment rights of transmen you – in an astounding display of moral hypocrisy – claim any authority to speak on that which is just?

I am not a christian, I do not believe in god or in forgiving my oppressors. I do not believe they are oppressed by their acts of oppression. that is the poisonous pap passed down by supporting institutions of oppression to quiet the oppressed often accompanied with promises of an imaginary reward from a magic invisible in some imaginary paradise beyond the grave. sky daddy

Why should I spend anymore energy on “transmen” than I spend on men in general? They moved into the world of the male privileged, into the world of the patriarchy.

Suzan asked it first and I think the question is valid: What side are you on?

I choose to stand on the side of 14th amendment equality for all:

• I do not stand on a side that would stand by and allow half of the trans population suffer.
• I will not put myself in the same moral boat as Dr. Ruth Jacobs, the KKK and those who would seek to bar Muslims from holding office . These bigots all use the same “some part of your population did something bad, therefore all of that population is a risk and should have their 14th amendment rights trampled upon” propaganda.
• I do not stand on the side that views transmen as being my oppressor.

My conscious will not allow it.