For example, this Spring a few self-promoting and self-aggrandizing “transgender” bloggers, authors and “gender outlaw” entertainers (who actually financially and professionally profit by enforcing transgender socio-politics and umbrella-ism theory) are obsessing over how to stop the inevitable transsexual liberation by creating petty drama, speculating, concocting ‘out of this world’ and laughable history revisionism, taking actions and quotes out of context, presuming to know one’s intentions as if they are telepathic, unrobing and degrading the bodies of women born with transsexualism and behaving like unstable, over compulsive and anti-social pesonalites, fueled by their amazing male egos and desire to get attention, although it’s negative attention. Their desperate behavior is obviously a backlash to the realization that their fantasy “transgender umbrella reservation” mandate is coming to an end. They are dealing with their ‘bubble being popped’ like most imperialists do when their colonies breaks free: Retaliating with [mental] violence, back tracking, faking evidence and agreements, mispspesking for deseased transsexuals & others, and transparent [and failed] character assassinations against numerous women of transsexual history that are being seriously listened to. Their over the top cyber bullying is very telling in how they lack genuine facts to back up their opinion based frame work, as well as not having authentic or sincere intentions, just the typical crafty lies most politicians spit when they want to CON-vince the people of something they know dang well is *hog wash*.
- Ashley “I hate citing evidence” Love, May 6, 2012
… And this is why the TS Separatist movement – as it has existed over the past 5 years – is dead. Love has just proven my point. Did I not say that Separatists have lost their historical narrative – the very centerpiece of their argument – and has thus been reduced to the trans equivalent of fringe conspiracy folks (like birthers) or the young earth creationists who believe what they believe because their belief tells them to believe? Did I not predict that Love would have this EXACT response? About a month ago I predicted the following behavior from Love:
Deny! Deny! Deny! I-CAN’T-HEAR-YOU! LALALALALALA! Some will simply pretend that the truth is not the truth (I predict Ashley Love will take this course) and/or that any/all evidence which disproves their narrative will be asserted to have been faked. Therefore, evidence disproving the narrative will magically become evidence supporting the idea of a conspiracy against transsexual identity.
- Me, just a little more than month ago
Let’s not forget that Love is aware that her narrative doesn’t align with reality. She’s apparently happy to try to convince you that transsexual history isn’t real. For her, the actual historical record should be hidden and regarded as being suspect because Love needs YOU to turn YOUR back on reality to support HER in HER belief that she’s been wronged and moreover, that she’s a heroic leader in some imagined epic crusade she believes herself to be fighting.
The reason the TS Separatist movement – as it has existed over the past 5 years – is dead is because the cat is out of the bag. The fictional history Separatists have propagated has been exposed and furthermore, it’s been noted by those who write the history books. That can’t be undone.
Love claims that non-Separatism ”lack[s] genuine facts to back up their opinion…” Really? Because I’ve been through a lot of Love’s blog and I can’t ever recall her making citations for her phantasmagorical fact claims. Not only is she’s demonstrably wrong about GLAAD’s position on the use of the term transgender, she’s demonstrably wrong about her assertion that “transgender” came from Virginia Prince. The reality is that today, “transgender” means what it meant in 1974. I mean, I guess it’s possible that I’ve written and artificially aged thousands of books from 1974 and have gotten google books to become part of the TG Borg in our effort to “fake evidence.” Or, maybe I time traveled so that while I was visiting the past, I forced and Drs. King and Ekins to write on page 3 of their 2006 book, Transgender Phenomenon the following account of how the term transgender was used in 1974:
There was talk that would take 20 years to become widespread: of transsexuals seeking ‘gender alignment’; of ‘trans-gender’ and ‘trans.people’ [sic] used as umbrella terms to include both TVs and TSs.
Or maybe Drs. King and Ekins were in on the conspiracy from the start!!!
Apparently when someone like myself points out that “transgender” has been around for more than 20 years and that it’s been, in fact, used in its modern sense since at least 1974, such perceived aspersions constitute “mental violence” in Love’s reality. Yurp… It’s all part of one big ol’ conspiracy that only Love and a few of her acolytes are aware of. Furthermore, anyone who dares poke a hole in her conspiracy theory has a male ego, is seeking negative attention, is desperate, an imperialist and a colonist.
So, yah… that’s one version of reality.
Another version of reality might be that Love is mistaken about a great number of things and needs YOU to reject reality so that she can continue playing the part of the heroic victim.
Which is more likely?
MY CHALLENGE TO ASHLEY LOVE:
- Produce objective evidence proving that Virginia Prince used the word “transgender” in the 1960s or 70s.
- Produce objective evidence proving that Virginia Prince used the term “transgenderist” before 1978.
- Produce the objective evidence which led Love to conclude that the historical record has been faked.
- Produce objective evidence proving that “transgender” wasn’t used in its modern usage back in 1974.
- Produce objective evidence proving that the term “transgender” is only 20 years old instead of at least 42 years old.
I promise you… Love will NOT respond to the above challenge in any rational way. She can’t; Love has nothing but fantasy to fall back on. My guess is their she’ll either pretend that I’ve not made this challenge or she’ll respond with yet more ad-hominem attacks. The closest Love could hope to come in meeting my above challenge is to simply quote someone else who is mistakenly asserting (without evidence) that Prince coined the term transgender to refer to crossdressers. She can’t respond with anything like a well-reasoned, evidence-based, citation-heavy reply. The historical record just doesn’t support the Virginia Prince fountainhead narrative. She is unable to support any of the truth claims she’s made about the term “transgender”.
I encourage rational people to consider that there is a truth to be known about Love’s assertions. Either I’ve faked evidence (and have apparently time traveled) in an effort to revise history to misrepresent the transsexual experience because I have no real evidence, have a male ego, am seeking negative attention, am desperate, an imperialist and a colonist or maybe Love’s reality isn’t congruent with the factual historical record.
cross-posted from Ehipassiko