Skip to main content

good on the New York Times

The New York Times pens another scathing editorial chastising some of the more backward thinking States passing these ridiculous transgender bathroom bills. I am afraid though that before sanity prevails we will see more lunes say and do bizarre things.

There is no other way to view these laws other than they are based on misinforned prejudice and hatred. Presumably they would prefer seeing a pre-op transsexual woman get assaulted by someone named Bubba wearing a "I love Jesus and guns" baseball cap in a men's bathroom.

I keep saying that there is no shortage of dim bulbs on this planet and I hope this issue doesn't divide the Americans the way slavery once did.

You can find the editorial here




Comments

  1. I do not agree very much with the New York Times but they have it right in this editorial. I especially like the quote from Sheriff Lott “In the 41 years I have been in law enforcement in South Carolina, I have never heard of a transgender person attacking or otherwise bothering someone in a restroom,” Sheriff Lott wrote in a letter to the committee studying the state’s bathroom bill. “This is a non-issue.” I am originally from Mississippi and we have a long way to go.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Michelle, I have to wonder what you don't care for in the NYT. Too liberal? Maybe, I suppose it may be colored that way. For me (and no, I'm not telling you you're wrong) it speaks a lot of truths. And I admire their forthright coverage of transgender people and issues. Their report on transgender bathroom use remains on the front page this morning, and here's another article from yesterday's paper about an ESPN anchor who was fired for his posting rants about transgender issues and people:
    http://www.nytimes.com/2016/04/21/sports/baseball/curt-schilling-is-fired-by-espn.html

    Frankly I'm proud of the New York Times.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Emma, I read a daily Times Digest because I can't get a daily paper delivered where I live. I do like their reporting but I don't agree with some of their editorials. I too admire their forthright coverage of transgender people and issues. I already read the article on Curt Schilling and he doesn't have a clue. We still have a long way to go. Thanks Emma and Joanna.

    ReplyDelete
  4. thanks to you both for your comments! I was away on vacation and just read them.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

how times change

How times have changed.

Whereas transition was something not to even contemplate for us, here is a young trans person who felt the opposite pressure. She looks and sounds extremely passable but decided it wasn't for her despite the social media presence of young transitioners potentially inspiring her to.

We are all different and I happen to think she's rather a smart cookie as well...


indoctrination

As transgender people, organized religion hasn't really been our friend however on the other hand it has often had little to do with true spirituality. I needed to learn this over time and much of what I was taught growing up was steeped in the judgmental superstition of society instead of what some creator would demand of me.

Regardless of your belief system, you are a child of the universe and have been endowed with uniqueness and goodness of spirit. You have probably never wished anyone ill will and you have tried your best to live within the absurd coordinate system of humanity. Yet somehow belonging to the LGBT community was entirely your fault.

As I have grown older this inherent irrationality became increasingly evident to me. I knew I was a fundamentally good person and yet I was different in a way which was not of my choosing. Hence with this comprehension my self appreciation and esteem grew in proportion.

Religion for me today seems forever trapped in the misinterpretat…

let's please read carefully

This post is prompted by a recent comment I received to one of my older posts and I wanted to address it.

I used to wonder why some transgender people accepted Blanchard’s work until I think I figured out why: they may not have examined it closely enough. They would experience cross gender arousal and then accept it was Autogynephilia without properly understanding what the term meant and what the theory said: it is an invented sexual “illness” which makes people transition. In other words, it is the arousal itself which causes this desire and not a pre-existing gender identity which does not align with birth sex. Of course, Blanchard has no explanation for the origin of his proposed “illness” only that it is a form of sexual deviance.

My counter proposal? we transition despite this arousal. In other words, the transgender identity is pre-existing and the arousal is the result of the mismatching of burgeoning sexual feelings towards females and this misaligned identity; it is not per…