Skip to content

‘Transilience’ – Joelle Ruby Ryan University of New Hampshire Harassment Campaign Against Women : Call For Action

March 11, 2013

university of new hampshire health joelle ruby ryan

I am writing this today out of a deep concern for the rights of women, feminists and lesbians to speak publicly about issues that effect us. Specifically, I would like to address the actions of Dr. Joelle Ruby Ryan and his ongoing attempts to harass, bully, censor and silence women and feminists on the internet, and the University of New Hampshire’s apparent complicity in his outrageous and illegal actions which Ryan claims to perform under authority of UNH.

You may notice that this week’s post -where we discussed ‘Transilience’, Joelle Ruby Ryan’s new University of New Hampshire Health sponsored video- is no longer visible. Also missing are your comments in the discussion that followed. The reason for this is that UNH’s Dr. Ryan has filed a false, perjured, harassing copyright claim that he apparently hopes will re-write all previous first amendment rights. Here is a screen cap of the post in question:

what it looks like when hides your post

Here is the entire text of that post, none of which Dr. Ryan had a problem with. It was succinctly titled “Transilience – Hilar!” and read:

Joelle Ruby Ryan’s new autobiographical spoken word/stand-up routine.

Joe is the guy who teaches Women’s Studies at the University of New Hampshire who claims the word “female” is outdated and offensive, that there is no shared experience of oppression among women, and thus no class basis for a feminist movement. Joelle believes all female gatherings and spaces should be outlawed as discriminatory against males. More about Joe here:

In this looong monologue, the 6 foot 6, 350 lb Ryan shares his youthful experiences being called a “fag” which somehow translates into discovering the sexxay of pantyhose on his shaved legs and a love of stilettos. He shares tales of blowing chunks of sushi all over during drunken binges, and reveals the peace he achieves taking long 4am walks around town alone.

Excerpt: “Mother Nature is a great teacher. I am continually amazed at the kindness and cruelty of the natural world. And by the breadth of diversity to be found within it. When I gaze at flowers I see so many different colors. When I look at trees I see so many different leaves and barks. When I look at stones, I see many different shapes and sizes. Some smooth, some rough. At the ocean, I marvel at the teeming life to be found in it’s depths. Each individual creature so unique, diverse, and crucial, to the well-being of the whole eco-system. Human beings come in many different colors, shapes, and sizes too. They also come in many different sexes, genders, and sexualities. And yet, the very vibrant diversity we can see so easily in the natural world, becomes much harder to see when it comes to human gender. Black or white. Either/Or. One or the other. Why can’t we transpose the brilliant hues we see in flowers to the myriad of genders we know exists in humans? I am an audacious orange flower blooming in the sun and delighting in the soft summer rain. I am also a person who demands the right to be ambiguous, fluid, and defiantly, boldly, queer. I almost never for instance wear breast prostheses. And while I wholeheartedly support the choice to do so, made by many of my sisters, I do not wish to wear silicone mounds on my chest to make others feel more comfortable.”

FORTY MINUTES of this, folks! ENJOY!

Posted by GallusMag

Here is a copy of the University of New Hampshire’s Dr. Ryan’s false DMCA claim [sic]:

Email Address:
Location of copyrighted work (where your original material is located):
First Name: Dr. Joelle Ruby
Last Name: Ryan
Company Name: Univesity of New Hampshire (UNH)
Address Line 1: 73 Main Street
Address Line 2: 203 Huddleston Hall
City: Durham
State/Region/Province: NH
Zip/Postal Code: 03820
Country: USA
Telephone Number: 603-862-0272
Copyright holder you represent (if other than yourself): Self and UNH
Please describe the copyrighted work so that it may be easily identified: The film itself is embedded without my or the university’s permission, along with a copyrighted still from the film, and both are placed on a vicious hate blog which has a long history of defamation, hate-mongering, bigotry and threats against members of the transgender and transsexual community. I would never give permission for my film or stills from said film to be used on a hate site. Please remove the blog entry immediately.
Location (URL) of the unauthorized material on a site (NOT simply the primary URL of the site –; you must provide the full and exact permalink of the post, page, or image where the content appears, one per line) :
If the infringement described above is represented by a third-party link to a downloadable file (e.g.…), please provide the URL of the file (one per line):
I have a good faith belief that use of the copyrighted materials described above as allegedly infringing is not authorized by the copyright owner, its agent, or the law.: Yes
I swear, under penalty of perjury, that the information in the notification is accurate and that I am the copyright owner or am authorized to act on behalf of the owner of an exclusive right that is allegedly infringed.: Yes
Signed on this date of (today’s date, MM/DD/YYYY): 03/09/2013
Signature (your digital signature is legally binding): Dr. Joelle Ruby Ryan

You will immediately note a few things.

Joelle Ruby Ryan identifies himself as University of New Hampshire representative

  1. Joelle Ruby Ryan identifies himself as a designated representative of the University of New Hampshire who is acting on authority of that institution.
  2. Ryan claims that using the “embed” function on YouTube videos is a form of copyright infringement. That is simply false. Not only false, but absurd. When University of New Hampshire Health (or anyone else) posts an embeddable public video: anyone, anywhere can embed that video on any site for any reason. You can read about that in an article titled “Court Rules That Embedding A Video Isn’t Copyright Violation” here:
  3. Dr. Ryan also claims that a still image from a public video, used for purposes of critique and discussion of that public media, is a form of copyright infringement. Again, an absurd claim that runs in opposition to all known First Amendment law. You can read about that here:

You can also read YouTube’s standard terms of service which state:

Section 6 (C)

6. Your Content and Conduct

You also hereby grant each user of the Service a non-exclusive license to access your Content through the Service, and to use, reproduce, distribute, display and perform such Content as permitted through the functionality of the Service and under these Terms of Service.


I know, I know. You’re thinking “even a twelve year old knows these things Gallus”. And I agree. They do. We all do. We don’t need a PHD to know that folks- even those we disagree with- are allowed to post about and discuss public media campaigns issued by University of New Hampshire Health, or any other entity. Even your uncle sam’s wedding video could end up “going viral” once he authorizes it’s publication- it happens all the time. Free Speech!

So why is a self-declared agent of the University of New Hampshire filing perjurous, false, ABSURD legal documents against a small Lesbian Feminist blog?

The only conclusion I can reach is that Dr. Joelle Ruby Ryan may be falsely representing himself as an agent of the University of New Hampshire. I reach this conclusion because I think UNH attorneys would not authorize false and frivilous, perjurous claims against Lesbian Feminist bloggers. They might, wisely, consider such actions a form of stalking and harassment- actions which the University of New Hampshire may well be liable for.

I look forward to the impending legal proceedings which were initiated by an agent of the University of New Hampshire on the basis of their claim that posting a YouTube video on a blog is an actionable copyright infringement. I also look forward to the upcoming legal proceedings initiated by the University of New Hampshire against a Lesbian feminist blogger for publishing a still from a UNH Health video for purposes of critique and discussion.

When a publicly funded university mounts such an incredible First Amendment challenge to the rights of bloggers to embed, screen-cap, write about, discuss, and critique the media campaigns published by them one can only wonder in awe which of the University of New Hampshire attorneys authorized such an action. This promises to be a fascinating – even surreal- legal exercise. One which I suspect will not end in favor of the civil liberties restrictions being litigated by the University of New Hampshire and it’s agents.

In the meantime, while the attorneys do their work, I would like to ask for your help.

I would like your help in celebrating our most basic first amendment rights: as bloggers, as women, as feminists and feminist allies, as lesbians and as gays.

I call on you to protest the University of New Hampshire sanctioned harassment of GenderTrender and all other feminist, lesbian, and gender critical bloggers and blog readers by making a post that includes either the video ‘Transilience’ or a screencap of such.

That’s right!

Feel free to copy and paste this post on your own blog or tumblr blog. Feel free to make your own post sharing your thoughts and impressions of Joelle Ruby Ryan’s UNH Health video. Feel free to create amusing and charming memes featuring these materials. The key words here are “Feel Free”. Because it is legal, it is our right to do so, it is protected speech (University of New Hampshire claims notwithstanding). Let’s enjoy and EXERCISE our free speech rights as Feminists and Women and say NO to infringements of our civil liberties.

Thank you for your support.

The link to the fully and legally embedable ‘Transilience’ is here:


The Power of Female Rage

January 19, 2013

As some of you may know, my posting access to my GenderTrender blog was suspended at the end of the business day on Friday January 18. My last post, on Friday morning, was a collection of screen caps: a random sampling of the abusive and threatening tweets directed at Suzanne Moore following her “SEEING RED: THE POWER OF FEMALE ANGER” article re-publication.


Prior to Friday morning’s post I did five controversial posts in succession:


1.)I outed an MD and Phd who threatened to murder a bunch of radical feminists, also specifically targeting myself and Cathy Brennan. 1/10/2013 FRI


2.)I posted the text of Professor Sheila Jeffeys’ submission to the Human Rights and Anti-Discrimination Bill 1/12/2013 SUN


3.)I posted the entire text (and published imagery) of Julie Burchill’s “Transsexuals Should Cut it Out”, which was subsequently censored in toto by the Guardian/Observer and for which she is now facing a government criminal inquiry. 1/13/2013 MON


4.)I posted commentary and photos and a partial re-blog of Dirt’s article calling out the racism and homophobia at the core of the initial trans response to Suzanne Moore’s use of the term “Brazillian transsexual” in her “SEEING RED: THE POWER OF FEMALE RAGE” article. 1/16/2013 THURS


5.)I posted a video of Precious “Jewel” Davis, a (self-professed) gay drag queen who recently “turned trans” from the “We Happy Trans” project . 1/16/2013 THURS



What a week!


My blog is “newsy”. When things are going on, I post them. And there is a lot going on right now. Specifically, there is a peak of public discourse around the feminist critique of gender. We have about a week before the general public becomes bored with this topic (as they do with all topics). Right now, this discourse is peaking- into the mainstream- in a way I’m not sure it has ever done before. This is a critical time.


Some of you have taken issue with the language Julie Burchill used in her now criminalized article and claim her bombastic tone has undermined the message. As if there was EVER a platform for that “message”. Suzanne Moore wasn’t “bombastic” and look what the fuck happened to her! Some of you have actively taken steps to discredit Burchill or distance yourself from her. Must step lightly, you say. Throw her off the boat! Backstabbing is a pointless discussion to have at this point. Clearly the trans politic is seizing the moment to re-frame their violent suppression of feminist – of WOMENS and LESBIAN voices- as an anguished “what about the menzzzz” cry to promote further censorship and no-platforming of feminist gender critiques, but remember, that is the same tact they use whether you are rude or polite. The polite Conway Hall feminist conference was no-platformed by the MRA/Trans alliance with terrorist bombing and murder threats. Mainstream feminist discourse has been taken over by males in an “oh so polite” way- backed up by threats of rape and death. Feminists who have tried to discourse with the trans politic have been- at best- mocked and distained. Whether you give an inch or a mile. Burchill simply chose to take on the abuse in stead of her friend Suzanne Moore. Julie is not a stupid woman. She has lanced a boil. That boil is the silencing of feminist voices by the transgender lobby. Whether that wound heals or encapsulates will be determined by our response. She has directed attention to this issue by throwing herself on a pyre into the angry mob. Immolation. That Burchill broad kicks some balls and goes down swinging. And where the fuck are you?


Let’s not waste this opportunity, shall we? We have the world’s attention. LET US SPEAK.


Unfortunately for me at GenderTrender, my voice has been silenced now by my website host at


Yesterday Janet Mock of People Magazine, (he of “Girls Like Us” fame), decided to start a campaign against my blog. Early Friday morning (before my Suzanne Moore Tweet post) I became aware of a censorship campaign against GenderTrender, and all wordpress radical feminist blogs. There have been a million of these campaigns, but Mock is a very powerful man.

Mock initially became enraged when he read my post (Number 4 above) and saw a photo of himself, and “misgendering” (because it mentioned that he was male) and decided that women have no right to discuss or post photos of public figures on feminist blogs.  Instead of filing a complaint with wordpress or messaging me with his demands (or just shutting the fuck up) he started a twitter campaign to ban my blog which was quickly seized by trans activists smelling blood in the water following their successful censorship of Burchill and success in driving Suzanne Moore off of twitter. All the usual suspects came on board within minutes: Hetero female “fag” Stephen Ira, Lefty “TGirl” inventor of the ladystick Savanna Garmon, Transfeminist Natalie “Die cis scum” Reed and all the rest. NO DISCUSSION of TRANS ACTIVISM by WOMEN they railed. GAG THESE BITCHES.


Janet Mock got his dick in an uproar over this

Janet Mock got his dick in an uproar over this

When I did not notice Mock’s campaign (because I never check my tweets and I was sleeping) he engaged his pals to post news articles complaining about’s hosting of gender critical and trans-critical blogs. The proposed banning of all female voices re: politics relating to gender, especially mine. I took action when I became aware of Mock’s campaign, specifically his charge that the public news-site photo I had used was off limits. To placate his male rage I replaced that pic with an alternate screen cap from another (NBC) appearance, and I kindly tweeted him that I had resolved his photo issue.  Seriously, these guys literally think they can lobby on the national news and women have no right to discuss it. HOW DARE IT SPEAK???


I posted a few of the Suzanne Moore tweets, went to work, and when I came home my blog had TWENTY FIVE THOUSAND hits. And I was LOCKED OUT by


I now have NO WAY to POST on MY OWN BLOG due to It’s all well and good for feminists to have blogs and such that are gender critical, as long as no one is paying attention to them. You can post the most intelligent, elegant legal critique of the ways “Gender Identity” status negatively impacts woman AS LONG AS NO ONE READS IT. AS LONG AS NO ONE IS LISTENING. Women can have their tiny corners, their sekret cabals AS LONG AS NO ONE IS READING. Let the gals blow off steam in dark corners on Facebook. As long as it doesn’t hit the mainstream. Let the edumacated upper class folks have their little talks that no one finds interesting or engaging. But god forbid feminist voices start being heard en masse. God Forbid Julie Burchill says what EVERY FUCKING WOMAN ON EARTH IS THINKING. GOD FORBID Trans Media Watch cites GenderTrender as a SOURCE in the women vs. gender discourse.


Someone said this as a comment on my blog recently, much better than I’m about to mis-quote, but it was basically that the transgender politic around the social hierarchy of the sexes is so utterly flimsy that it can tolerate no critique whatsoever from women, and as a male-centric philosophy the realities of female experience CANNOT be tolerated., hosted by Automattic, has prevented me from posting this on the blog I have built up from the ground against all odds. And Gosh who cares about that? Who cares about Bindel and Greer and Jeffreys and Brennan and Moore and Benvenuto and Burchill? We still have our little corners where they can’t silence us. Keep voices hushed. Avert your eyes, sisters. Let’s spectate.


IF YOU GIVE A SHIT ABOUT ANY OF THIS – and I know many of you DO, I encourage you to RAISE A HOLY FUCKING SHITSTORM about the silencing of feminists who critique GENDER and PLASTIC SURGERY and MUTILATION and RAPE and FREEDOM FROM THE PEEN and ETC ETC ETC.


I mean this literally: SPEAK NOW or FOREVER HOLD YOUR PEACE.

Have a blog? UPDATE IT TODAY with a focus on FREEDOM OF SPEECH for women. COMPLAIN about death threats on women- and NOT to your “friends” on Facebook. COMPLAIN about CENSORSHIP of women. Call the fucking news agency. Call ten fucking friends to meet on Tuesday night to set out a goal-oriented political action plan to support freedom of speech for women. ASSERT the right for women to DISCUSS POLITICS even if those public figures are “TRANS GENDER”. Make that lame fucking account so you can leave that comment on that awful news story. Take action every single fucking day. But ESPECIALLY TODAY. It’s time to say NO to the censoring of women- even if they are more (or less!) plain-spoken than you would like.


You liked GenderTrender, you counted on me- well I have been ELIMINATED. Fucking GAGGED because people were listening.


Fuck You, boys

Fuck You, boys

Transgender Trope #10- Defining Men and Women by Sex reduces us to Nothing More than Genitals

April 16, 2012

This trope is a reversal, a thought-terminating cliché, and a colonizing attempt to re-frame women’s liberation concepts into erasure of the physical reality of the female sex and erasure of the primary role our reproductive biology plays in the targeting and enforcement of female oppression by males.

The goal of this trope is: total erasure of females as an organizing class under patriarchy, erasure of the way our reproductive capacity is targeted and exploited by males as the very basis of patriarchy, reversal of feminist concepts into male-supremacist ones, promotion of anti-feminist concepts of equating certain psychological, behavioral and intellectual traits with the female reproductive system.

This is a very, very popular trope, with many variations.


– “Saying “female” is a purely reproductive category reduces females to walking vaginas”

– “Females are more than just baby-makers”

– “Using “male” and “female” as reproductive categories reduces people to nothing more than their genitals.”

– “Defining females as humans with the capacity for egg-producing and offspring-gestating means you think females who get hysterectomies are no longer female!”

When a male uses this trope feel free to simply cut and paste the following paragraph in reply:

Women AREN’T “defined by their genitalia”. Only men like yourself frame females that way. Females are defined by their genetic sex, and women are adult females. Adult HUMAN females. No human is defined by their genitalia, because they are human beings. A male such as yourself is by definition NOT female, because of your Y chromosome, your sperm producing testes and your male biology. Males are NEVER female. That doesn’t mean your male genitalia defines you. It is simply a fact of your biological reality. Truly, when males who wish they were female invoke the trope of “females being defined by their genitalia” they are trying to colonize and reverse feminist messages against sex-based stereotypes and sex-roles by inferring that actual biological sex reality doesn’t exist. And that’s just silly. Because humans are a sexually dimorphic species, and all your willing that to go away because for whatever reason you wish you were female, is just silly. You take a feminist meme of “women are more than just our reproductive systems, we are full human beings” and you attempt to upend it into “there is no such thing as a female”. Well hon, no one is buying that except you. Sowwy. Females actually DO exist! WITH our genitals! Or even with them (god forbid) missing for some reason. We are still female, and we are still fully HUMAN, ergo, MORE than just our reproductive capacity. It’s actually an expression of male aggression and sexism to imply that IF our female sexed reality EXISTS than we are SIMPLY GENITALS and LESS than human. See how that works? Probably not, because I don’t think you give a FLYING FUCK about anything but your own entitlement to females, and anything you think females can do for you.

When this Trope is refuted the Genderist will usually switch over to the “Brain Sex/Lady Brain” trope. Or just call you a “bitch” or a “fish”. Possibly threaten you with violence or murder.

Subtext: Bitch, I see you as nothing more than a walking reproductive system, lacking all humanity, and will call you one, and will blame YOU for “making” me do so, unless you play along and “affirm” my male fantasy of becoming a “real female”. Because female reality harshes my buzz.

Classification: Reversal, Appropriation, Re-framing, Thought Terminating Cliché, Thought Stopper, Obedience Demand, physical sex does not exist, lady brains, mansplain feminism cause females r doin it wrong.

(See: “Transgender Trope#2: Biology Isn’t Destiny”)

Transgender Trope #9- My Vaginoplasty is the Same as a Vagina

June 20, 2011

OK now this is some seriously sad-ass shit.


“My penis is a Neo-Clit”

“I have a functioning clitoris and am capable of multiple orgasm.”

“ I have a vagina. As the cells in the human body undergo complete replacement over seven years, there is not a single cell in my body that was ever part of a penis. I have a perfectly good vagina as do all post-women with a transsexual history.”

“The female external genitalia (the Vulva) is composed of many major and minor anatomical structures, including the labia majora, mons pubis, labia minora, clitoris, bulb of vestibule, vulval vestibule, greater and lesser vestibular glands, and the opening of the vagina. I have all of these.”

“I have a vagina that receives annual gynocological examination and PAP smears. It is virtually indistinguishable from any other vagina (verified and confirmed by at least a half-dozen medical experts over the years). I can normally accept penetration by the erect penis of a normal average male (7 to 8 inches in length, an inch and a half to three quarters of an inch in girth).”

This is where it gets really really sad. Guys, this is where your entitlement runs out. You think it would be really hot to be female. You’d be even better at it than most females, who don’t even appreciate their privilege of how hot they are. Think of how much more you would work it, girl. Women have it so good, they are treated as harmless colorful trifles, having doors opened to them and getting free dinners. And all that hetero dick everywhere you look for the taking! Or that hot lesbian sex like in the pornos! All you can eat! A pink cloud of gossip and make-up and sensuality and fashion. Being a female is hot. And fun. It’s a privilege you deserve. Other men, learned, medical men have provided a means for you to achieve your goal. And other men, those who have traveled this path before you (and those closeted crossdressers who sympathize) have mapped out a legal path for you to achieve your entitlement! Hell it’s on the public dollar depending on what country you live in. Given the same priority (or higher) than cancer treatment. The world is your (autogynephillic) oyster bro! Go for it! Live the fantasy reality. Inhabit female. Own it. It’s yours to own. You own “female”. You own “woman” to do with as you wish. You own it baby!

EXCEPT. Except for those actual goddamn females. The ones whose vaginal organs exist. Actual organs, not sheaths of skin created as penile fuckholes, not granulating inverted-penile cavities created to serve as masturbation holes for clueless women-hating men who would stick their dick in a sheep’s cunt if it was available and warm. Not an oozing wound dripping foul smelling bowel juice and requiring eternal dilation to prevent from healing closed. Not a flesh tube held in place by internal scar tissue. Not a surgical cavity causing chronic bladder infection and incontinence in more than 50% of purchasers. It may come as some surprise to you fellows but vaginas are actually organs, not just dick-insertion holes! And your “neo-vag” might be hidden inside you, in the space between your rectum and your prostate gland (funny how none of you feel “dysphoric” about keeping that) but if you could see it – it looks as close to a real vag as these “neo-penises” look to real dicks (trigger warning: YUCK)

You may want to do this to yourself in pursuit of your fantasies (which have NOTHING to do with actual females, btw. You’ll be QUITE SHOCKED to find out how females are treated -of course you will assume such treatment is due to your male entitlement being challenged since you just know females have it SO great!) but hey guys:

>THIS< has NOTHING to do with a vagina.

Transgender Trope #8- Some Women Have Penises and Some Men Have Vaginas

April 19, 2011


Sex is a continuum.

Genitals don’t make one female or male.

What about women who have mastectomies and men who lose penis in duck hunting accident- they are still female/male, right?

This is a “physical reproductive sex doesn’t exist” trope. This trope seeks to erase the fact that human sexual reproduction is binary, comprised of males and females. We all know how babies are born, as a result of female egg and male sperm. Physical sex is a simple reality. None of us would be here otherwise. Humans are either male or female. This trope attempts to co-opt the experience of people who are born with a disability- a disorder of sexual development. People with a birth defect, either a chromosomal anomaly or malformed reproductive system. Plenty of people are born with birth defects. Some are born with no legs, some missing an eye, etc. But no one claims humans are not a bipedal species. No one claims that sight is not a human trait (barring grave disability). The reason we can safely say that hominids are a bipedal species is because -except in case of developmental disorder or amputation injury- humans are born with two legs. Roughly one in 400 humans is born with some sort of congenital anomaly (birth defect). About one in 800 is born with Down Syndrome. About one in 14,000 is born with a disorder of sexual development or “intersex”.

99.9997% of humans are born without a disorder of sexual development. They are male or female with no anomalous characteristic such as chromosomal variation or deformed reproductive system. So we can easily say that humans are male or female except in very rare cases of disorder of sexual development. There are more people born missing a body part than are born intersex. And now that we have chromosomal testing even intersex people can be sexed. Most individuals with disorders of sexual development are male= they have a Y chromosome. Chromosomally female intersex have an XO configuration, and are sterile as a result of their chromosomal birth defect. So even the tiny minority of people born with a birth defect of sex can be “sexed”.

So why do transgenders say that sex doesn’t exist?  People born with no legs don’t claim that bipedal hominids don’t exist.

They do this because they want to believe it is so. They want to believe, and more importantly, they want others to believe, that they are “really” female, or “really” male, even though they are not. Transgenders need their beliefs to be affirmed by others in order to sustain those gender  fantasies. Genderists think that by co-opting the experiences and reality of those born with disabilities of sexual development they can destabilize the reality of human sex, at least politically, or in the public mind. To further their political aims (which have much in common with the Christian Creationist movement in terms of scientific denial) they have destroyed most organizations set up to support people born with disorders of sexual development. The largest “Intersex” organization now in existence, Organization Intersex International (OII) was set up exclusively to frame transgenderism as an intersex or birth defect matter. People who are actually intersex have had to re-start organizations under the moniker of DSD= Disorders of Sexual Development, in order to support children born with actual intersex conditions and distance themselves from transgenderist political activists who prevented them from having supportive organizations which acknowledge the reality that intersex medical conditions, and resulting disability such as endocrine dysfunction and sterility actually exist. This is equivalent to individuals who fetishize amputees taking over disability services designed to assist those who are paraplegic.

Females DO NOT have penises, and males DO NOT have vaginas.

Transgender Trope #7- Society has no influence over my gender identity

April 19, 2011

This trope is dragged out in response to critical analysis of social sex roles by folks who believe in “Female Brains” and “Male Brains”: that sex-roles are innate, biological, and unchangeable. Transgenders claim to transcend or cross gender, but what their philosophy reveals is that they actually feel that gender is fundamental and not changeable. They claim their unchangeable innate “gender identity”, which is based on sex but in their case is a mistake of nature, requires sterilization, lifetime medical dependence on synthetic hormones (and medical monitoring) and radical extensive plastic surgery to promote congruence between sex and gender, which is the desired – necessary even, for sustenance of life – state of being. Those who believe in the biologic inherence of sex roles (gender) assert that sex roles are not social roles, and are not culturally created. These genderists believe that society has no influence over them. This trope is a thought terminating cliche. Obviously sex roles are culturally created, not biologically essentialist. Sex role conditioning is started on fetuses in the womb, as parents subject the mother to tests to determine fetal sex while still in utero. “Is it a girl or a boy?” is the most frequent refrain when a child is concieved because the answer determines the treatment the child receives. People treat females and males differently from infancy, even in utero when the sex is known. This is not under debate. The overwhelming influence of social conditioning is not under debate in any realm of psychology, psychiatry, sociology, anthropology, or any objective study of human behavior. Only trans claim to exist in a magical land free from social conditioning. Trans claim all females and males besides themselves are subject to social influence. Trans are somehow magically exempt. This trope is usually whipped out when sex-roles are discussed in relation to transgender. It is usually used to support their biologically essentialist claims that sex-roles are innate, and that the male-supremacist sex role stereotypes that feminists dispute are biologically innate, fixed, and unlike other neurology is unchangeable.. This trope is used by people who hypocritically insist on socially gendered pronouns, adopt new names which are gendered, and adopt behavior and dress which is gendered. If  society has no influence over gender than those seeking to transgender would have no need for social affirmation (name changes, change of legal sex marker, gendered behavior and appearance, medical body modification- hormones and surgery, pronouns, etc). If society has no influence over gender than genderists would seek no social affirmation of their adopted sex-role. Most male transgenders have FFS (facial feminization surgery) before they have SRS (sex reassignment surgery) because social perception and “affirmation” of their “gender” is prioritized over the body sex dysphoria that transgenders who use this trope claim is the essence of their “medical disability”.  Why would social affirmation supercede sexed body modification if the body is the problem? How do trans avoid the sex-roles the rest of us are all subjected to? How do they achieve this objectivity, and why do they prioritize surgeries which promote social perception of sex and social sex-role affirmation over surgical correction of what they claim is a physical, personal sex deformity with no social aspect? Hmm. Because it’s a total lie.

This trope is a thought stopper, conversation stopper, and a form of magical thinking, and let’s just say it: a lie.

Usually when questioned a genderist will switch over to the intersex trope “Some Women Have Penises and Some Men have Vaginas”.

See: “It’s about body dysphoria, not sex role”

Subtext: “I am an island. I am unaffected by the human condition unlike every other human. In fact I only speak my own language that no one else can understand: ST HBbHjh jhsbu7hs cks cbsksc csjksjkhkhj c kckh skdcsdos;dskjiquyfyf ejk he vouevoev  cjkdckjc.”

“I am special magic. I control the universe. Obey me.”


“Scientifically invisible “Brain Sex Roles” are biologically innate and unchangeable yet the proven biological reality of reproductive sex doesn’t exist. And even though reproductive sex doesn’t exist, “Brain Sex Roles” force one to be driven to modify one’s body to simulate the (non-existent) sex that is inherently attached to the invisible sexual reproductive function of the brain.”

Transgender Trope #6- From childhood I felt like a girl/boy

April 19, 2011

This trope is used to promote the idea that Sex Roles are innate, and rebellion against sex role constraints is a symptom of a physical birth defect= false biological sex, not false roles.

The narrative of experiencing something “since childhood” implies that one’s experience is intransient, innate, fixed, possibly “hard-wired” and biological. This trope is usually substantiated by sex role evidence such as ” I never liked dolls and preferred to play with matchbox cars” or “until sex roles became more enforced as I grew near puberty I assumed I was not innately different from my male/female friends”. “I liked to hunt and fish and never understood or related to those conforming to the sex role demanded of females”. “I did not like being separated from girls and being considered “other” because of my biological status”. “I wanted princess things that the girls seemed so lucky to have”. “I was surprised and disquieted to discover myself different from other children due to my genitals”. Etc. This trope is called a testimonial. One’s feelings and experience, which anyone can relate to, is relayed to bolster one’s underlying assertion by using emotion rather than critical analysis. This is a deflection of critical thought. No one can dispute one’s personal experience narrative. This trope is used to deflect from critical analysis of sex roles by using emotional appeal.  If one injects critical analysis to this narrative – for example pointing out the sex role stereotypes which inform the narrative – the trope user will rapidly change course, abandoning the testimonial completely and moving onto another trope, usually “Society has no influence over my gender identity”.


Transgender children should be sterilized before puberty so they can better conform to sex roles.

Sex roles are innate and un-changable.


Sex roles are inborn and not culturally created. Girls like dolls and submissive behavior, boys like guns and dominating behaviors.