some people need to be mocked

[winterbadger]

It's just that some of them really go out of their way to attract our attention to this fact. What a bunch of idiots!

Is the "transgender agenda" connected in any way to the "gay and lesbian agenda"? If you're a member of the lesbian agenda and you transition to male gender, do you have to give up your lesbian agenda identity card and go through a debrief before you can get your TG agenda briefing (sorry, I spent the morning in a security briefing, so special status briefings are on my brain).

Is the transgender agenda a sub-agenda of the New World Order agenda? Does it relate to the International Zionist Conspiracy? Because, man (or woman), I'm tellin' you, I am betting that the Lubavicher rebbes are not real supportive of TG transition, and I'm dead sure they don't think highly of gays and lesbians. And as for the ultra Orthodox wanting to be part of a world conspiracy run through the UN... Given, that it's the same UN that passes resolutions condemning Israel every time they, well, bulldoze a few streets of terrorist houses or blow up a terrorist leader and accidentally kill some female terrorists, teenage terrorists, and baby terrorists, I can't really see Yona Metzger or Shlomo Amar sitting down to plot takeover strategies with Kofi Annan.

Comments

[kathygnome.livejournal.com]

If you're a member of the lesbian agenda and you transition to male gender, do you have to give up your lesbian agenda identity card and go through a debrief before you can get your TG agenda briefing

Trust me, you don't want to get into the delicate dance between the lesbian and trans communities ;-)

And I've never met a transgendered ogre. I'm a gnome.

[robbysmom.livejournal.com]

from the article's quotation of the "alert":

"the transgender agenda," an "effort to deconstruct the biological reality of male and female."

hmmmm. . . well, jeepers, here we go again with the trouble (in addition to willful ignorance) being simplification. Deconstruction looks at language (signifiers and the signified), not "realities" in the sense these folks might like to think of realities-- as empirtically provable facts.

The theorist wing of the LGBTQ "movement" as it were is largely made up of us troublesome thinkers (gasp) who if aware of techniques of Deconstruction might point out that so-called "biological reality" of sex is not the same thing as the social construction of gender. So the 21st c. US, a bar tender with a shadow beard wearing a dress would be understood to be a figure of ambiguous GENDER, which is not the same thing as sex.

But, too the oversimplifiers clearly would just like to ignore, it seems, so-called (biological) hermaphrodites or those with ambiguosu genitalia and the biological fact (as we know it) that cells in utero that form male and feamle genitialia are the same until affected by hormones and human systems can act rather differently on any number of humans than on most humans. They may also ignore the lived reality of folks for whom apparent sex and gender may be different (too complicated, they may say), as well as those for whom apparent sex has always seemed wrong-- for whatever reason.

(There's a really excellent novel whose narrator is an intersex person _Middlesex_ that is the most well written book I have read this year.)

Anyway, my own lesbian agenda is that with regard to the "biological realities" the oversimplifiers tout, there is a great deal of common cause between homosexuals and transgender folks. I would say that the oversimplifiers are *not* wrong about that! But, typically, they would conflate groups-- perhaps, I worry, to either or both "divide and conquer" and "tar with one brush."

it's seems obvious to me, meanwhile, that a "transgender" charatcer who is depicted as EVIL woudl not be the creation of those who wished to advance any POSITIVE "agenda" with said character.

[winterbadger]

it's seems obvious to me, meanwhile, that a "transgender" charatcer who is depicted as EVIL woudl not be the creation of those who wished to advance any POSITIVE "agenda" with said character.

Yeah, good point. I think this falls into the category of "if we even admit something exists then, by depicting it, we implicitly approve of it."

This is, alas, a form of ?logic? not restricted to the ultraconservative right. I've seen similar logic from the overprotective left when it comes to characters, actions, and sentiment in art and the media when it comes to issues of violence, hate speech, etc.

[winterbadger]

And I've never met a transgendered ogre. I'm a gnome.

Yes, but you're not a transgendered *gnome* are you? As a gnome, haven't you always been female? ;-)

Presumably the Traditional Values Coalitions would go completely apeshit of they encountered the Piers Anthony series (either Tarot or Cluster) I read in h.s. where the protagonist's soul is projected not just into differently sexed bodies but different species, including one that has three sexes.