There are two distinct types of ‘trans woman’ — transsexuals and autogynephilic transvestites. These are people born male who present as women. Other than that, the two types have no similarity to each other. However, this has been deliberately confused by individuals in one of these types, to advantage themselves at the expense of the other, and also to harm women. This has caused widespread misunderstanding. We need a field guide.
Researching the history of transsex is not at all easy. In the first place, the activities of transwomen, feminised males and sex workers are rarely considered appropriate material for men of letters to discuss. Even where such histories were written, cultural revisionists have done everything they could to erase them, with much original material being deliberately destroyed.
Transsexualism is high profile these days. But what actually causes it? Who are transsexuals? Since there is clearly a deal of ignorance over this, I’m going to go over the explanations again, in a short series of articles.
Women trapped in men’s bodies?
Many people are familiar with the idea that male -to-female (MtF) transsexuals, or transwomen, are ‘women trapped in men’s’ bodies. At the same time, they probably have heard the inverse about Female to Male (FtM) transsexuals or transmen. That is to say, they are ‘men trapped in women’s’ bodies.
A moment’s reflection should make anyone with a brain ask a pertinent question: how can they possibly know that?
Today’s first piece is an update to my last, about a Fraud called Tailcalled. I could just update that but a new one will get more coverage. So, ladies and gentlemen, I give you Carl Dybdahl, aka ‘Tailcalled’.
I have now confirmed that ‘Tailcalled’ is in fact a man and that the picture he uses is a fake. He confessed on Twitter that it is actually an AI-generated image. So to all his fans, sorry, this is not your man.
In fact, this is ‘Tailcalled’.
His real name is Carl Dybdahl and he is a software engineer living in Copenhagen. Carl has confirmed this identification by his reaction to my posting certain details.
Carl made the mistake of attacking me personally from behind his false identity, on YouTube. I imagine he might think twice before doing that again. I shall refrain from further comment on the person, though I will on his methodology, in the future.
I shall post another piece about why we have to destroy the internet culture of anonymity.
This is an unusual post for me. It is likely that my web presence will have to be significantly modified in the future. I’m afraid Covid-19 has caught up with us and we have lost all our sponsorships and support. This website generates no income and is really a vanity. So things will have to change and it is likely that I shall use other media more in the future.
However, before beginning these changes, I want to make a few things quite clear, regarding the ‘trans debate’, if something so vicious can be called a debate.
J Michael Bailey’s seminal book, The Man Who Would Be Queen(TMWWBQ) sparked huge controversy when it was published in 2003. The furore it caused, while small in focus, was spectacular in its incandescent rage at the author. This was categorically different from the conservative reaction to works of other controversial authors like D H Lawrence, or even Vladimir Nabokov’s deeply unsettling study of male attraction to pubescent girls. In those, the hostility was principally against the work; not so here. It was J Michael Bailey in person who was vilified.
And to cap that, TMWWBQ is not a work of fiction, but of popular science. It is well written, in non-scientific language, is easy to read and deeply sympathetic to its subject. So what on Earth happened, to provoke such a furious backlash? It included entirely spurious attempts to end Bailey’s career, personal slurs and threats of violence against him. His attackers even accused him of sexually molesting his children.
The campaign against Bailey, coordinated by a small group of internet bullies, amounted to nothing more or less than a blatant attempt at censorship associated with a virulent personal attack on the author. It’s time, now, to revisit this book and see why it caused such a storm in a latte cup. Continue reading “The Man Who Would Be Queen”
This article on the two types of trans woman is from 2015 but I’ve updated and refreshed it. The points it makes are still germane.
If you’ve been anywhere near a media outlet over the last few years you won’t ave been able to avoid noticing that trans women are getting a lot of attention. If you have seen images of Caitlyn, formerly Bruce, Jenner, and then Paris Lees, Janet Mock, Laverne Cox or Jai Dara Latto, who was crowned Miss Transgender UK 2015, you might be forgiven for being a bit confused. You might be struggling to figure out what the connection is between an ageing sports jock who looks like a man in a dress, and a glamorous woman who looks like — a glamorous woman. If you’re at all liberal or PC, you might have just accepted that these are the same, but, you know, because time and stuff.
But you’d be dead wrong. There are two completely distinct types of transgender woman and there is no connection between them at all. The conflation that is going on is wrong and potentially lethal.
This is important because one type is the subject of deadly and repeated violence, while the other colludes in it. Perhaps even worse, a vicious form of feminism rooted in the writing of the odious Janice Raymond, has for decades also been colluding in this persecution. Those who follow this are called Trans Exclusionary Radical Feminist or TERFs.
Now I will show my cards here: my girlfriend is trans. But she’s not like Jenner. And because she is — being of the other type — a potential victim of violence, I have to stand to the wire. Political Correctness is all very well until people start dying because of it; and that is what is happening. So let me explain.
A few years living outside the particular circumstances of the Anglo-West forces a question: are ‘gays’ in the West homosexual at all? Is ‘homosexual’ a way of having sex, or does it refer to a personality type?
Ever since Kinsey entered the fray, there has been a concerted effort to avoid seeing ‘homosexual’ as a personality type and to use it instead to describe a way of having sex. But this is completely at odds not only with the global usage of the term, but also of the historical antecedents.
This is important because, as so often happens, an entire group of people has been ruthlessly erased to suit the political agenda of another one, this time because of their personality type. To understand that, we have to understand what the terms mean.
‘Gay’ is usually taken to mean ‘ homosexual’ and has been used in this context since the 1920s, in the West. However, the term is vague and today really applies to a lifestyle rather than a specific sexuality. Several classes of people inhabit that lifestyle, which adds to the confusion, since many of them do not conform to the homosexual personality type
I am in a relationship with a transsexual (TS) woman. This places me in a position of responsibility, because my girlfriend, like all her sisters, is in danger. Transsexual women are abused, insulted, and disrespected; but worse, they are beaten, falsely arrested, harassed by authorities that should protect them and frequently murdered.
This means that men like me must stand up and be counted.