Sunday, March 02, 2008

Shower-Nuts Admit Rio Incident Was Staged

Am I the only one who thinks there is some irony when the man from the Concerned Women for America is bad-mouthing transgender people? There is an interview on the CWA web site with Theresa Rickman of the Citizens for a Responsible Whatever, where they start out lying about what the new nondiscrimination law says, go on to say ridiculous hateful things about Dana Beyer, and end up, before the interview is over, admitting that the scene where a man in a dress went into the ladies locker-room at Rio was staged by the CRW.

First, listen to how Concerned Woman Matt Barber defines the referendum movement here -- this is what the CRW wishes our local journalists would do:
MARTHA KLEDER: Matt, what is going on in Mongtomery County?

MATT BARBER: Well, Martha, Montgomery County Maryland, the county council out there put a law in place which basically allows men in dresses or women who perceive themselves as men to use showers and public facilities, restrooms and locker-rooms of the opposite sex, so a man in a dress can walk into a women's locker, shower alongside the women, use the women's restrooms and so forth. So naturally, rightfully, a group of concerned and outraged citizens there in Montgomery County started a petition drive to get a referendum in place that would rescind this ridiculous law.

This guy is good. He tells the story exactly how they want it to be told, perfect.

In case you haven't been following, the law they are referring to prohibits discrimination in employment and other things on the basis of gender identity -- it protects transgender people, so they can expect to be hired for jobs they are qualified for, they can expect to be served in restaurants, and so on. The law doesn't say anything about what bathroom anybody uses. There has never been a law regulating bathroom use, and this law doesn't change anything. This has been the CRW's frame, to scare people into signing the petitions so they can re-legalize discrimination.

Anyone who wants to argue about whether the CRW was misrepresenting their petitions needs only to look at this explanation -- this is the same thing they told people outside groceries stores and malls.

Theresa goes on and on about the organized harassment of their petition-pushers. I'll tell you what, as far as I know there were six or seven people -- including me -- covering the entire county. Most sites never got a visit, and nobody anywhere was surrounded. One guy at Leisure World got a visit by five of us, because he appeared while we were relaxing inside a Starbuck's and we saw him on the way to our cars. Whatever, whining is a way of life for those people.

This part made me sick. If Theresa Rickman had a shred of decency, she would have hung up on this interview when they started in like this:
MARTHA KLEDER: Theresa, who is Dana Beyer? Identify that person for us.

THERESA RICKMAN: Dana Beyer works for Duchy Trachtenberg. She's a senior aide to the council member, woman, that sponsored the legislation. Duchy Trachtenberg got sixty percent of her funding for her elections campaign from out of the county. [more irrelevant stuff about Trachtenberg's donations] ... and we believe that hiring a Dana, to have Dana, a transgender, you know, in the County Council offices every day, was also a very deliberate move.

MATT BARBER: Now, Dana Beyer is a man who perceives himself as a woman, correct?

THERESA RICKMAN: I believe Dana has gone, undergone a sex change operation.

MATT BARBER: Well, he's still a man who's essentially altered his physical appearance --

MARTHA KLEDER: through plastic surgery --

MATT BARBER: Plastic surgery and considers himself a woman. Well this gentleman, I understand that he lied ...

And for the rest of the interview, these hateful people referred to Dana as "he." You know, Dana's my friend, and this is reprehensible. Even Theresa had the decency to refer to Dana as "she" and explain that she has had the surgery. To listen to this recording, to hear this guy's voice, just turns my stomach. Why did the director of the Citizens for Whatever go along with this? It's not a hard question: this is the way they feel. At the bottom of this referendum effort is a loathing of transgender people, a refusal to accept them as human beings, a need to mock them.

But here's the interesting part. A while back, a man in a dress went into a gym at Rio. He signed in, went to the ladies locker-room, and came out again. Channel Seven responded immediately with a breathless acount. We found out later that Theresa Rickman was actually in the lobby of the gym when this happened, but the Citizens for Whatever have consistently denied that the event was staged.

Until now.
MARTHA KLEDER: Well Theresa, I also heard that someone tried to test this. Was there some event where a transgender or a shemale or someone tried to use the opposite sex bathroom?

THERESA RICKMAN: Yes, at Rio Sport and Health up in Germantown. A guy dressed as a girl went into the ladies bathroom. And, ah you know, essentially what uh, that was meant to get some media attention, you know, and the guy left immediately apparently, I mean but there was, this is the Rio Sport and Health Club, you know and Sport and Health has steam rooms, and there are ladies changing in those locker rooms, people in various stages of undress [laughing] all the time, so there's lots a guy can see.

Yes, that is just what we were saying: this was meant to get some media attention. Greta Kreuz from Channel Seven sent an email saying she was "offended by suggestions that this incident was fabricated by this group and that Channel 7 got sucked into reporting it as part of an 'agenda.'" We don't know if she was fooled by it, or if she was part of the plan in the first place, but Channel Seven was the only outlet to tell their public about this "test of the new law."

80 Comments:

Anonymous Anonymous said...

Greta Kreuz from Channel Seven sent an email saying she was "offended by suggestions that this incident was fabricated by this group and that Channel 7 got sucked into reporting it as part of an 'agenda.'"


Greta thinks she was offended? She reported on a story without checking into facts and just who all the players in this hoax was. Nor did she do any research into what the law was actually about.

She has some nerve saying she was offended. She needs to go back to study Reporting 101.

Ted

March 02, 2008 11:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Jim wrote: Why did the director of the Citizens for Whatever go along with this? It's not a hard question: this is the way they feel. At the bottom of this referendum effort is a loathing of transgender people, a refusal to accept them as human beings, a need to mock them.


Beacause the "real Theresa Rickman" keeps shining through as a bigot and one who promotes hateful discrmination. Rio Theresa is a Shower Nut through and through and deserves not one ounce of respect on any level.

Theresa, you and your sick cohorts owe Dana a public apology.


Ted

March 02, 2008 11:08 PM  
Blogger BlackTsunami said...

Did someone send Greta Kreuz an email letting her know about the recent admission? I would be interested to see what she says.

March 03, 2008 3:16 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I believe I said, "that was bound to get some media attention, Jim. not meant." I will go check the tape. we have no idea who did this and we did not stage it as you keep implying. geez. theresa

March 03, 2008 8:46 AM  
Anonymous Derrick said...

Therea admiting that she lied isn't a surprise... we all know that!!! HA!

That is all these sickos do is LIE, LIE, LIE!

March 03, 2008 8:46 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

and once again. I was not in the lobby when it happened. we got a call back from the robo calls in the evening, from another lady who was in the lockerroom, and called the news and went over the NEXT day. (with about 4 other people when we realized the cameras were going to be there). .. you are a liar Jim because I have told you this before. Since you were not there you don't know. Call the manager of the gym, she can also tell you that we were there the next day, not the day it happened. And, by the way, it happened again, and two ladies have quit the gym over it since..and one lady (renee) went up and asked Rio who said that their new policy is to let transgenders in because with the new law, they will be fined up to 500,000 if they don't. Theresa

March 03, 2008 8:54 AM  
Anonymous Aunt Bea said...

Deny it all you want Theresa, but clear as day you said the stunt at Rio "was meant to get some media attention." We can all hear you say it at 12:50 on the CWFA audio file.

March 03, 2008 9:05 AM  
Blogger JimK said...

Theresa, we did talk to the manager, right after it happened, and she said she thought it was staged, and that you were in the lobby when it happened. The real question though is why you continued with this interview with these despicable, hateful people at CWA. It has long been clear that you are very conservative, and I can respect that even if I don't agree with your views. But the terrible things they were saying -- why did you participate in that? It shows us another side of you that does not deserve respect.

JimK

March 03, 2008 9:15 AM  
Anonymous Emproph said...

Theresa Rickman said...
"we got a call back from the robo calls in the evening, from another lady who was in the lockerroom, and called the news and went over the NEXT day"

The "NEXT" day? How long ago did this incident happen, and how long have you been being accused of having been RIGHT there after it happened, and how long have you been shrieking about wrongful involvement in this whole hullabaloo, and this is the FIRST time you're mentioning it?

March 03, 2008 9:19 AM  
Blogger Dana Beyer, M.D. said...

Theresa,

You denied having anything to do with TVC, and here you are giving an interview to the equally hateful CWA. You obviously sat there while they insulted me, didn't argue with the interviewers, didn't walk out, didn't correct their improper and rude use of pronouns.

I give businesses more credit than you do. We all know that, thanks to you, that there is no law in place and no potential fine which you love to bring up. If Rio has a policy of allowing us to use the locker rooms, it is a policy with discretion, because that's the way it always has been. To insinuate that there are trans women exposing themselves in that locker room is obscene.

And you can try the plausible deniability route all you want, but we know the truth. So maybe Johnny had one of your guys put on a dress, and it wasn't you. Just the way your petitioners routinely lied through their teeth during signature gathering, but you absolve yourself of all responsibility for that.

Tell me -- so it was one of us who was testing the law (which didn't exist)? Are you serious? You're going to say that to a judge with a straight face?

March 03, 2008 9:23 AM  
Anonymous Derrick said...

Theresa- this isn't I think you are going to lie yourself out of.

March 03, 2008 9:28 AM  
Anonymous Derrick said...

OOPS! Typo... my last post should have said, "This isn't a LIE you are going to lie yourself out of"

March 03, 2008 9:29 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

It has become readily apparent that Theresa R. is in need of immediate psychiatric treatment. A person who is so hateful, paranoid, dishonest, and re-creates the world according to her own perceptions, is sick. She must be an extremely unhappy person. So sad!!

March 03, 2008 9:51 AM  
Anonymous Emproph said...

Theresa said...
"geez."

Theresa, Geez is short for Jesus.

March 03, 2008 10:01 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Andrea- not anon
Theresa, do you feel dirty after hanging around with these truly despicable people? Baseball cap guy is really a creep- I've been in plenty of demonstrations and he is one of the nastiest people I've ever encountered. This guy from CWA, the sicko from the first hatefest(I keep blocking his name because he was so awful that Michele and Johnny tried to shut him up), the people who write such horrible things on the on-line Petition. I figure you are okay with them- any kind of support from the lowest sort of people. There is sometimes honor of a sort among bigots - there is a limit to whose support they will accept for their cause. With a guy yelling "Heil Hitler" on your side- well, that adds a whole extra low dimension to your "cause".

March 03, 2008 10:05 AM  
Anonymous Emproph said...

In addition Theresa, you continue to complain this as a complaint, redundantly:

"we have no idea who did this and we did not stage it as you keep implying."

I for one am not contending that you, Michelle, or CRG "staged" the incident in question, or "know" who did it.

What I DO contend, and what I think is being insisted upon as evidence, is that you, and/or your group, were complicit with this person in the execution of the event.

The only real question is, did you, or anyone you know, have any conscious awareness that this was staged for the express, and specific purpose of bringing attention to your notmyshower cause?

Because if you did, which it seems you did, you are complicit in the crime. And thus, you aided and abetted.

Do you care to deny this?

March 03, 2008 10:24 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Andrea...interesting point you made about the petition-signers who wrote comments on the petition they signed. I could be wrong about this, but wouldn't that nullify those signatures or even the entire peititon page that contained such comments? I am not aware of any petition that allows for written comments to be scrawled on it.
RT

March 03, 2008 10:32 AM  
Anonymous Derrick said...

Yes, indeed, interesting Andrea (about writing things on the petitions). That most certainly makes them invalid! :-).

The ENTIRE page, actually.

March 03, 2008 10:43 AM  
Anonymous Robert said...

I've had dealings with Concerned Women; they are a pretty hateful organization in general, but their new guy, Matt Barber, is consistently snide and rude to people with whom he disagrees. He comes across as similar to the most hateful people on talk radio, and that's the audience at which CWFA aims. They, by their examples, make a bad case for Christianity. They are also quite influential on the right side of the aisle on Capitol Hill.

March 03, 2008 11:18 AM  
Anonymous Robert said...

For example, when we were battling over one of the anti-gsa bills in Virginia a few years ago, consistently described GSAs as "sex clubs" in their public testimony. At their rallies in Fairfax about the (orientation only) non-discrimination policy, they portrayed me as wanting kindergarten boys to wear pink tutus to school (where they got that one from I don't know, but they had good graphics). At one point they put my principal's phone number on their national website, I think in an effort to cause me difficulty at work. She kind of wondered why people from Alaska wanted her to fire the gay teacher who was recruiting students.

Shockingly, overwhelmingly hateful. Theresa and CRC/CRG are known by the company they keep. They do serve to make the rest of us seem eminently reasonable when we discuss discrimination, harassment, fairness and tolerance.

rrjr

March 03, 2008 11:23 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Last time and for the record.

We have no idea who did this.
I was not there the day it happened.

Let's conference call the gym manager together, shall we Jim ? she will tell you that I was not there the day it happened. I was there the day after it happened.

I have already said that I will happy to take a lie detector test.
That offer stands. I have no knowledge of who did this.

the clear wording of the law, and nothing else, forces any gym to let anyone who claims to be female in a ladies room, as the lawyers trolling for clients have already stated in published legal opinions. If they don't the clear language of the law (which does include punitive damages) allows the trans person to sue for up to 500,000 dollars. Any trans person can thus put any gym that would like to keep sex segregated faciltiies out of business, easily. and of course the gym might also get sued by ladies who don't want men in their locker rooms. I don't know what these folks expect the gym to do other than go out of business.

theresa

March 03, 2008 11:47 AM  
Anonymous Robert said...

Didn't Rio say that their policy is that trans people use the "family" rest room?

rrjr

March 03, 2008 12:24 PM  
Anonymous Derrick said...

Theresa-

Maybe you had this premeditated.

It may be possible that you made sure you didn't know "who" went into the women's shower area... however, maybe the two questions that you should be asked on a Lie Detector Test are:

1. Did you have any knowledge that this even was going to take place before it did?

2. Did anyone inform you that they had staged the event after it happened?

Then we'll see what happens.

March 03, 2008 12:25 PM  
Anonymous Emproph said...

So, after I said all of this:
"I for one am not contending that you, Michelle, or CRG "staged" the incident in question, or "know" who did it.

What I DO contend, and what I think is being insisted upon as evidence, is that you, and/or your group, were complicit with this person in the execution of the event.

The only real question is, did you, or anyone you know, have any conscious awareness that this was staged for the express, and specific purpose of bringing attention to your notmyshower cause?

Because if you did, which it seems you did, you are complicit in the crime. And thus, you aided and abetted.

Do you care to deny this?"

--
She STILL didn't deny collusion.

March 03, 2008 1:52 PM  
Anonymous Emproph said...

theresa said...
"I have already said that I will happy to take a lie detector test."
--
I clarified POINT BLANK that it wasn’t about WHO did it.

Then I asked you POINT BLANK whether you had anything to do WITH it.

And your response was that you didn’t know WHO did it.

What part of anything to do WITH it do you not understand?

March 03, 2008 2:19 PM  
Blogger Dana Beyer, M.D. said...

On a more personal level, Theresa -- why did you sit there when they were insulting me? Your complicity in that interview belies you comments of the past few days that you have not done so.

March 03, 2008 2:26 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Rio Theresa said, "you are a liar Jim because I have told you this before"


That is rich coming from you Rio Theresa. Haven't you and your cohorts told enough lies already?

I guess not. Even when your lies come back to roost you then tell another bigger one to CYA.

Ted

March 03, 2008 2:28 PM  
Anonymous Emproph said...

Audio @ 15:01 said...

Matt Barber: All of this just really embodies the insanity of this whole notion of transgenderism, this word that they made up for people who suffer from gender identity disorder, which the APA still, although they’re an extremely left leaning organization, even they still acknowledge that gender confusion and gender identity disorder, is a disorder.

Theresa Rickman: Correct, correct, yeah, we don’t have any other mental disorders that have special rights.

March 03, 2008 3:12 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"And, ah you know, essentially what uh, that was meant to get some media attention, you know, and the guy left immediately apparently"

I listened to this interview and, unless Theresa retaped it, this quote that Jim titled this post on is fictitious. Theresa didn't say it.

March 03, 2008 3:54 PM  
Anonymous Emproph said...

Didn't say what?

Exactly, precisely, what is it she did not say?

March 03, 2008 4:23 PM  
Anonymous Derrick said...

From www.mcpscurriculum.com:

"CRC Not to Appeal Judge's Ruling:

Will Seek Legislative Input on Definition of "Erotic Technique". Students To Be Given Direct Information On MCPS' False Reason (Innate) for Homosexuality."


Any my question is, how are students going to be given this "direct information". I'll be sure to let the BOE know about this.

March 03, 2008 4:57 PM  
Anonymous Emproph said...

"that was meant to get some media attention"

Not "I think." Not "I assume." But definitively, and was indeed, "meant to get some media attention."

Which puts her squarely at the conceptual scene of the crime.

And despite REPEATED requests to do so, articulated in NO UNCERTAIN TERMS, she has yet to deny it.

So Rickman, the floor continues to remain yours.

March 03, 2008 5:13 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Emproph said... "So Rickman, the floor continues to remain yours."


Unless Rio Theresa would rather, "crawl under the floor."

The hoax was just that a hoax with Rio Theresa and CRW(hatevers) squarely involved.


Ted

March 03, 2008 5:33 PM  
Anonymous Emproph said...

Emproph said...
Audio @ 15:01 said...

Matt Barber: All of this just really embodies the insanity of this whole notion of transgenderism, this word that they made up for people who suffer from gender identity disorder, which the APA still, although they’re an extremely left leaning organization, even they still acknowledge that gender confusion and gender identity disorder, is a disorder.

Theresa Rickman: Correct, correct, yeah, we don’t have any other mental disorders that have special rights.
--
You knew full well that the treatment for the disorder was transition, and that after transition it is no longer a disorder.

You understood this. You've been told, repeatedly, I am witness. And you not only stood idly by as a half truth was told as a full truth, thereby making it a lie, but you took it two steps further. By confirming that half truth as whole truth, and then by characterizing the legal protections of Americans who are transgendered, protections that you swim in daily, as being "special rights."

Did that make you feel special Theresa? I certainly hope someone "got off" on the whole exchange.

March 03, 2008 5:57 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Andrea- not anon
The on-line petition is not the same as the paper petition for the referendum. the on-line petition is a way for people to support this bigotry from anywhere on-line, not just MC. Still the comments I read on-line are sure to make Theresa, Michelle and Steina proud even if they can't count these as support for their hate referendum. The hate that is spewed in some of the comments makes you know that these are the people you need to keep away from your kids.

Transgender people do not have a mental disorder but people with mental disabilities are given rights in acts such as the ADA. So Theresa, as usual, is wrong.

March 03, 2008 6:04 PM  
Blogger Dana Beyer, M.D. said...

Theresa,

I'm not focusing on the Rio incident, and this is not a political question. I just want to know how you can sit in an interview with people that are so hateful?

Do you really believe you don't owe me an apology for that?

March 03, 2008 10:14 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I don't think she does.

I also believe she shouldn't make any more responses to you.

March 03, 2008 10:17 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Anonymous: Why is that? Is it because she is a chicken-livered coward?

March 03, 2008 10:25 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

No, it's because Dana seems to be trying to goad Theresa into the same kind of behavior that Dana displays so often. It's not hard to guess why.

March 03, 2008 10:47 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

You guys are unbelievable.

1. Did you have any knowledge that this even was going to take place before it did?

No, I didn't

2. Did anyone inform you that they had staged the event after it happened?

No, they did not. However, while I was standing outside a grocery store handing out the Rio flyer some lady (who I did not know) said she knew who did it, it was one of her clients. No idea what that meant. She was entering the grocery store as she said this and in retrospect, I should have followed her inside and asked. Also the Rio manager said that someone had lost their card and apparently the person who did this went in the gym on this lost card. Though perhaps this is just a way to cover with the media on not providing the name. Now you know everything I know about the incident.

3. The only real question is, did you, or anyone you know, have any conscious awareness that this was staged for the express, and specific purpose of bringing attention to your notmyshower cause?

No, no one in my group knows who did this.

Go back and look at the story. It was recorded on Tuesday (when I was there) and the guy went into the bathroom on Monday.

And I went back and listened to the tape (I was on a plane this afternoon, or I would have done this sooner). What I said was "that did get some media attention". not "this was designed to get media attention".

Jim you are misrepresenting again. Shocker.

And just because you folks have claimed that gender identity is only listed in the DISM so that folks can get sex change operations, doesn't mean I have to agree with you. There are plently of conflicting medical opinions out there on whether someone can be "innately" opposite than the sex they were "assigned" at birth, based on their "brain sex". I believe you are the sex the your chromosones and your genitals dictate. Sorry, there is absolutely no name you can call me that will make me change that belief. There are lots of doctors who agree with us, this is not a radical belief. You are on the radical side, folks. And I believe Dana and Mary Ann are very confused folks, and I feel sorry for them. I have absolutely no problem with gender identity job non-discrimination rights, as long as they are not working as a teacher around kids, as long as religous institutions don't have to hire them, and there are reasonable exceptions to this law. I don't want people with penises in ladies rooms and especially not in ladies changing areas, regardless of whether or not they expose those male genitals. Sorry, I don't think you have the right to tromp all over my reasonable expectation that people in ladies rooms will be genetically female. And you shouldn't be tromping on the religous rights of every Muslim women in the county by forcing them to share bathrooms with people who are still genetically male.

You need to be careful not to take rights away from 99.9% of the population, when you extend rights to .1%. That is reasonable. The current law is not.



Theresa

March 03, 2008 10:48 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Rio Theresa said, "Jim you are misrepresenting again. Shocker."

Rio Theresa you and you lying cohorts have the market cornered on misrepresenting.

You are a bigot and a liar and remain so.

Dana do not hold your breath on Theresa apologizing for any of her discriminatory habits. She is quite comfortable in her roles as a bigot and a promoter of hate.

Ted

March 03, 2008 10:56 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

And we had just been talking about how the media is falling for the "personal and private" misrepresentation, and not bothering to dig into the law and understand that it clearly still covers bathrooms, which is why I made the comment that the Rio incident "did get some media attention".

And Dana, I am not apologizing for doing an interview with CWA. I don't think they are hateful at all. Just because someone calls you a "he" does not make them a hateful person. It goes against the religions of many folks to refer to you as a "she" when they strongly believe you are the sex you are born, that God gave you. Did it ever occur to you that by asking them to call you a "she" you are asking them to deny their religious beliefs and perhaps infringing on their religious rights ?

I don't feel that strongly about it one way or the other, so I just try to avoid using either pronoun - which is challenging.

Ok, now I am signing off and will not be answering.

Theresa

March 03, 2008 11:03 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Theresa needs a lesson in biology. Not every human being is either XX or XY. There are countless variations like XO, XXY, XYY and more. So tell us, Theresa, since you believe you are the sex the your chromosones and your genitals dictate tell us what is the sex of someone with XXY chromosomes? According to your beliefs, does the XX make this individual female or does the XY make this individual male?

March 03, 2008 11:06 PM  
Blogger Dana Beyer, M.D. said...

Actually, I am not offending anyone's religious beliefs. There is nothing in anyone's religion to which you can point to that has anything to do with being intersex or transgender other than in an honorific manner, and you blithely use a religious cover for bigotry.

I have said repeatedly that I don't care what you think, but you have an obligation in a civil society to treat me respectfully. I am as legally female as you, and to deliberately ignore that is to violate the norms of a civil society.

There aren't many physicians who agree with you, Theresa. Sorry. Over 100,000 women have transitioned in this country under medical supervision. No psychiatrist who agrees with you has ever had success with anything but social and physical transition. To scientists that's plenty of proof, and the neurological and developmental studies all point in the same direction. Again, you don't have to believe it, as you don't have to believe in evolution and gravity, but you have no right to incite hate against anyone. And when you incite it against me I take it personally.

All you have to do is get over your discomfort, but you would rather make the lives of even a handful of people miserable to save yourself the effort. And cut the crap about 99.9% of the population. They didn't care at all before you made a stink, and only those you've frightened plus the bigots care now.

Since you've finally thrown in the towel on the sex-ed curriculum you can spend all your time gunning for me. You should be so proud. We're not going anywhere, however, so you're just going to have to get used to us.

March 03, 2008 11:16 PM  
Anonymous svelte_brunette said...

Hey folks, been having some neck, back, and shoulder pains recently, and I know exercise helps loosen up my muscles and relieves some of the pain. Anyone know a good gym in the Germantown area I could perhaps go to after work?

Peace,

Cynthia

March 04, 2008 8:04 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Andrea- not anon
Why is Theresa so worried about who is in the next stall? We know the only people who really care about who is in the next stall are male Republican politicians who aren't gay but like to have anonymous bathroom sex with other men.

I only hope there is paper in the stall and hot water and soap at the sink and it seems like lots of people don't care about the soap and hot water- that scares me!

March 04, 2008 8:54 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Would you favor making all group bathrooms unisex then?

BTW, the lies that have been revealed in this post should be you guys to shame. You've all been lying about the day Theresa was at Rio. Lied about what the manager of Rio said. Lied about what Theresa said in the CWA interview.

Apparently, you're shameless.

March 04, 2008 8:59 AM  
Blogger Dana Beyer, M.D. said...

You know, Wyatt, you really take the cake. We know what Theresa has said, and we know what we were told by Rio. This time, Theresa is on tape speaking, so everyone can hear her for themselves. Regardless of what you say.

As for Rio, the easiest way to resolve this is to have Rio bring in their member who participated in this hoax. People have said here that if this truly is a pedophile then you would certainly have raised the alarm and called the police (something you guys have proven very adept at doing) and, I imagine, that Rio management would have done so, too, because they would not want a predator on their membership roles as a constant threat. That nothing has happened is further circumstantial evidence that it was a hoax, and Rio knows it. They've said that they accommodate trans women with separate facilities (without any law or anticipation of any law), so they have nothing about which to be concerned.

Ultimately this fellow may be subpoenaed and we will have all this under oath.

But in the meantime you should listen to the tape. I'm sure you'll be very proud as a Christian, with Matt Barber's demonizing and dehumanizing behavior.

March 04, 2008 9:17 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Anonymous:
You said: "Would you favor making all group bathrooms unisex then?"
I would guess that you probably have unisex bathrooms in your own home. On the other hand, you have probably given stern warnings to your family not to go into the other gender bathroom. I wonder what your Bible says about sharing bathrooms? It must be a real burden to live such a shame-ridden life.

March 04, 2008 9:29 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"I would guess that you probably have unisex bathrooms in your own home. On the other hand, you have probably given stern warnings to your family not to go into the other gender bathroom. I wonder what your Bible says about sharing bathrooms?"

The Bible says absolutely nothing about bathrooms. If you'll read carefully, you'll see I asked Andrea about what she favored for GROUP bathrooms. She seemed to imply that GROUP unisex bathrooms were fine with her. I was just checking to see if that is correct.

March 04, 2008 9:38 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I have offered to conference call Rio with Jim. You don't even have to conference call Rio - just go look at the story again. The story says the incident happened on Monday, and the story was taped on Tuesday. I was clearly there when the story was taped. That woudl be Tuesday.

Or go listen to the tape of the CWA interview again. I said "that did get some media attention", clearly not "was intended to" or anything else. Jim needs to go listen to the tape again, he is mistaken.

Offer stands to call the Rio with Jim on the line.

theresa

March 04, 2008 9:48 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"We know what Theresa has said, and we know what we were told by Rio. This time, Theresa is on tape speaking, so everyone can hear her for themselves. Regardless of what you say."

I listened to it myself yesterday, "Dana", and before I read Theresa comments, I thought it said precisely what she said it did. I said so earlier yesterday.

"As for Rio, the easiest way to resolve this is to have Rio bring in their member who participated in this hoax. People have said here that if this truly is a pedophile then you would certainly have raised the alarm and called the police (something you guys have proven very adept at doing) and, I imagine, that Rio management would have done so, too, because they would not want a predator on their membership roles as a constant threat. That nothing has happened is further circumstantial evidence that it was a hoax, and Rio knows it. They've said that they accommodate trans women with separate facilities (without any law or anticipation of any law), so they have nothing about which to be concerned."

No one said it was a pedophile. Theresa has said she believes herself it was a stunt. The only dispute it that you said CRG pulled the stunt.

Whether stunt, hoax or arms-length event, the point demonstrated is still the same.

"Ultimately this fellow may be subpoenaed and we will have all this under oath."

I don't think that TTF obsessions are legal concerns so I doubt. Even if CRG goes through with their rumored lawsuit, I doubt this incident will be relevant.

"But in the meantime you should listen to the tape. I'm sure you'll be very proud as a Christian, with Matt Barber's demonizing and dehumanizing behavior."

I listened. Obviously, he didn't feel kindly toward you considering some of the tactics you have engaged in but I don't he was incivil. He believes XY equals male. He has a right to his opinion. Indeed, most people share it.

March 04, 2008 9:53 AM  
Anonymous Maryanne Arnow said...

Hello all - just thought i would get back in on this for a few minutes.

I would like to address Ms. Rickman.

This is going to be quite long, and i apologize for that, but it is VERY necessary at this point.

i am going to dissect your use of language with a scalpel to expose lies, dirty tricks, contradictions, and distortions, and you and everyone here will want to take the time to read it.

I also just listened to the interview again, Ms. Rickman -

i am willing to give you the benefit of the doubt, but you DID completely misquote yourself in the above posting. I'll address that near the end of this posting.

Since You called me out by name, please do me the courtesy of allowing me to respond, and i hope that you, and every single person in this entire world that supports your position will read every single word of my response.

I hope that you will be fair enough to share it with all the people that only hear the one and unfortunately often inaccurate side of your argument(s).

So Yes - I noticed that you mentioned me directly in this posting. I do thank you for that. I thank you because it makes it appropriate therefore that i respond to you directly in return.

I assume that, since the very last time i exchanged dialogue with you, and i was very apologetic for any spitefulness, but that since you have denigrated me again, i must now guess that one of your reasons for mentioning me in a somewhat negative light, was to illicit my response.

Now you shall have it.

Please bear with me if you would, and allow me to respond to several specific points.

First, i will be the first one to defend you as a woman, and of your rights as a fellow citizen to express yourself.

I myself have railed at Jim for using certain language that i thought was inflammatory, and i defended your supporters and fellow residents on the basis of their concerns as parents and families and mostly good folk doing what they think is the right thing to do.

I have apologized to you personally as well as anyone else that may have been offended by my words or actions during this, and i meant that most sincerely.
You have once again given others a false impression and insulted Dana and myself in many subtle ways.

I respect you as a woman and a mother. This is sacred, and deeply meaningful to me and i do mean it most seriously.

The problem i keep having though, is that in order to get the support of fellow parents and citizens, you have used many distortions and half truths to do so, and so therefore do your allies and supporters, which have been hooked by using their fears against what they clearly do not understand. This is disgustingly shameful, and an insult to women and fellow citzens everyplace in the world, including myself.

When you, as a respected community member and parent, give people half of a truth, and a distorted half at that, it makes it easy for you to generate the kind of sympathy, shock, anger, disgust, and fear which is then easily taken advantage of to achieve certain ends - such as in the case of your petition drive and campaign.

It is a basic and very effective subtle psychological trick, and one that you seem very good at taking full advantage of. It is also shamefully unethical and utterly disgustingly dishonest to do so.

This MUST be exposed so that anyone that supports your position can see that they are are being treated like ignorant children and taken full advantage of their basest human fears - essentially telling them all of the monsters lurking under their beds, and how you and your organizations are just exactly the anointed ones full of the exact moral piety to go ahead and slay those monsters for them, and with their undying support and allegiance to that cause.

People that support you should eventually be incensed and outraged upon finally realizing that someone like yourself - a mother of children, and a good woman of position and respect within your community, would lower yourself to such dark and disgustingly unethical means to use their fears against others in this, or in any way.

To use your position in the community to generate such fear based on lies, personal opinion, incomplete or inaccurate clinical data. That is wrong, and somewhere deep in your own heart you must know this.

To take advantage of people's fear and ignorance of what they do not fully understand is the kind of behavior exhibited by people such as the Spanish inquisitors, or King Edward I, - the “Hammer of the Scots”, that also decreed that all Jews wear yellow badges and then effected the arrest, robbery, and murder of their heads of household.

You are inciting mob behavior based on fear and prejudice.
You do this well, you obviously know very consciously that you can, and given the nature of your captive audience and their fears and misperceptions of all people like me, - - and so therefore you do this very effectively -

it is also the highest treason and gravest insult that one can perform upon any free-thinking people, including your own self and your own spirit.

Adolf Hitler did the same thing in the building of his deadly effective rhetoric against all non-aryan peoples, including the gays.

You are exhibiting tyrannical behaviors under the guise of religious goodness and piety, -

The very same thing as has been done for centuries by religions and governments against innocents thoughout the world to amass support, consolidate power, gain control, and then literally steal the freewill of fellow citizens by using such fear and lies and so-called piousness to do so.

I am sick of the lies and petty games, while you laugh bawdily in an interview, and gladly destroy the lives of others that you have never met, nor known, like myself.

Earlier in the post, you stated that

"And just because you folks have claimed that gender identity is only listed in the DISM so that folks can get sex change operations, doesn't mean I have to agree with you. There are plently of conflicting medical opinions out there on whether someone can be "innately" opposite than the sex they were "assigned" at birth, based on their "brain sex". I believe you are the sex the your chromosones and your genitals dictate. Sorry, there is absolutely no name you can call me that will make me change that belief. There are lots of doctors who agree with us, this is not a radical belief. You are on the radical side, folks. And I believe Dana and Mary Ann are very confused folks, and I feel sorry for them."

I will point out Several highly and blatantly contradictory things you have done: You are a brilliant strategist and know how to take advantage of people's feelings. You just did that in the above statement. Very subtle. Very effective for your fans and supporters.

You cast yourself in the light of having compassion for poor confused people like me and Dana on the one hand - yet at the very same moment painting us in a negative light that can only be explained by such negative connotation as "confused".

Anyone else out the see what she is doing ? The hand of grace, yet the hand that very subtly insults and denigrates to support and foster the continued misperceptions. As for feeling sorry for me or Dana or anyone else like myself ? that is another backhanded insult that supports your assertion of knowing what makes all people like me tick.

You are not the witness to my life, nor my joys and despairs, nor why i have those joys or despairs, and therefore you cannot possibly honestly feel sorry for what you literally know nothing about from personal experience.

Everyone that knows me now - even those like yourself in my life directly, that were themselves, as if not more in some cases, deeply opposed as you are - opposed to the acceptance or idea of validity of gender identity variance -

almost all, several years later, can and will attest that i am more joyful and more comfortable in my own skin - more relaxed, self-confident, self assured, and generally more effective as a human being in general than i EVER was in my ENTIRE life, prior to beginning my gender transition.

That is one of the clinical criteria that must be met in order to make this change possible for someone in the first place.

There must be NO DOUBT that someone like myself will be happier, more productive, more well adjusted, and generally more open than ever before as a result of making such a "radical" change.

Why would you ever feel sorry for anyone that has that kind of a blessing in their life ?

Finally free of hiding immense truths of our selves, and in desperate fear of persecution and ridicule that is common to most of us.

True of most of us until we reconcile ourselves, and accept the sacrifice and the consequences that we will face in undertaking such an amazing change?

No more fear. What price for that? What value in such a blessed beautiful thing as that? Sounds pretty confused to me...

Freedom to finally be everything i could ever possibly dream of with all my might and all of my hope of childhood dreams and fears and deepest of personal anguishes?

Also sounds like deeply confused reasoning, dosen’t it?

What a blessing. I am deeply and extremely blessed more than anyone else i know.
Don’t feel sorry for me. Don’t say that you do, when in fact you may not be, under the guise of false compassion.

That is rude and completely transparent to anyone with enough intellect to recognize such a dirty trick of psychological manipulation, for the light of favor you are trying to cast upon yourself and your allies.

You seem to forget that while you are playing these games, you are actually playing games with someone else's life - MY life.

That is horrificly unacceptable by any ethical or moral standard i have ever known in this world.

People should feel sorry for YOU and everyone else that will never know such a joy of total rebirth in every sense, and completely honest unhindered self expression and self-acknowledgement and self-reconciliation that i now have in every moment and every aspect of my life as it now stands.

NEXT POINT: Another complete contradiction in YOUR OWN words. I will plainly expose it for anyone that didn’t catch it yet. You also said:

" And just because you folks have claimed that gender identity is only listed in the DISM so that folks can get sex change operations, doesn't mean I have to agree with you. There are plently of conflicting medical opinions out there on whether someone can be "innately" opposite than the sex they were "assigned" at birth, based on their "brain sex". I believe you are the sex the your chromosones and your genitals dictate. Sorry, there is absolutely no name you can call me that will make me change that belief." - - - -

OK - that's fair enough based solely on your personal (non-clinical) opinion and what side of the data you have studied on the subject - but next, here's where you repeatedly contradict yourself to the point of it almost being funny, but it’s really quite sad - - - you next said:

" I have absolutely no problem with gender identity job non-discrimination rights, as long as they are not working as a teacher around kids, as long as religious institutions don't have to hire them, and there are reasonable exceptions to this law. "

Look at this very carefully Theresa - this is where your argument breaks down in your OWN words.

You say that - " you have absolutely no problem with gender identity job discrimination rights, *** AS LONG AS....*** " remember - this is YOUR OWN words -

To begin with, the first part of your statement inherently implies that you personally have acknowledged some level of validity that such a thing does, in fact exist, and is being directly addressed, first of all.

Next, there are now several more contradictions which should be pointed out in this, and in the rest of your statement.

"I have absolutley no problem with Gender identity". That IS a statement in and of itself - whether it is taken out of context or not.

Next you say you have "NO PROBLEM" with that as it directly relates to job discrimination, but in the VERY SAME BREATH, you use the words, "AS LONG AS", and then list two specific workplaces in which there must be an exception made, based on your logic. How can you say you have no problem with fighting workplace discrimination against people that first you refuse to acknowledge the validity of the case, then, you make the case for us, and then you immediately assert that there ARE specific instances in which it would be acceptable to enforce discriminatory practices against me or anyone else like me.

GET YOUR STORY STRAIGHT BEFORE YOU START PLAYING GAMES WITH LANGUAGE AND OTHER PEOPLES' LIVES. That's 3 or 4 contradictions in a row. You cannot deny it.

You are trying so hard to be so intelligent, so clinical, and so subtle, and yet you use personal opinion to make your case so believable to those that you know you can slip it by, and yet all the while you are disproving your own case in almost every single sentence you use.

This is the penultimate definition of the term "CONFUSION".

I had previously responded to this same assertion of "confusion" as you put it, in an earlier posting on the "Checking the Petitions" section. I will repost this response here -

I stated that:

"Anyway - to continue - For those of us that do feel compelled to risk our lives, give up our careers, lose family and friends that we dearly love, and face the constant rdicule, gossip, rudenss, judgement, humiliation, abuse, and general torment involved in the radical and difficult change in one's biological gender from one to the other - one has to be as sure as it gets, my dear - you would certainly have to know this -
Dr. Jacobs would certainly also have to know this - by the very same standards which you and others define this as a "disorder" as listed in the DSM IV classifications, the same standards are used for testing of potential gender change candidates in this country.

Meaning, simply, that one had better be darned sure - so sure in fact, that there cannot even be the slightest doubt of their actual gender by all psychological and psychiatric standards for testint that ccurrently exist in this country.

those tests (such as the MMPI exhaustive battery)( a series of progressively eliminative testing to reveal disorders in such a way that the answers and result cannot ever usually be faked, fooled, or cheated on even if you lie while taking it...

By many accepted standards, this eliminates the possibillity of any other major mental, and even a vast number of physiologic disorders - before the person can be passed thru without any question whatsoever -

so the answer to your little slap, where you just defeated yout own entire argument and made mine without me even having to try (but i am going to do it right here so that everyone else can see it in plain sight, and in clear terms) -

- is that - exactly the same standards that you and many detractors use to continuously denote deeply negative connotations, that use such terms as "mental illness" and "disorder",....

- are exactly the same standards that most of us will have to pass so rigourously that we had better be DARNED sure, my dear.

So had the therapists, doctors, surgeons, endocrinologists, personal physicians, and anyone else involved in the transitional process.

We are probably some of the MOST sure people about our gender on the entire planet, and that case is made by exactly the same psychiatric standards that you yourself have used to negatively define us by."

- - - - -

You also continuously neglect to point out that this same standard which you are fallaciously using as a double edged sword - requires that people such as myself must, and often under a high degree of clinical supervision, be able to pass the RLE - or real life experience.

In most cases, as dictated by almost every legal and psychiatric standard in the country, this requires the person such as myself, to be able to effectively live fully in our appropriate or "target" gender, 24/7/365, and usually for a minimum of at least one FULL year.

So, you are saying that you and your supporters are ready to challenge the entire standard – the same exact standard by which you yourself use to describe us in the most volatile and fearfully negative light possible ?

THAT is a total contradiction, and does not make sense at all other than being again completely disingenuous, and preying on the basest fears of anyone and everyone that you can get to listen to it.

Another excerpt from an earlier posting in which i responded to this point specifically - parts of which were actually read by the county council in a follow-up letter, after my own testimony, which focused 100% on severe workplace and other societal/social discriminations:

- - - - - -

"As is most commonly misperceived of women like myself, I am not a gay male, have never been that, nor am i any other sort of “man in women’s clothes” seeking any sort of sexual or predatory gratification via use of public facilities as such. I never was and never will be.

I am not a drag queen, nor a female impersonator, and was neither of those things for a single day in my life. I say this because first of all, that seems to be predominant in people’s judgments of me that I have to face in open society every day of my life. Gay does not mean transgender and transgender does not mean gay, first of all.

As well, the continuous association and misperceptions constantly made, that just because someone is transgender, gay, bi, or otherwise, must somehow also immediately mean, that any of us, that fall outside of “acceptable” gender or sexual “norms”, would automatically be more of a “threat” to other’s safety, sanctity, or privacy in some way, is both continuously insulting, and is also a continued fostering of untruth and total misperception that makes my life in public society much more dangerous and difficult than any of the supposed “at risk” groups, because of the fear and hatred that this sort of belief instills in others..

I am not a sexual predator of any kind whatsoever, nor pose any threat to the safety or sanctity of public facilities for any other women or their children, as was recently implied in many articles which claim that such legislation would open the door to fear of anyone that expresses his or herself outside of considered "normal" gender roles.

This is, at least for me, an utter fallacy, and hypothetical situation based on lack of real facts. This must be exposed as such for effective and intelligent decisions to be made as regards this legislation.

In the course of my normal daily life, i regularly have to use public facilities such as toilets and locker rooms. I am an active person and use my community pool, gym, and locker room facilities as i wish and need to, and fairly often.

As a legitimately transgendered woman, considered very well-adjusted, and following a "clinically correct" and very closely monitored and clinically guided course of transition, I would never even consider the possibility of placing myself or others in any situation where any kind of inappropriate exposure would, or could, ever possibly occur.

This would be considered routinely commonplace for anyone meeting such criteria for "Gender Transition".

Such an occurrence could easily compromise all the risks taken by me or anyone else that has begun such a rigourous and mentally and emotionally trying and exhausting process as this.

including the already mentioned constant denigration, lies, rumors, distortions, sniggering and humiliation, and torment and insult continuously experienced by those like myself in open society.

- and all for nothing more than snap judgment from the vast majority of fellow citizens we meet, and based on nothing more than outward appearance alone.

All people of color once had to endure such denigration, torment, enslavement, and still even today often face continuous discrimination.

- - and all because of the justifications somehow created in the minds of certain “good Christians” in our past history, that these people were somehow “less than” all others, and for no other good reason than the color of their skin.

THAT ? - is an acceptable ethical standard of behaviors and thinking ? Must be - that's how all the kids i went to school with were towards me personally, and SOMEONE - MAYBE YOU - had to teach them, or allow them, to be that mean, rude, shallow, cruel, judgmental, and inconsiderate.

All of that, just because I was always “different”, somehow.

I was more sensitive, more emotional, more thoughtful, more advanced in my learning, and openly warm and expressive.

Weaker and less developed than all the other boys, and preferred to be friends with girls anyway, although few ever wanted to be my friend anyway because I was the “freak”, the “outcast”, ohhhh yucckky…. –

I WAS tormented for having these naturally occurring qualities within myself - qualities most commonly associated with feminine sensitivity and sensibilities my entire childhood.

Great way to set an example of moral and ethical standards if you ask me…

What a great way to raise such good children full of love, and values of forgiveness and acceptance.

Most of us had people be mean to us when we were kids – some – many have had it much worse – but imagine not having a single friend, and being beaten up and down, tormented and teased, and totally rejected by EVERYONE in your entire peer group almost every day of your entire childhood – all just for being “different”, a “sissy”, a “loser”…

I just wanted to be understood, but no one would ever listen.

Now they (you) are all adults, and largely act the same way whenever faced with things they do not understand, or that fall outside of what you judge should be considered as "normal". You are not the judge.

What no one else has bothered to mention is that, at least in this country, the screening standards prior to even beginning gender transition are so high that many of the people that think they may wish to undertake such a process do not, nor will ever pass the psychiatric testing standards of both criteria, that specifically fit and justify such a radical change in one’s gender and biology.

Not only that, but much less be able to endure and survive the IMMENSE sociologic, economic, and psychological strain involved in such a process, not to even begin to mention the overwhelming physical and medical risks.

One must already inherently possess enough of the NATURAL (UNCONTRIVED) characteristics of the related gender that it cannot be denied that it will vastly improve the mental and emotional health of the person in question to seek the process, whereby which any level of real "self-congruence" can finally be achieved in(MY)the person's life .

Just going to go about it willy-nilly, and flambouyantly parade around in ridiculously "outlandish" clothing of the desired sex to make it a reality, eh ?

hmmm... another ridiculous and entirely inaccurate representation of people like myself.

You see, largely speaking from any personal experience that I have had, Drag queens and effeminate or flamboyant gay males are just that. Gay males, and generally with NO desire or compulsion whatsoever, to change entirely one's gender or gender identity.

Drag queens are usually always gay, or much more rarely straight men that portray women for a variety of different reasons, including professionally, and often as a direct expression of great admiration for women in general.

Being a gay man that seems to others to be effeminate or flamboyant in an effeminate manner, does not mean that they have ever, for even one day, dressed or presented themselves in the appearance of the opposite gender.

Not only that, but most would probably never attempt such a risk as using a ladies facility as such, simply because they do not possess the naturally inherent characteristics which would allow them to be inconspicuous in such an environment, and they know that.

Not only that, but since GAY MALES are INTERESTED primarily ONLY in OTHER MALES, what would one of them want in a ladies facility to begin with ??

Vice versa, for any female to male transperson in the men’s facilities, or possibly even a lesbian woman that is usually attracted only to other women. Should they also not ever be allowed in the women’s facilities ???

I see not one person has addressed that very simple bit of logic thus far. There are other even far more valid points. Gay men tend to be very respectful of female boundaries and are widely respected or known as ideal “safe” friends for many women. So please, tell me, why suddenly will the most supposedly “predatory” of them, all flock to dress as girls (most do not, nor will ever - which is abovementioned misrepresented stereotype about gay men) and then invade the girls rest and locker rooms where they will find nothing but the sex they sexually desire THE VERY LEAST ? OK – so that rules out gay men. What about others ?

NEXT - Male cross dressers. There are many degrees of cross-gender behaviors in the human population.

Not just in men, but in women as well. This is not the point.

Typically the majority of male “cross-dressers” consider themselves as heterosexuals, often live straight lives, and are usually in most, or at least many cases, deeply closeted (maybe some of you ladies out there that have husbands or freinds that keep this little secret - that is very likely, by the way).

First of all, the idea of even going out in public dressed "as a girl" to these guys is usually TERRIFYING - much less awkward –

they couldn’t walk comfortably in heels (or any other girl's shoes less than a size 10 without a lot of practice) if they tried.

usually don't know much about how to use makeup, and sure as jiminy don’t sound, move, or look anything like a girl much to begin with, much less ever considering giving up their lives as straight, often married males, to pursue a life as a woman…

Can you imagine them even TRYING to get into a women's facility in open public, much less broad daylight, and thereby immediately risking full exposure, ejection, embarrassment, and possibly arrest, as they would be “read” immediately, and unless able to produce an appropriate clinical reason for using that facility at all, removed or ejected and/or arrested.

Makes no sense whatsoever and largely an entirely unreasonable idea to advance or consider.

There are “male” cross-dressers that may be more deeply involved in doing this sort of thing, and possess a higher degree of cross-gender behavior, as it were, and may even have other friends, girlfriends, and sometimes wives that are openly supportive, and may even therefore occasionally go out in public “dressed” this way.

So, all of a sudden, just because this law is passed, even though these kinds of men generally do not pursue a course of complete gender change, once again, all of a sudden, the most “predatory” of this population segment will go rushing to take advantage of this law, and take all the risks to prey upon women and children en masse, when they are terrified of even having to consider using the ladies’ facilities to begin with, because they actually do recognize

A.) that they are in fact male, and will most likely never try to change genders, even if they have considered it, and

B.)that they therefore do not belong there…? Hmmmm……

Another complete fallacy and distortion not mentioned or detailed.

The list really could go on and on for quite awhile, covering almost every demographic, and effectively debunk almost every single line of fear that you all are being spoon fed by the chunkloads.

This is a stereotype that hurts both gays and transgendered, and that has become so commonplace in misperception that it is accepted as overriding logic of all other factors.

Now about ME and people like myself going through change of gender identity:

When using public facilities, all of which always have closed stalls and/or private changing areas, most or all of which have areas which also lock or have curtains, it would never cross my mind for ONE MOMENT to be less than dignified, or reckless, much less EVER openly invite or consider any sort of exposure which might place my life and/or the sensibilities of others in danger or question whatsoever.

Not only THAT, but:

A.) i ALWAYS have my wallet and ID with me which is legally now gender marker "F" On my driver's license, and only gained after having successfully lived and worked in open society in my naturally related "target" gender, and then submitted substantial paperwork of clinical oversight and rigorous standards to the Maryland Motor Vehicle Medical Advisory Board for review and approval.

B.)I always carry letters from everyone in my clinical team neatly folded in my wallet should the impossibly unusual circumstance actually occur that i would be stopped or questioned for any reason whatsoever.

I am there to do one thing and one thing only. Use the facilities as every other woman in this entire COUNTRY does, in as normal, relaxed, and inconspicuous a manner as possible, and LEAVE.

Should i have to be forced to consider endangering my own self by using male locker and restroom facilities when i already live as 'normal' a life as possible, every single moment of my life now, as any other woman in this country does ?

That is unreasonable at best, and DOES put me personally at severe and very real risk for hate crimes such as assault or rape, public conflicts, further humiliation, and ridicule, as well as completely compromising any validity that I've gained by openly and successfully living as an intelligent, comfortably well-adjusted, and professional woman in public society for several years now.

I have every right and legitimate reason to use the same facilities as every other woman does.

I do so in a discreet and quiet manner without exception, and present a threat to no one, at no time, in any way, shape, or form whatsoever.

In my life, gender identity and sexuality are distinctly different facets of my life as a human being.

Supporters agree with the right of any individual to express gender and/or sexuality in any way that an individual sees fit for themselves, as long as it does not involve being a harmful, or detrimental person to themselves or society at large.

Opponents continue to claim that sexuality and gender identity are individual "life"style" "choices", that there is no difference between the two, and may sometimes be based on certain "moral" and "ethical" precepts, possibly originating from certain "religious" viewpoints.

I believe that if one wishes to be a good person of true conscience to themselves and all others, then taking the ultimate risk(s) to live true to oneself is not a "choice" at all, per se, and NEVER was...

I've read by opponents that anything that falls outside of the range of "normal" and human heterosexuality is aberrant, abhorrent, abominable, and should be admonished and discouraged at all cost if possible, as to not endanger any perceived view of what "normal" society should be like for all peoples.

Unfortunately this continued lack of personal awareness may also take the forms of fear, hatred, violence, discrimination, bigotry, humiliation, ridicule, gossip, and frankly, outright distortion and continued misperception - from a total lack of personal or clinical experience whatsoever than what has been taught or learned as the "only" "correct" way to live this life as a human being.

How any such qualities can be equated with morality, ethics, fairness, unconditional love, understanding, or forgiveness, is beyond my ability to comprehend.

I strongly disagree with such views. If any person of color, race, religion, sex, or differing gender expression, is deprived of any single human comfort or right as a result of another's view, this then inherently deprives all people of the gift of freewill, which as i understand is one of the cornerstones of many spiritual teachings, and part of the basis of the relationship between God and Mankind as a whole.

Angry, sometimes violent, and pervasive judgementalism, which flies in the very face of all such "spiritual" teachings of fairness, freewill, forgiveness and understanding, also flies in the face and the very basis of an equal and free democratic society for all peoples, and must not continue to stand as acceptable behaviors by any standard of true kindness or decency that i am aware of.

I openly oppose such unfairness, ignorance, and hatefully misguided hypocrisy. Change must occur through intelligent and non-violent dialogue. I must exercise the expression of my own God-given freewill, and with the help of any person that also has a willingness and any ability to help enact any form of positive change and expanded awareness for others.

Please do not bend under pressure of any that wish to make such decisions without having ever met or talked with someone like myself that can lend true validity of actual personal experience, as opposed to perceived experience of others.

I will do my best to give personal experiences as valid referential material, so that others may have a better understanding of the issue from people like myself, that are affected most by this issue.

I DO struggle daily with continued misperceptions and stereotypical views which plague me and hurt me deeply, every day of my life in open society. That is a plain cold fact of what i have to face.

Between the ages of 4 and 5, i became acutely aware of an overwhelming and soul-searing level of real and very conscious mental and emotional anguish due to apparent lack of perceived congruence between my physical self and my mental and emotional self.

This would be considered as years before any such "lifestyle choice" or "sexuality" could possibly apply. I had no sisters and was not encouraged in this, nor was i ever forced to do anything which would have placed this compulsion so deep within me.

Not only that, but as is common for most people similar to myself, this level of personal anguish and lack of self-congruence never goes away - just the opposite.

It usually intensifies as we age, and in most cases, only beginning some form of “transition” from one biological gender to the other, is the most commonly accepted form of therapeutic resolution or relief at this time by almost ALL current modern standards.

This is now accepted throughout the entire medical and psychiatric establishment at this point, regardless of current classification, or prior classification as any form of "disorder".

I do not personally believe that this is a mistake or an aberration of nature. I do not believe that God makes mistakes and that this was, at least for me, one of the great blessings of my life, even for all of the pain and hardship involved in dealing with such an issue for all of my life.

I was given and gifted this unique perspective and the innate ability to deeply understand both sexes better than most of you will ever be able to.

The fact that for me at least, being female - is and always was much more naturally predominant, and so therefore i am obviously now able to express my real internal nature as female in "gender identity", than i was ever any sort of "real" male at all, in almost all ways that can be either logically or psychologically quantified.

As an adult, i was finally overwhelmed with the weight of what i had carried for so long that it literally broke me down.

As a result, I had to decide to risk giving up my marriage, my home, any positive relations with my entire family, on both sides of my marriage, lose nearly all professional standing, and almost any social capital that i had gained that far as a male person.

I was entirely willing to give up any sense of "male privilege" in this society altogether. I was never truly happy, nor genuinely and fully self-expressed in my entire life in the male gender.

As an open, loving, highly intelligent, and expressive child i suffered severe physical, mental, and emotional abuse for many years growing up, for simply being "different", and never able to fit into any "typical" "male" mold whatsoever. Should i be chastised and denigrated further for this ?

I did not "CHOOSE" to be that different. I was MADE that way. People call us "freaks of nature".

If everything in nature is a part of God, and God never makes mistakes - please tell me the sense of that catch-22.

I essentially LEARNED to REPRESS truthfulness in every form of my natural self-expression, from basic survival instincts, because i learned i was never rewarded for real honesty of unconditional self-expression with nothing but fear and ridicule, harm and humiliation. Real Moral and Ethical, Huh ?

Real good moral and ethical societal values of fairness and understanding all of you Godly good parents out there taught the people that acted that way towards anyone like me.

Every day of my life, i HAD to consciously and methodically hide all of my natural self-expressions from extreme fear of further ridicule and abuse, so that no one would ever detect i was actually a girl always somewhere deep inside where they could never really see me.

I somehow managed to become a more functional "male" persona by my twenties, but still deeply struggled my whole life thus far, and barely ever felt a true sense of happiness within or about myself.

Why would i now, give up everything in my life ? My marriage of more than 10 years to my best friend and soulmate - an incredibly beautiful, and super intelligent woman.A home and profession, which i deeply love.

Why would i consciously re-invite all of the ridicule and scorn of my childhood again as an adult - and all for nothing more than "sexual kicks" of some kind ?

Why would anyone willingly choose to go through all ot that again, that was already beaten down for years, just for no other reason than for being different ? I think not.

Think about that and try to tell me you know my mind and heart better than my own self.

I WILL call you an outright liar in front of the world, and make you prove you are a psychic, or retract your assertions.

People ask me why i would want to be something i am not, nor was really meant to be. I am not being someone that i am not.

I simply stopped "editing" everything i do and say, how i naturally would act and move, and finally for once, am being true to my self, everyone else in my life, and my own conscience of self.

I am the same person i always was, except now more openly visible and completely vulnerable to the entire world than ever before in this life except as a very young child.

Once again, i am constantly targeted for misunderstanding, and frankly, probably more "at-risk" than all of the other groups of opposition put together.

I literally must take my life in my hands every time i step foot out of my own front door, for the irrefutable reality that people WILL and DO hate, discriminate, humiliate, ridicule, talk and gossip about, and try to judge and denigrate me in every way possible - and for no other good reason than being "different".

I am now more openly straightforward, and truer in total self-expression than i have ever been before.

I think that any kind of belief system which promotes such behaviors simply should no longer stand as any form of acceptable ethical or "moral" behavioral standard, no matter what belief system, science, theology, or philosophy it may be rooted in.

This will continue. This is only part of my answer to what i have seen here.

Theresa - Dr. Dana Beyer and I await your response. Please accept an open invitation - to my own home if necessary - where you and yours will be treated with kindness, respect, warmth, and true hospitality, regardless of our differing views.

That is the way it should be in my book.

I hope you have read the same book.

Most Sincerely, and respectfully to all,

I AM,


Maryanne A. Arnow "


*********************

I havent even gotten to the worst parts yet.

Next you say:

"And you shouldn't be tromping on the religious rights of every Muslim women"

This is the height of disgusting, and every Muslim woman in America with a shred of decency and intelligence should recognize that you have now begun to play on the race/culture card to bolster your case. You already know full well that there are many people's in Muslim cultures that are not in agreement with such things as homosexuality and gender variance. Deeply so, and you know this full well. Therefore it behooves you to break that card out and throw it on to the table to further bolster your support in the minds of those, most open to your somewhat shared viewpoint. Isn’t it true that the Christian and Muslim religions have many times been at deadly odds almost as long as religion has existed? And YOU DARE to insult these people by using their beliefs as a PAWN in your fight for further public opinion ?

That is insulting and disgusting and abhorrent and i hope that many will see it for exactly what it is.

Politics and mind games for nothing more than bolstering the effectiveness of your already deeply flawed and fallacious logic(s).

Lastly, i just listened to your interview this morning - several times - over and over until i pinpointed the exact place where you begin to talk about the Rio incident.

In your abovementioned post you said that - -

" And I went back and listened to the tape (I was on a plane this afternoon, or I would have done this sooner). What I said was "that did get some media attention". not "this was designed to get media attention".

I made darned sure i transcribed your EXACT language on this one.

This is a VERY important point that any good attorney worth half an ounce of salt would turn you to a confused and gibbering mass of burned toast on the stand for, in about 2 minutes or less.

Remember i said that i was definitely willing to give you the benefit of the doubt.

How you will answer the questions that follow this section will definitely determine public opinion on this one.

Please be very careful, and i am not being rude or sarcastic here either. You used very specific language, and it was very unsure, tentative, disjointed, and poorly expressed.

YOUR EXACT LANGUAGE IS AS FOLLOWS:

"AND UH, I, YOU KNOW, ESSENTIALLY WHAT THAT, UM, THAT WAS MEANT TO GET THE MEDIA ATTENTION "

I made sure to listen to it several times and transcribed it as exactly as i heard it on the tape.

Can you please tell me, exactly why, you have changed or recanted the exact language that you DID, IN FACT, USE?

Please look carefully at exactly what you have said here:

the word "Essentially". This is an affirmative term that implies a DEFINITIVE sense as exactly related to the AFFIRMATION OF: any object, action, thought, instance, or occurrence as directly relates to that point.

This is good, but not as important as the next point.

NEXT and MOST critically important:

You used the word "MEANT".

In the context of the rest of the sentence - " ESSENTIALLY WHAT THAT, UM, THAT WAS MEANT TO GET THE MEDIA ATTENTION "

Let's look at this progressively...

"MEANT TO",
"MEANT TO GET",
"MEANT TO GET THE"
"MEANT TO GET THE MEDIA"
"MEANT TO GET THE MEDIA ATTENTION"

The word "meant" specifically implies intent. Not only intent, but forethought as well. Not only forethought but the possibility of very conscious intent combined with forethought. In other words – the possibility of premeditation, specifically.

If you or someone MEANS to do something, this must include forethought and intention. Plain and simple.

I am still giving the benefit of the doubt however - you claim to have no knowledge of who or whom could have staged such an event.

I honestly can give you that because you are standing on your word, and plainly saying you have no awareness or knowledge of such a thing. I understand if you were on a flight and travel can be exhausting, and maybe you mis-worded what you actually said to everyone here on this forum. We all make mistakes.

But when you combine those two factors with - the FACT THAT YOU USED THE WORDS "ESSENTIALLY" and "MEANT TO", YOU HAVE GOT TO UNDERSTAND HOW THAT LOOKS TO PEOPLE.

I am sorry. I am not trying to be mean. I really am not. But there are far too many inconsistencies in your story, your logic, your responses, and your language that someone has to call it out.

You are playing games with my life and the lives of anyone that has every struggled against discrimination, misperception, and fear of real persecution and harm, as well as no legal recourse against such ills. You are a woman, too for God's sake.

You have undoubtedly had to face some of these things in your own life and would know exactly how much that hurts - how unfair – how rude and how disgusting to be perceived in the box that others only want to keep sticking you back into.

Chauvanism has done that to almost all women in this world for centuries upon centuries. I am a human being and i am a girl, no matter what you or anyone else thinks about it. I know my own self well enough to know that this is true.

I caught your petitioners in lies, half truths, and distortions everyplace i talked to them. Who gave them that misinformation? I was told that there were no public hearings - Really? I was AT the hearings and gave my own testimony.
I was told that there had been no publicity about these issues, and that the council had just quietly slipped one under the rug of the voting public. Really? What about the nearly FULL PAGE Sunday Post article that i appeared in, and the TV news spots i took within the same month of the hearings. How about the Gazette article from that same time that reached thousands of readers? I was told that women and children were no longer going to be safe because this law was passed. Really? All of a sudden the predatory types are going to shift their entire modus operandi to engage in high risk and high exposure behavior that will get them caught or arrested in almost any case whatsoever.

I am a girl too. I have the same concerns that YOU do. I am vulnerable. I am smaller than most men. I am at risk - even more so than anyone else you have talked about because of the constant fear and pervasive misperceptions that are accompanied by vitriolic hatred and humiliation from people that do not understand someone like me.

You don’t seem to want them to see us a real people. They might just find out we are actually human and feeling and loving and hurting and living breathing fellow citizens just like you are - then there goes your whole entire logic. Be straight. Please give this up. Please engage in dialogue free of rudeness, hostility, subtle and disgusting insult, total contradiction, distortion, and fearmongering - please open your heart and mind to a more accepting and loving view.

I am literally asking you this and begging you this on an extremely personal level. Funny thing is - in my guts - i actually LIKE you. I can’t explain that, but i do. I have a feeling of real compassion for you. How do you like that? I would actually enjoy sitting and talking with you instead of this crap and all the rock throwing... You are going to lose the war, even if you win the battle. I would and could actually be a friend to you in this life if you would allow it. Everyone here will think that is insane, but i honestly speak from my real heart and real gut instincts whether anyone likes it or not..

You are a girl, a woman, a mother -all of the things i have struggled in the deepest anguish my whole entire life to even begin to touch and honestly and openly express within my own self. I cannot help that i was made this way. I did not choose it. I chose to be true to my self.

Can we please just let go of all this and get on with our lives ?
Could we actually help each other instead of trying to constantly tear down ? There are bigger battles in the world and we really don’t have to come done to all this barbaric conflict on a subject we could all talk about in a much better manner.

Please call or respond to me on this. I am not hiding. I will talk to you anytime anyplace, and any day of the week. Just make the call and we can work towards resolving this/our conflicts. I can only leave it at that, and continue to do what I must continue to do.

Most Sincerely and respectfully yours,

I am,


Maryanne

March 04, 2008 10:05 AM  
Anonymous svelte_brunette said...

Don Imus is entitled to his opinion as well, and I'm sure a lot of people share it. However, that doesn't mean every opinion he has or states on the radio is fit for public consumption. Indeed he was (rightly) fired for one of his remarks.

I live my life as a woman, including judicious daily use of sanitary napkins to manage an excessive moisture problem that leaves me highly prone to yeast infections. (Much to the surprise of my reluctant gynecologist.)

I have worked with people for over a year (close to 2, in some cases) before revealing my medical history to them, and typically the response is something like “Oh my god, I can’t imagine how you could have ever been a guy!”

You are certainly entitled to believe that I am still a man. Some people believe that the holocaust never happened, an there are even scientists that have done “studies” to show that the ovens could never have burned all the people they said they did, and that there was no remnants of insecticides in the bricks of the gas chambers.

Our culture is full of irrational beliefs. I may believe that someone is a “fetid crimson pustule on the buttocks of humanity oozing a pestiferous blight of hatred, ignorance, and bigotry upon an unsuspecting civilized society,” but actually referring to someone like that is uncivilized, unkind, unproductive, and unnecessary, so I don’t do it.

Frankly, I don’t care if someone believes I’m a Martian, mentally ill, or a man. They have precious little evidence to prove any of these things – unless perhaps I give them a DNA sample. But if you need a DNA sample to tell if I’m a man or a woman, then we’d better start checking everyone else too. I simply ask to be treated in the same way that every other woman is treated. Indeed, that’s the way I AM treated, unless someone uses what they think they know of my medical history to do otherwise.

Peace,

Cynthia

March 04, 2008 10:17 AM  
Anonymous Aunt Bea said...

Theresa said: I said "that did get some media attention", clearly not "was intended to" or anything else.

I listened to the audio file again at 12:30 into it. The word "did" is not in Theresa's reply nor is the word "intended" in Jim's transcript as Theresa claims.

Here's what I heard:

Yes, in the Rio Sport and Health up in um Germantown, a guy dressed as a girl went into the ladies bathroom. And, ah you know, essentially what that um, and that was meant to get some media attention, you know, and he, the guy left immediately, apparently, I mean but there was, this is a Rio Sport and Health Club, you know Sport and Health has steam rooms, and there are ladies changing in those locker rooms, people in various stages of undress [laughing] you know, all the time, so there's a lot this guy can see.

March 04, 2008 10:25 AM  
Anonymous Emproph said...

You guys are gonna hate me.

I went back and listened to it too, for the umpteenth time, this time even more closely, and I think Theresa’s right. It may still not be audible for some, but I think now that she did say “that did get some media attention.”

Essentially what that um, that was, meant to get some media attention.
Essentially what that um, that was, that did get some media attention.

1) "That was," was a non sequitur. It didn’t logically follow from the words before hand, but we all do that in conversation, so it’s understandable.

2) Obviously it got media attention, so why bother clarify that as the “essense” of it? Again, no big deal, just another reason, meaning-wise, to be inclined to accept hearing the words “meant to,” as opposed “that did.”

3) Outside of the interview, the incident was meant to get media attention. So I think it’s understandable that she might have said as much and just forgot to preface it with “I believe.”

4) Again, not intentional, but at the point in question she waxed quiet, so I also think her vocal inflection when delivering those words was more conducive for the sound and meaning of the words "meant to."

But despite all that, I believe I was wrong and that Theresa and anon were right.

So I’m sorry Theresa and I apologize.
----
Maryanne said…
“I am literally asking you this and begging you this on an extremely personal level. Funny thing is - in my guts - i actually LIKE you. I can’t explain that, but i do. I have a feeling of real compassion for you. How do you like that? I would actually enjoy sitting and talking with you instead of this crap and all the rock throwing... You are going to lose the war, even if you win the battle. I would and could actually be a friend to you in this life if you would allow it. Everyone here will think that is insane, but i honestly speak from my real heart and real gut instincts whether anyone likes it or not..”
--
I don’t think you’re insane, I kind of feel the same way. Since she’s been in the media of late, she comes across as articulate, she seems friendly and gregarious, and like someone that would be fun to hang around with. Aside of course from the projectile bile that continually spews from her lips. It’s sad.

March 04, 2008 1:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Theresa:
For some reason I just can't seem to work up a lot of pity for your self-perceived victimhood. You were the one who insisted on making an issue of denying a minority the same rights that other citizens have. You are the one who has distorted the intent of the law. You are the one who has encouraged and promulgated unbelievable and unspeakable slanders against transgender people. You are the one who time after time, and in whatever public forum you can muster up, repeats the same tired lies and distortions. And yet you get out the old crying towel and expect everyone to believe that you are the one being victimized here.
Somehow I get the feeling that you have missed the bus. To reference something in what I guess is your favorite book: "What you sow you shall reap" seems to be the result of your hate mongering, and it has come back to bite you.
Diogenes

March 04, 2008 1:14 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

In response to the statements by Maryanne and Cynthia, I am reminded of lyrics written by Oscar Hammerstein for the musical "South Pacific". Lt. Cable opines the attacks and slanders he has to suffer because of his love for the beautiful non-Caucasian Liu in the song, "You've Got to Be Carefully Taught":
"You've got to be taught to hate and fear,
You've got to be taught from year to year,
It's got to be drummed in your dear little ear
You've got to be carefully taught.

"You've got to be taught to be afraid
Of people whose eyes are oddly made,
And people whose skin is a different shade,
You've got to be carefully taught.

You've got to be taught before it's too late,
Before you are six or seven or eight,
To hate all the people your relatives have,
You've got to be carefully taught -- You've got to be carefully taught."
Almost all of us who read the blog comments posted here are truly appreciative and welcome the education you give us about transgender people. The few who don't are - simply put - not re-teachable. What a pity...that's their loss. My only wish is that they not project or impose their ignorance and fear and hatred on other people.
RT

March 04, 2008 2:06 PM  
Blogger Priya Lynn said...

Theresa said "And I believe Dana and Mary Ann are very confused folks, and I feel sorry for them.".

No you don't. If you truly felt sorry for them you'd be trying to alleviate the major source of frustration in their lives - discrimination. Instead you are trying to increase it. You say you feel sorry for them not be cause you do, but because that falsely implies there is something wrong with them rather than the society and people like you that oppresses them.

Theresa said " I have absolutely no problem with gender identity job non-discrimination rights, as long as they are not working as a teacher around kids, as long as religous institutions don't have to hire them, and there are reasonable exceptions to this law.".

Those aren't reasonable exceptions. Its only religionists who seak the right to discriminate against transgenders and gays - there's nothing special about them that they deserve the right to break the law. A transgender person should be judged solely upon their ability to teach, not on their gender. If they can teach there is no reason to deny them teaching jobs - to do so would be unjust, unfair, and despicable.

Theresa said "You need to be careful not to take rights away from 99.9% of the population, when you extend rights to .1%.".

That's totally dishonest of you. The majority of the population doesn't feel their rights are being taken away and they most certainly are not. You can't put the lives and safety of transwomen at risk just to give bigots some abstract satisfaction that transgenders aren't accepted in society. That would be a tremendous imposition on transgenders just to provide you with a trivial psychological thrill - not a reasonable tradeoff

March 04, 2008 2:09 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Andrea- not anon
I leave the bathroom designation up to the place I am in. MienYu in Georgetown has a large unisex bathroom with a number of stalls. Some malls have family bathrooms. Some places have one toilet. I was in a bar in a college town where there were two toilets and just a low dividing wall- sort of a female version of the urinal.

The point wasn't group unisex bathrooms because I don't have M.N. Anon and Theresa's problem with worrying that the person in the stall next to me is transgender. I don't care who is peeing next to me in a stall as long as they keep it in the toilet and keep themselves in their stall.

We all know you aren't concerned about pedophiles- Theresa has said she doesn't want special rights for a small portion of the population. She means transgender people- because she hates them. History is full of people who didn't want civil rights for black people, for women, for immigrants(not now- Irish, Italian, Jews from eastern Europe) because of their own fear and hatred. You are no different-small minded and hateful

March 04, 2008 5:58 PM  
Anonymous Robert said...

Theresa said:

" have absolutely no problem with gender identity job non-discrimination rights, as long as they are not working as a teacher around kids"

Protecting the children again, dear?

I remember people who sent their kids to private schools so they wouldn't have Catholic, Mormon or Jewish teachers.

Theresa, when they come to get you, there will be no one left to object.

March 04, 2008 6:59 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"I leave the bathroom designation up to the place I am in."

Then CRG is on your side.

March 04, 2008 11:19 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Wow, it is really amazing the number of personal insults you all can fling over here all the while without addressing the argument at hand...

Do they send you to a special school to teach you how to do that ? Is that what they teach in the "tolerant" churches you attend ?

In case you haven't noticed, I really don't care WHAT you say about me. And you have called me about every name in the book. But you will notice that I don't fling insults back at you.

It is not going to work to call me hateful, bigoted, spiteful, horrible, etc, etc, etc....You have been calling me names for years and it hasn't slowed me down one bit. I hope the media is reading this blog, because you seem to have no idea how badly this reflects on you.

So hey, keep right on going guys, your true colors are shining through.

And Dana, if you would like to point to where in the MC code it says that "operators of those facilities can determine who can access them".... I would sure like to see it. Why don't you ask the county attorney to publish a legal opionion that public accomodations in MC don't cover bathrooms while you are at it ? Gee, that is because he can't... because of course public accomodations include bathrooms, always have, and always will.

Good night !
Theresa

March 05, 2008 12:53 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

As has been pointed out previously, Theresa's obsession with the subject of transgender women in rest rooms is a cause of worry and dismay. Not being willing to concede to factual information indicates a psychological disorder. Such zealotry in clinging to her own interpretation of the reality of the world, despite attempts to get her to understand facts and her unhealthy obsession with other people's private sex lives is a sign of sickness. She is obviously a very unhappy and sad woman who deserves pity for her struggle with her inner demons. Maybe an exorcism to expel them would be in order.
OOO

March 05, 2008 1:38 AM  
Anonymous Emproph said...

Theresa Rickman said...

"Wow, it is really amazing the number of personal insults you all can fling over here all the while without addressing the argument at hand..."

In psychology, psychological projection (or projection bias) is a defense mechanism in which one attributes to others one’s own unacceptable or unwanted thoughts or/and emotions. Projection reduces anxiety by allowing the expression of the unwanted subconscious impulses/desires without letting the ego recognize them.
--
"Do they send you to a special school to teach you how to do that ? Is that what they teach in the "tolerant" churches you attend ?"

We don’t claim to be “tolerant” of unreasoned intolerance:

"Unlimited tolerance must lead to the disappearance of tolerance. If we extend unlimited tolerance even to those who are intolerant, if we are not prepared to defend a tolerant society against the onslaught of the intolerant, then the tolerant will be destroyed, and tolerance with them."

– Karl Popper, The Open Society and Its Enemies
--
"In case you haven't noticed, I really don't care WHAT you say about me. And you have called me about every name in the book. But you will notice that I don't fling insults back at you."

We’ll come back to this one, but in the mean time, no, you "don't fling insults back," you just "innocently" maintain comprehensive websites full of every hackneyed half truth, distortion, and outright lie that you can find to demonize and dehumanize entire swaths of feeling human beings, and then you "innocently" go on programs with extensively larger audiences than you can cull on your own, so that you can promote those litanies of insults even further. Yes indeed, you truly are the victim in all this.
--
"It is not going to work to call me hateful, bigoted, spiteful, horrible, etc, etc, etc....You have been calling me names for years and it hasn't slowed me down one bit. I hope the media is reading this blog, because you seem to have no idea how badly this reflects on you."

Not intended to slow you down, just observations. And the fact that you don’t have any desire to refute those observations whilst implying that they are unfounded, only confirms them.
--
"So hey, keep right on going guys, your true colors are shining through."

Again, confirmation. By not taking any measure to distinguish which of us “guys,” or persons you’re talking about, collateral damage is of no concern to you when it comes to those who may not deserve it, ergo, and in your words, "hateful, bigoted, spiteful, horrible, etc, etc, etc...."
--
"And Dana, if you would like to point to where in the MC code it says that "operators of those facilities can determine who can access them".... I would sure like to see it. Why don't you ask the county attorney to publish a legal opionion that public accomodations in MC don't cover bathrooms while you are at it ? Gee, that is because he can't... because of course public accomodations include bathrooms, always have, and always will."

"because he can't..."
"But you will notice that I don't fling insults back at you."
"your true colors are shining through."

--
"Good night !
Theresa"


AND SHE REALLY REALLY MEANS THAT!!!!!!!

March 05, 2008 5:57 AM  
Anonymous Emproph said...

Dana Beyer, M.D. said...
"Emproph,

She used the pronoun “he” with respect to the County attorney, who happens to be male."

--
Thanks Dana ;)
--
I'm sorry Theresa, I was wrong for accusing you of insulting Dana like that.

I was wrong for my impetuous misperception of the facts, and for the scathing mockery that was derived and expressed from it.

By accusing you of an insult you did not intend, I ended up insulting you. And for this, I apologize.

-Patrick

March 05, 2008 11:00 AM  
Anonymous Maryanne Arnow said...

One very brief comment.

To Theresa - in the comments you had made prior to my last and very long response, you had said - -

"I don't feel that strongly about it one way or the other, so I just try to avoid using either pronoun - which is challenging."

As much as i have tried to get you and everyone else here to look at the constant contradictory and very inconsistent language that you use, this is another case of the same.

If you dont feel strongly about this, why would you and all of your allies devise and use such distortions and misinformation about both this law, and people like myself, thereby placing many unwarranted fears in the minds of my fellow neighbors and citicens of this county if not the state as a whole.

Someone that does "not feel that strongly about it" would never go to such lengths in organizing such an effort.

Another quick point. You claim you do not fling insults at others here. I have told you of several insults that you have aaid about myself, Dana, everyone like us, and that you have clearly done that in a very backhanded way disguised as compassion, and regret for how sorry you feel for "confused people like us." You ghave used specific language such as "the .99 percent of people that ar enot confused about what gender they actually are" - You know for a fact that these are some of the most insyulting and inflammatory things you could ever say to people like me or Dana - yet you do it anyway. If you happened to actually rwead the last post i made - i clearly and irrefutably used your own arguments to show that in fact just the opposite of "confusion" is true for people like myself using the very same standards that you denuigrate us with.

I pointed out nio less than half a dozen GLARING and complete contradcitions in your own language and clinical knowledge of the situation of people like myself. No - i am sorry - you DO fling insult - and some of the very worst ones.

You do it by using what you think is astute language couched in graciousness, false compassion, and sympathy, when in fact you exhibit none of these characteristics based on the continuous flood of contradictions that you continue to post here. That in and of itself is insulting.

The fact that you have been clearly shown to be often inconsistent and even completly and repeatedly contradictory, yet refuse to acknowledge one single peiec of it is insulting.

The fact the i addressed you directly and you do not even acknowlegde my open and honest request for real dialogue with you is a blatant insult.

Once again you are trying to paint yourself in the most gracious light poiossiblle whern it should be very clear to everyone here that you are in fact doing exactly the opposite.

All of my offers to dialogue with you in a civil manner still stand.

TO EMPROPH: I have listened to that same interview segment over and over - i have VERY high quality sound sytem for this computer. She clearly said the word MEANT - which implies if nothing else, at least the possibility of forethought and conscious intention in this case.

I still give her the benfit that she was not invloved, based solely on her word, but the language on that tape seems clear to me.

So does the laughter and flippant nature of the mannerism as the interviewers contniue to spew their Anti-transgender rhetoric while she sits there and goes along with all of it.

I am NOT laughing. I wrote what i wrote in the manner that i did, and for a number of very specific reasons.

Every single lie, distortion, false compassion, insult, unethical tactic, and subtle psychological subversion of the truth is clearly outlined in my personal analysis of her tactics and langusge.

These are my personal impressions -i could be incorrect in many ways, and i will always be the first one willing to step up to the plate if i am.

Theresa - You said that you hope the media is following this section - I do too.

I also hope that every single person that supoports your cause read the whole thing as well so that they will begin to see the light of truth glimmering around the edges of the mass of continued distortions, inncaccuracies, and insults that you use, and often, insultingly, with what seems to be couched in false compassion and graciousness when in fact you are being nasty as hell.

I still respect you. I still wish to dialogue with you further.

Please Have the courtesy that when you call someone out by name, and attahc a negative connotation to that person - such as the words
"very confused" and they respond to you - dont be rude and insulting by ignoring the response.

Thanks all,

Sincerely,


Maryanne

March 05, 2008 12:53 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Does anyone actually read these posts by Maryanne?

Try practicing a precis technique.

March 05, 2008 1:17 PM  
Blogger Dana Beyer, M.D. said...

This recent post of hers is much more concise and readable.

March 05, 2008 2:40 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

That's true.

Don't mean to be rude, Maryanne, but brevity works best on this whole blog thing.

People need to be able to read while on hold at the office.

March 05, 2008 3:07 PM  
Blogger Priya Lynn said...

Red Baron, when you're at work you're supposed to be working. Typical of an immoral person like yourself you abuse your employer by engrossing yourself in personal business while he pays you to actually be working.

March 05, 2008 7:35 PM  
Anonymous Emproph said...

That’s pretty good Priya, I missed the office thing the first time around.

So what do you say Anon, should there be a law against blogplace discrimination?

March 05, 2008 7:50 PM  
Anonymous Emproph said...

Maryanne Arnow said...
"TO EMPROPH: I have listened to that same interview segment over and over - i have VERY high quality sound sytem for this computer. She clearly said the word MEANT - which implies if nothing else, at least the possibility of forethought and conscious intention in this case.

I still give her the benfit that she was not invloved, based solely on her word, but the language on that tape seems clear to me."

--
Oh, I’m not contesting what you hear Maryanne, or what anyone else hears for that matter. “Meant to” fits like a glove. Even I can still hear it when I listen to it, and I’ve listened to it even more times since I wrote that last post.

It’s the perfect storm, linguistically speaking. The influence not least of which is the fact that the incident was indeed “meant” to get media attention. Whether or not Rickman was involved, or said the word “meant.”

To qualify further, the language on the tape seems VERY clear. Aside from anon, everyone else heard / hears “meant to” too, including me. But I can also hear it as “that did.”
--
To Theresa now,
That said, I noticed that you did that a lot during the interview. You’d wax quiet, or your vocal inflection would lilt, endearingly I might add, at the very point where you decided to shift gears and change the way you decided to describe whatever it was you were talking about. And your lilts, if anything, are one of your stellar signature interviewee qualities.

So basically my "complaint" is, as far as the need for ensuring the accuracy of what is heard, is that you were too conversational.

Perfect for private conversations, but if you’re going to be conversational in interviews like that, at least make sure not to get so quiet that your words may not be heard, or worse, very clearly misunderstood.

In addition, try to avoid saying "ya know" so often. I have to go back and count, but you said "ya know," nigh on 100, if not more times during that interview.

Again, it's great in private conversation, and I’m not suggesting that it was that noticeable while listening to it, but I think your points could have come across much more gooder without having relied on it so much. I’m not saying to give up on it altogether, as it’s a bonding and transitional phrase, you know, so, it has its place. I’m just saying, you can do better.

Especially so as to avoid being pestered by people like me who are sticklers for vernacular.

March 05, 2008 8:23 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Theresa said "you will notice that I don't fling insults back at you."

Are you the same person as the "Theresa Rickman" in this exchange?

"THERESA RICKMAN: I believe Dana's had a, has has gone, undergone a sex change operation.

MATT BARBER: Well, he's still a man who…

THERESA RICKMAN: Yes."

That is you isn't it, Theresa? Do you honestly think agreeing with CWA's Matt Barber on air that Dana is "still a man" is not "flinging" an insult? If you do, "I hope the media is reading this blog, because ... [Theresa Rickman's and the CRG's] true colors are shining through."

You insult trans people every day as you work to keep discrimination against them legal. And what is your rationale? So you can continue to enjoy SHARED PUBLIC NUDITY with your lady friends in the lockerroom at your health club. Who's the pervert? Do you and your lady friends do the foot tapping thing too?

MCPS Mom

March 06, 2008 10:05 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Okay, Emproph.

I will try to be more careful the next time I give an interview with the ya'knows and the lilts... which will probably be today.
I appreciate the honesty.

Theresa

March 07, 2008 5:28 AM  
Anonymous svelte_brunette said...

Theresa,

Please let us know if the folks who are interviewing would like to hear the other side of the story. I'm sure we could find someone to talk to them.

Thanks,

Cynthia

March 07, 2008 7:20 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Theresa Rickman said "I appreciate the honesty."

Well, that's a start. Today's interview would be a good place for you to try being honest so we can all say the same thing about you.

MCPS Mom

March 07, 2008 7:28 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Cynthia.
We will definitely take you up on that.

Please email the email addresses and phone numbers (if you are comfortable with that, I will only provide to media)...to info@notmyshower.net. Please indicate you would like the email forwarded to me.

We very frequently get requests for interviews where they want someone to represent the other side and I would be delighted to provide them with contact information.

Make sure you come with a definition of what a facility is, if it is not a bathroom :-)

Thanks !
Theresa

March 07, 2008 2:17 PM  
Anonymous svelte_brunette said...

Theresa,

Thank you for responding. As a woman, you’ll probably understand my reluctance to send my personal contact info to an open mailbox at “Notmyshower”. Although I’m sure you’d be scrupulous in making sure my contact info didn’t end up on some web-site where people could mail or call me at all hours of the night with unfriendly commentary, I’m not convinced everyone who might see that e-mail, or have it forwarded to them would.

As such I have sent the following request to Jim and Chris at TTF:

“Would it be possible to have Theresa send her e-mail address to info@teachthefacts.org ? And when you receive an address that appears to be legitimate, hers, and not to an open box, could you please send her the following address?: (address removed) This is an old account I should have access to through August.

If you feel this is outside the purview of your responsibilities, just let me know and I’ll work on another method.

Thank you,

Cynthia”

If this doesn’t work, perhaps we can get in touch with each other through a common friend or acquaintance like Dana.

Peace,

Cynthia
(At home, eating chicken soup with a REALLY nasty cold.)

March 08, 2008 3:24 PM  
Blogger Stellewriter said...

Transsexuals and Intersex....
Let us not confuse by unfair association those who have medical issues…

Every ten minutes a child is born, 1/2500, in which the doctor cannot determine the sex, or gender. This is not talking about homosexuality, but tragically a congenital condition of birth which can be caused by endocrine agents and chemicals. These children are Intersex; they are born into a life of not male or female. Likewise in similar fashion the Transsexual is identified with a Bioneurological congenital condition, and they too are locked into something not quite so clearly defined as male, or female. The best we can do is live as close to what we seem to believe we are. That may preclude the wants, and often ignorant and bigoted beliefs of others. In what case do we ignore this issue and abandon the children who now cannot hide? How can anyone continue in hate and prejudice so as to deny simple equality and justice? It is either time for change and understanding, or simply wheedle out the transgender element as inhuman and adopt the final solution as Hitler visualized? Not an easy thing to resolve, but one that is present and will not go away. I can appreciate other’s opinions, and the freedom to express same, but I would hope all would be with regard to the children, teens, and emerging adults, and all who are not so fortunate to have been born by someone’s idea of “normal.” Yet as a Conservative, Christian, Parent, and “Transsexual”, law should be equal for everyone, or it is not fit for anyone, yet, equality and recognition are still a dream for many.

March 29, 2008 7:47 PM  

Post a Comment

<< Home