Re: OT: Who Da Fuck Cares?
JenniferFlusher
<FutureG...@invalid.invalid> said:
> 13 wins, 0 losses. WOOF!
JenniferFlusher
<FutureG...@invalid.invalid> said:
> I do! I'm ECSTATIC!
Great - why don't you go post in your football newsgroups all your TG
high school exploits before you discovered your feminine side and make
sure to tell them you're a TG person with every post. Tell them about
your shoes and shit. I'm sure they'll be as glad to see you as
everyone else it.
Be sure to put OT in your subject line to make it OK
Jennifer Usher
"Helen Detroit" <FutureG...@invalid.invalid> wrote in message
news:5slai5564c2nmkabr...@4ax.com...
> I do! I'm ECSTATIC!
>
> Some folks set a filter to automatically kill any subject with "OT:" in
> it. That's why some other folks put "OT:" in the subject when they post
> off-topic. Nevertheless, since it seems to bother you so much, even
> though I don't recognize you as a regular here, to avoid making you
> angry I will not post any more on the topic of the New Orleans Saints.
> Nothing would make me happier than to see everyone else happy.
The simple fact is, there is always going to be someone who will find
something to complain about.
> PS Are you sure you aren't maybe a Patriots fan? :o\
I think he is a troll, plain and simple.
Jennifer
Jennifer Usher
"Helen Detroit" <FutureG...@invalid.invalid> wrote in message
news:hksai59ah0i57n8tc...@4ax.com...
>>Great - why don't you go post in your football newsgroups all your TG
>>high school exploits before you discovered your feminine side and make
>>sure to tell them you're a TG person with every post. Tell them about
>>your shoes and shit. I'm sure they'll be as glad to see you as
>>everyone else it.
>>
>>Be sure to put OT in your subject line to make it OK
>
> Well, I did say I wouldn't do it anymore. What more do you want? I
> apologize if that will do any good. I am beginning to think that you are
> offended by every thing and everybody.
Helen, you are being trolled. The simplest thing to do would be to just
kill file him, and forget him. He will still continue to complain, and will
probably even try to get your attention, but you won't see him. He has been
in my kill file from his first appearance.
> And I don't read any football newsgroups. As I said before, I am usually
> not particularly interested in football. My posting history over the
> last 8 or 9 years on this group should bear that out.
I imagine I would possibly get caught up in the excitement if a local team
were doing well.
> Again I am sorry for irritating you so much. I was not trying to get
> under anybody's skin.
Seriously, don't feed the troll. Plonk him, ignore him, forget him.
Jennifer
fluffybunnie
>
>
> How do you know that this is a "he"?
>
Lardo likes to pretensd he's the only "true transsexual" on the
planet. How do you think he got everyone calling him "he"? It's
not as if we always called him that...
--
(\__/)
(=^.^=)
(")_(")
Jennifer Usher
"Helen Detroit" <FutureG...@invalid.invalid> wrote in message
news:o12gi55c1pb3k0rcd...@4ax.com...
>>I think he is a troll, plain and simple.
>
> How do you know that this is a "he"?
Well, first off, I have a strong suspicion of who this actually is. Second,
the trolls tend to be men who wish to fantasize that they are women. Being
a woman is more than just claiming to be one.
> Here's a he for you:
> http://www.neworleanssaints.com/Team/Roster/People/Drew%20Brees.aspx
No argument there. Very nice.
--
Jennifer Usher
Jennifer Usher
"Helen Detroit" <FutureG...@invalid.invalid> wrote in message
news:d18ii5hf0j7m7qm7g...@4ax.com...
Well, first off, I have a strong suspicion of who this actually is. Second,
> Well, I think it is time I went on record on this topic. On this group,
> I see a lot of folks assuming the mantle of "gender judge", claiming
> that they have the necessary knowledge or authority to declare that
> someone else is or is not (usually the latter) a woman.
Yes, that does happen a lot.
> Wishing to be a woman is closely related to believing-- or I should say
> knowing-- oneself to be a woman. Not exactly the same, but indicative in
> a general sense to one another. Fantasizing about being a woman is a
> whole different critter. A fantasy in this context is a short-lived but
> repeating intentional self-delusion, usually to satisfy either some
> degree of gender ambiguity or sexual desire, or more often a bit of
> both, and a fantasy is generally not publicly proclaimed, but kept to
> oneself or shared with a lover, spouse, or friend. The fantasy is
> irrelevant to reality. The deep-seated belief or knowledge, as opposed
> to the fantasy that comes and goes on a whim, is the best determinant of
> true gender.
Okay....
> If a person claims to be a woman, I think it mostly boils down to one of
> two possibilities: either the person knows that he is not a woman and is
> simply lying, or she believes ("knows", to her) that she is one and
> therefore at least emotionally and mentally she is a woman or certainly
> something near enough to a woman.
Well, one is either a woman, or one is not. Close doesn't count.
> The best judge of a person's true gender is that person. He or she is
> living within his or her own reality and an outsider's determination
> that it is false, on whatever grounds, will never ever change that.
In a sense, I agree. More than one kook here has made false statements
about me here. Personally, I could care less. Their crap is not true, so
I simply ignore it. On the other hand, many transgender types go to pieces
at the very suggestion that they are not "really women." Why? Because,
simply put, they are NOT women, and they know it. They cannot stand to have
their illusions shattered.
> Another person can of course refuse to accept that a person is a woman,
> but it does not change that fact, if such fact exists. Such a
> determination by another person can only be regarded as an opinion, with
> no basis in the subject's self-evident gender determination. I can
> refuse to accept you as a woman, decline to treat or address you as a
> woman, or proclaim to all who will listen that you are not a woman, but
> you know the only truth that really matters, not anyone else. Of course,
> such a proclamation in truth would only reflect badly on me. I would be
> a "gender judge", and of course an unqualified one. I am only qualified
> to determine my own true gender, and nobody else's.
I agree, to a point. Actually, if one is not perceived by society as a
woman, or a man in the case of an FTM, then perhaps that should cause them
to reexamine their beliefs. Being a woman is more than thinking one is a
woman, or wanting to be a woman, or claiming to be a woman. That, of
course, is contrary to "transgender dogma," but it is reality.
> To claim that one has some sort of magic secret sixth sense
> ("trans-dar"?) enabling one to authoritatively categorize others by
> their true gender, I believe to be fallacy. To judge another person by
> his or her behavior or words to be a man or a woman is nearly as silly.
--
Jennifer Usher
> My PERSONAL OPINION, if I have one, of whether a person is truly woman
> or not, is my own business, and if I am smart I will in general let it
> remain only my business. But I cannot change the way that the subject
> views himself or herself, and that is the only thing that matters; and
> if I am acting without personal bias and with maturity and intelligence,
> I will not make public statements to the contrary. That
> self-determination is the only real truth that matters.
Everyone makes such a determination. Now, what we do with that
determination is affected by various factors. I usually try to be
considerate of a person's presentation, unless the person gives me reason to
do otherwise.
> In truth, I think often when one "gender-judges" here, the judger really
> doesn't care one way or the other what the judgee's true gender actually
> is, but is only using a negative judgement as a form of insult.
In many cases this is true. In others, it is not.
> To sum it all up, "gender-judging" is simply not right.
>
> Just my opinion, of course, FWIW and YMMV.
As I say, there are some points I agree with, and some I do not.
Willow
wrote:
> Songlian's mother: Rich man? If you marry a rich man, you will only be his concubine.
> Songlian: Let me be a concubine. Isn't that the fate of a woman?
> (From: "Raise The Red Lantern")
You and we must be amongst the only people to have copies of "Raise
the Red Lantern". A wonderful movie.
As to "gender judging", I think you are very right. It is foolish to
attempt to "judge" another - and it is always an insult when it is
done. I well recall many support group meetings at which, had anyone
wanted to "judge", most would have been deemed lacking. Not only
would saying something be in poor taste, it might also hurt well
beyond measure. Newbies tend to be rather fragile. Further, if *we*
expect others to recognize "us", it is ill advised to hurl such
insults at ourselves, not matter how any one of us may look. It is
trite to say that looks are only external. That what really matters
is inside, and only the person can judge what is inside.
How many times have we - as a group, that is - railed against the
horror of some outsider calling us by the wrong pronoun? How many
tears have been shed by too many of us due to such comments, regarded
as cruel and worse. Or been mad when the media uses the wrong
pronoun? Frankly, if within our small group we use the same insulting
words, we do not deserve any better form outsiders.
When I started transition it was deemed the worst insult one TS could
advance against another. When it happened, the person who did so was
tossed out. Very appropriate.
Willow
Jennifer Usher
"Willow" <pang...@telus.net> wrote in message
news:0c668f25-7e95-470d...@f20g2000prn.googlegroups.com...
> As to "gender judging", I think you are very right. It is foolish to
> attempt to "judge" another - and it is always an insult when it is
> done. I well recall many support group meetings at which, had anyone
> wanted to "judge", most would have been deemed lacking. Not only
> would saying something be in poor taste, it might also hurt well
> beyond measure. Newbies tend to be rather fragile. Further, if *we*
> expect others to recognize "us", it is ill advised to hurl such
> insults at ourselves, not matter how any one of us may look. It is
> trite to say that looks are only external. That what really matters
> is inside, and only the person can judge what is inside.
Actually, as usual, Willy Boy misses many important points. Appearance is
only a very minor part of the larger issue. I have known people who were
clearly women, even before they remotely began transition, and I have know
some who were quite credible in terms of appearance but who, the moment they
began speaking were clearly men. And I am not referring to voice quality,
but instead to their attitudes and behavior.
> How many times have we - as a group, that is - railed against the
> horror of some outsider calling us by the wrong pronoun? How many
> tears have been shed by too many of us due to such comments, regarded
> as cruel and worse. Or been mad when the media uses the wrong
> pronoun? Frankly, if within our small group we use the same insulting
> words, we do not deserve any better form outsiders.
Yes, those determined to fool themselves often react emotionally when their
delusions are challenged. Those who are secure in their identities just
shrug at such and move on. For example, Goat Boy forgets that I knew him
before he became angry with me for not believing that a man who wishes to
hang on to his penis is, well, a man. His more recent insults are
outweighed by what he said before.
> When I started transition it was deemed the worst insult one TS could
> advance against another. When it happened, the person who did so was
> tossed out. Very appropriate.
Yes, I imagine this is true. Those who are pretending tend to hang together
and support each others delusions. Those who are real move on, and separate
from the faux women. The faux women tend to hand together and continue
their delusions.
--
Jennifer Usher
Jennifer Usher
"Helen Detroit" <FutureG...@invalid.invalid> wrote in message
news:d9lji51snviaakhcs...@4ax.com...
> So it is is or ain't, on or off, with absolutely no gray area? I have
> never heard anyone except religious fundamentalist types say that. I
> think many people truly do exist in some shade of gray and not at
> absolute polar opposite extremes of black and white. If one must
> categorize oneself or be categorized, often one must choose from one or
> the other, man or woman, depending on which is closer to the mark. And
> if it were a case of absolutes, who is qualified to set the standards?
> Who is fit to judge? Who is this perfect TS with goddess-like power to
> separate the wheat from the chaff? Who will be the gatekeeper? And why
> should the subject person listen to this goddess of gender wisdom and
> accept her holy declaration as immutable?
Womanhood is not quantifiable. There are not degrees of being a woman, or a
man for that matter. Yes, we all have varying degrees of femininity and
masculinity but the actual being a woman or man is pretty specific. There
is no perfect judge, but in some cases is pretty obvious. As to
"gatekeepers," that is best left to the professionals, though I think there
is some value in getting input from those who are transsexual.
And for what it is worth, I don't claim infallibility. I am, quite frankly,
expressing an opinion. That is why I always get so amused by those who
become so terribly distraught when someone points out the obvious...that
they are not really women. It takes so little to devastate their fragile
identities and yet they cannot see the truth that is before them.
> So it is false when it is said about you, but not false when said about
> another person? Jennifer, please look at the bigger picture as others
> see it, and consider how that sounds. And going to pieces over being
> called "not a woman" is no indicator of it being true. You know yourself
> what a touchy issue that can be. You know how stressful transitioning
> can be under the best of circumstances, let alone the worst. And perhaps
> sometimes even more stressful than transitioning, is NOT transitioning,
> or delaying it for whatever reason. Many TS are understandably carrying
> around a lot of crazy psychological baggage, including low self-esteem
> and sensitive egos. Add a shot in the butt of delestrogen and a handful
> of estinyls or premarins, (hormone rage!) a miserable childhood, a
> failed marriage and financial ruin, rejection by family and friends,
> perception by the public as some sort of freak Springer show trash, and
> you have a recipe for "going off" at nearly any provocation.
Let me put it this way. It is an opinion either way. They say it about me,
and I have a good laugh. I say it about them, and suddenly I have taken
away something from them. If we were talking about people who were early in
transition, I would tend to agree. Both Willy Boy and Goat Boy are quite a
few years into their transition. Yes, I was a lot more insecure years ago.
But that passed. In fact, that raises a good point...if transition does
not, after a reasonable amount of time, help one overcome things like low
self-esteem and sensitive egos, if one is still suffering from all that
crazy psychological baggage, or worse, things are getting worse, then
transition is probably a mistake. I see people who's lives go from
supposedly bad to absolute disaster. And yet, they persist. They think
there is some honor in being a truly miserable woman. They revel in the
humiliation and abuse they receive. I doubt there problem is
transsexualism. It is more likely some form of masochistic fetish.
> if one is not generally perceived to be a woman, then more often than
> not it DOES cause them to reexamine their beliefs. That is part of the
> RLE, and an important part, IMHO. One must go through the worst case
> scenarios and deal with any doubts caused thereby, before any
> irreversible procedures. Certainly, one who cannot walk the walk and
> talk the talk with a reasonable level of credibility is bound to be less
> successful in transitioning and probably less happy in general, but that
> is not necessarily proof that one is not a woman. True gender identity
> is in the mind, the heart, and the spirit, and not in the eye of another
> person. It is perhaps understandable that a person ignorant of TSity or
> TGism might declare that a person with detectable male characteristics
> is not a woman, but for a person familiar with the many aspects of
> "T-ness", I think it is not only heartless but also intransigently
> pig-headed to "gender-judge" the subject person.
Yes, ideally that is how things work. But we are not always dealing with
sane rational people. And not everyone who claims to be a transsexual is,
and some who should not have surgery can lie, and slip through the cracks.
Of course, some, like Goat Boy, are avowed non-ops. Their true gender
identity is decidedly male, as they have no desire to lose their penis.
They have some bizarre fantasy about being a woman with a penis.
> Just as there are varying shades to gender, there is varying success at
> appearing to be a woman to a trans-phobic society. The TS who can go
> anywhere, do anything, wear any clothes, have naturally perfect skin,
> hair, nails and hands, feet, posture, walk, etc etc is relatively rare.
> 9 out of 10 I am sure do at least occasionally get spooked. Some get
> spooked practically all the time by every person who sees them. Where
> would you draw your line, to one side of which dwells the "true
> transsexual" and on the other side, the "man who thinks he is a woman",
> or the "mere TG"? And how can any person simply declare oneself to be
> the expert who can do this? I must say that is a hot enough potato that
> I will NEVER touch it. So I still say that "gender-judging" is wrong,
> and that a reasonable, mature, thoughtful person who knows about such
> things will refrain from doing it.
First off, transsexuals are actually quite rare. They always have been.
Transgender people are far more common, but the vast, overwhelming majority
are not remotely transsexual. And the reality is, the woman who can go
anywhere, do anything, wear any clothes, have naturally perfect skin, hair,
nails and hands, feet, posture, walk, etc etc is also relatively rare.
Women are not perfect. We generally have flaws. And we learn to deal with
them, or we learn to live with them. That is why we spend money on skin
care products, nail salons, hair products, etc. Transgender types often
obsess over these things. Real women don't to near that degree.
--
Jennifer Usher
Willow
I believe we agree on this issue...
Thinking back, I believe that Jennifer has attacked many others here
here for not bring up to her standard of "femininity". In this, I am
not alone. More recently, there was a person called Barbara Hudson,
who was only the last (that I remember at the moment) of a long line
of members here who were denigrated for their lack of supposed
femininity or supposed male traits. It has been repeated endlessly.
Indeed, at the root of the Willow/Jennifer posts was the start when
Jennifer decided to use male pronouns and other silliness in posting
about me.
As you state, "I have never heard anyone except religious
fundamentalist types say that. I think many people truly do exist in
some shade of gray and not at
absolute polar opposite extremes of black and white." Jennifer is, of
course, fundamentalist in her religion and fundamentalist in her view
of transsexuality, To her, abuse of normal civil behaviour is a norm,
not an exception. Again, that applies not only to me, but to a string
of others who have come here, stayed awhile, been attacked and left.
As with any braggart, the image she projected was destroyed when her
picture and residence were exposed. Far from being the ideal woman,
passable in all ways, she was shown to be in her true colours. That
has, of course, led to a constant state of "No-it-ain't-so"itis.
After so many have been insulted by her (and you may check the
archives for proof of this, going back years) her true circumstances
were laid bare. Those who had been abused by her, as well as those
who had been silent and no doubt afraid of being attacked, were
delighted to offer up the "facts" which totally destroyed the "myth"
she had created for herself. Her transition from transvestite to
transsexual to "true transsexual" (whatever that might be) to HBS -
all of which were very public due to her own rantings - was nothing
but a shallow attempt to shore up what most believe to be a poor self-
esteem. The same holds true with her supposed love affairs, from the
night of her arrival in SF by bus to the lurid affair with "Sugir",
her insistence that still with a male member she had a female orgasm,
and tales nurses mistaking her gender in certain circumstances - all
set out here in some strange effort to bolster her "image".
Simply put, many who have been here, some who remain here, have many
reasons to strike back. Is that nice? No, but after not one, not
two, but repeated attacks by her, it is little wonder that many have
replied in kind. This is why this place is as it is, and shall remain
so. Jennifer will never behave in a civil fashion, falling back on
"I say what I think" and similar excuses for her falling to follow
normal rules of conduct. I note that most recently she has stated
that she would behave the same in person as she does on line. Her job
is to assist TG and TS who have issues with AIDS. It is hard to
imagine a less well suited person for such a position, given her
comments her and her stated ways of behaviour "in person". Of course,
I have no intentions of visiting San Francisco, so she is free to brag
about her supposed "victory" in a non-existent meeting.
Several attempts have been made over time to "be nice to Jennifer".
None of those attampts have been successful, and so we return to the
tit-for-tat world that is this NG. Jennifer refers to someone as
male, or uses male pronouns. Others respond in kind to her and post
accounts and pictures of her and her living conditions. She starts a
series of denials, and claims hallowed "HBS" status (an asylum run by
the inmates it seems to me) and on things go.
Yes, Red Lantern is a wonderful movie, certainly one of the best to
come out of China. It was quite a hunt to locate a copy "Red
Sorgum" is another. Have you seen the Indian films "Water", etc?
Willow
Jennifer Usher
"Helen Detroit" <FutureG...@invalid.invalid> wrote in message
news:teiki5l2jtacajt7n...@4ax.com...
> On Wed, 16 Dec 2009 20:46:32 -0800, "Jennifer Usher"
> <jenni...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>Actually, as usual, Willy Boy misses many important points.
>
> Jennifer, if you could refrain from referring to Willow as "Willy Boy",
> at least for a while, you might get a very good conversation going where
> you could express your views to others who would be more likely to hear
> you out. Really, what is so hard about that? You claim a right to assign
> or determine another's gender; do you also claim a right to change
> another person's name?
Well, at the moment, you are the only person here, besides Willy Boy, who is
not in my kill file.
And no, I do not assign gender. I express an opinion. And I use nicknames
for some people.
--
Jennifer Usher
Jennifer Usher
"Helen Detroit" <FutureG...@invalid.invalid> wrote in message
news:9viki55v5le3krub4...@4ax.com...
> Are you saying that FluffyBunny is Mabel? Mabel seemed a likeable sort,
> to me. If not, where are you getting "Goat Boy" from?
You betcha! And trust me, if you knew this person in 3D I imagine you would
agree that neither fluffy or bunny is applicable.
> There are TS who retain their penis for reasons other than personal
> preference. Do you know for a fact that this person prefers having a
> penis?
This person has made nasty remarks about post-ops. Goat Boy is a classic
transgender type. He wants to be a woman with a penis.
--
Jennifer Usher
Jennifer Usher
"Willow" <pang...@telus.net> wrote in message
news:d9e352aa-76a6-4c59...@y10g2000prg.googlegroups.com...
> Helen,
>
> I believe we agree on this issue...
>
> Thinking back, I believe that Jennifer has attacked many others here
> here for not bring up to her standard of "femininity". In this, I am
> not alone. More recently, there was a person called Barbara Hudson,
> who was only the last (that I remember at the moment) of a long line
> of members here who were denigrated for their lack of supposed
> femininity or supposed male traits. It has been repeated endlessly.
> Indeed, at the root of the Willow/Jennifer posts was the start when
> Jennifer decided to use male pronouns and other silliness in posting
> about me.
How very weasely. No, I don't attack people on the basis of standards of
"femininity." Now, Barbara Hudson is an interesting case. Barbara and I
were good friends...sort of like Willy Boy and Sue Ann were good friends.
Barbara even attacked Willy Boy quite a bit. Then Barbara decided she was
going to end the wars here. Barbara wanted to start a forum and have every
one move there. She claimed that, because of "Canadian law" that people
would be severely restricted as to what could be said. I declined to join,
and she got mad at me. She then left the group. She returned for a while,
attacking me regularly, and when I had my fill, I basically treated her
appropriately.
Actually, the start of problems between myself and Willy Boy was when he
started attacking people who did not accept his ridiculous story as being
typical and normal for a transsexual. He claimed he sought surgery and
became a transsexual because a therapist told him to after he was raped. We
raised some legitimate concerns about such a reason, and pointed out that
this was not remotely normal and he got mad.
> As you state, "I have never heard anyone except religious
> fundamentalist types say that. I think many people truly do exist in
> some shade of gray and not at
> absolute polar opposite extremes of black and white." Jennifer is, of
> course, fundamentalist in her religion and fundamentalist in her view
> of transsexuality, To her, abuse of normal civil behaviour is a norm,
> not an exception. Again, that applies not only to me, but to a string
> of others who have come here, stayed awhile, been attacked and left.
Actually, I never start attacks against anyone.
> As with any braggart, the image she projected was destroyed when her
> picture and residence were exposed. Far from being the ideal woman,
> passable in all ways, she was shown to be in her true colours. That
> has, of course, led to a constant state of "No-it-ain't-so"itis.
> After so many have been insulted by her (and you may check the
> archives for proof of this, going back years) her true circumstances
> were laid bare. Those who had been abused by her, as well as those
> who had been silent and no doubt afraid of being attacked, were
> delighted to offer up the "facts" which totally destroyed the "myth"
> she had created for herself. Her transition from transvestite to
> transsexual to "true transsexual" (whatever that might be) to HBS -
> all of which were very public due to her own rantings - was nothing
> but a shallow attempt to shore up what most believe to be a poor self-
> esteem. The same holds true with her supposed love affairs, from the
> night of her arrival in SF by bus to the lurid affair with "Sugir",
> her insistence that still with a male member she had a female orgasm,
> and tales nurses mistaking her gender in certain circumstances - all
> set out here in some strange effort to bolster her "image".
Now, this is typical of Willy Boy (and a good example of why I call him
that). I have never claimed to be "the ideal woman." I have no problems
with people seeing me as anything other than a woman. I created no myth. A
bit of truth has been mixed with a lot of lies. I was never a transvestite.
"True transsexual" is a term used by Harry Benjamin himself, and Harry
Benjamin Syndrome is a proposed terminology for what Benjamin called "true
transsexuals." Of course, Willy Boy denigrates these terms because they
obviously, by his own admission, do not apply to him. Now, I had no love
affair the night I arrived in San Francisco (all I wanted was a shower and a
bed) and while "Sugir" was a bit of an interesting diversion, he proved to
be quite the disappointment. And it has been shown, more than once. that I
never claimed to have had a female orgasm. That is a outright lie. one of
many Willy Boy is known for. Yes, I have had more than once when a nurse
took me for female. No remotely a matter of mistaking my gender.
> Simply put, many who have been here, some who remain here, have many
> reasons to strike back. Is that nice? No, but after not one, not
> two, but repeated attacks by her, it is little wonder that many have
> replied in kind. This is why this place is as it is, and shall remain
> so. Jennifer will never behave in a civil fashion, falling back on
> "I say what I think" and similar excuses for her falling to follow
> normal rules of conduct. I note that most recently she has stated
> that she would behave the same in person as she does on line. Her job
> is to assist TG and TS who have issues with AIDS. It is hard to
> imagine a less well suited person for such a position, given her
> comments her and her stated ways of behaviour "in person". Of course,
> I have no intentions of visiting San Francisco, so she is free to brag
> about her supposed "victory" in a non-existent meeting.
Again, I do not attack unless attacked. Goat Boy, for example, got mad
because I would acknowledge that non-ops are really transsexuals. Another,
Diane Lask, got mad because I would not obey the demand that I join in
leaving this place and "shutting it down." I behave in a civil manner when
I treated in a civil manner. And no, Willy Boy does not remotely know what
my job is. And we established long ago that Willy Boy is not allowed to
enter the United States (ironically, that bit of information came by way of
Barbara Hudson).
> Several attempts have been made over time to "be nice to Jennifer".
> None of those attampts have been successful, and so we return to the
> tit-for-tat world that is this NG. Jennifer refers to someone as
> male, or uses male pronouns. Others respond in kind to her and post
> accounts and pictures of her and her living conditions. She starts a
> series of denials, and claims hallowed "HBS" status (an asylum run by
> the inmates it seems to me) and on things go.
Actually, the only time that happened (we reached a truce) it lasted until
Willy Boy started attacking Sue Ann without provocation or cause. I tend to
stand by friends and when I saw that Willy Boy had not really changed, I
dropped the pretense and let him have it.
When all is said and done, I am consistent. One may, or may not, like what
I say, but I will say what I think. Unlike some, I don't see this place as
a competition, and I don't change what I say to fool people. If someone
left here for a month or two, and returned, they would find Willy Boy back
to his usual insults (well, most of which he tried to slip in here anyway).
--
Jennifer Usher
Willow
> And no, I do not assign gender. I express an opinion. And I use nicknames
> for some people.
A distinction without merit. Such an excuse would justify anything.
Willow
Jennifer Usher
"Helen Detroit" <FutureG...@invalid.invalid> wrote in message
news:ootki5lv6ludsshnh...@4ax.com...
> What are the official criteria, then? And by the way, where do the
> various forms of intersexed persons fit in? And consider yourself as an
> example, by asking yourself these questions (without necessarily
> answering them to us, as it is not our business) :
Official criteria? ROTFL!
> "When did I become a woman?"
That depends on what you mean by woman. Let me simply say, I was born with
a female brain. As are all true male to female transsexuals. For male to
females, the opposite is clearly true.
> "What makes me a woman?"
Having a female brain.
> "Was I ever a man?"
No, not really.
> "If I was actually a woman while I lived as a man, how do I explain my
> very male behavior back then?"
Huh? I never had "very male behavior." That was part of the problem. Like
all true transsexuals (well, all true MTFs) I was downright lousy as being
"male."
> "Do I now have any of the characteristics, to ANY degree, that I have
> used as criteria in declaring other persons presenting as women to
> actually be men?"
That is an interesting question. As I have said, womanhood is objective.
You are either are, or you are not. Gender behavior, on the other hand, is
somewhat subjective. I know women who love football, and men who love
arranging flowers. But they are still women, and still men. When you use
words like, "to any degree," it becomes a question like, "Yes or no, have
you stopped beating your wife?" It is not an honest question. If one says
yes, you can use that to try to imply something other than what they are
saying. If they say no, then they are probably lying.
> The fragility of one's identity is not in any way related to the
> validity of that identity.
I disagree.
> ANY competent therapist will, in the very FIRST session, disavow the
> patient of any idea that transition will cause all her problems to go
> away. A person is not simply reborn, dehorned, deloused, dehaired and
> disinfected of all her inner demons, even those directly attributable to
> having lived in a male body. I don't know any post-op who regrets
> surgery, but I do know a couple who are unhappy. Since they were also
> unhappy before surgery, there is no net damage from it.
No, it will not cause all problems to go away. Of course not. Some
problems, surprise, surprise, are unrelated to being transsexual. But if
one does not improve...or if things get worse, then that is another matter.
> The risk is there. It is real. And for many candidates, the risk is one
> deemed worth taking.
It should not be a risk. Transition should result in improvements. If it
doesn't, then something is wrong.
> I know more GGs like that than TS. The martyr syndrome is very much a
> feminine thing.
First off, those born female are not transitioning, so that is comparing
apples to oranges. Yes, I know women who play the martyr. That is not what
I am talking about. I am talking about improvements in behavior, a
lessening of stress, that sort of thing. Yes, we can easily trade one set
of problems for another, but that is a whole different discussion.
>>They revel in the
>>humiliation and abuse they receive. I doubt there problem is
>>transsexualism. It is more likely some form of masochistic fetish.
>
> This, I think, is very rare.
I know, from direct observation, that it is not. Granted, we are talking
about the larger "TG" situation. Not specifically about those who are true
transsexuals, but about the larger picture.
> And you have the ability to detect their true gender identity? Yes, the
> actual DESIRE to keep one's penis would cast some doubt on a person's
> declaration of womanhood, but since that (I will say hypothetical)
> person does want to keep her penis and is not a candidate for SRS, what
> is the harm? If she declares herself a woman, then so what? What is
> wrong with that? Who is anybody else to issue a proclamation contrary to
> that? It serves only one purpose: to put down the person in the
> spotlight-- to attack her, hurt her, try to make herself doubt herself,
> or even as an attempt either conscious or subconscious, to make the
> attacker feel better about herself.
I don't claim infallibility, but I have seen a lot of people. Keep in mind,
I have worked in an outreach program. I saw a wide range of people, from
true transsexuals (very rare) to people who were clearly schizophrenic.
Now, let me add, I have known a lot of people who are "non-ops." The vast
majority of them I have treated quite well. The ones I have problems with
are the ones who either try to force themselves into women's spaces, the
ones who try to co-opt the transsexual experience, or the ones who because
obnoxious, insulting jerks because you don't share their radical political
views.
> Natal women who are not flawless nevertheless do look like women, unless
> they are actually trying to look like men. Naked or dressed in finery or
> rags, hair coiffed or ratty, makeup or no, chipped cracked nails over
> work callused hands or expensively manicured and ring-bedecked, they are
> still practically never mistaken for men. Well I know one with a genetic
> abnormality similar to Turner's, who is often mistaken by discerning
> folks to be TS or TG, and another who has battled Lupus for many years
> and who has a very robust body structure (her sisters do, too, and I can
> personally verify that one of them is totally female) who is sometimes
> "spooked" even by real TG or TS and gets quite frustrated by it. But
> this is statistically insignificant. TS even when they consider their
> transitions to be complete, often are spooked, however careful they
> might be with their appearances. Or however careless, for that matter.
> Some things cannot be changed by plastic surgery, and can be disguised
> only to a limited degree. That "sixth sense" that often makes a
> cisgendered person do a double-take, for instance. That is usually an
> unconscious cue caused by the male-typical ratio of leg length to torso
> length. A man's torso is of course proportionately longer. The waist is
> lower. The legs shorter, for a given height. When a person suspects but
> doesn't know why, that is usually the reason. Height is an obvious clue,
> though I know an adorable TG who is very passable in part due to her
> height of 4'11". Hand size, foot size, those are not correctable. Head
> size is only fixable to a small degree. Now how many TS just naturally
> have feminine proportions in these areas? Hardly any. Disguising them or
> misdirecting the observer only go so far. How long do you go, between
> spookings? No, don't answer that to me, just ask yourself. Yet, you are
> by your own declaration a true woman. How do you reconcile that? It is
> time to stop being so judgemental, don't you think?
Being a woman is not about body shape. It is not about any of this stuff.
Physical appearance can be misleading. I have met more than a few women who
I first thought might be TG or TS. I have met a few TS who I honestly
thought were born women until they told me otherwise. I know women born
female who are taller than I am. I have seen women with figures that are
very masculine. Simply put, early in transition I took the time to really
observe things and I realized that we all come in all sorts of sizes and
shapes. First off, most physical clues are in the face. Second, the
decision seems to be very quickly made. But again, I don't judge one's
gender based on appearance.
And, in many, though by all means not all, cases those who are truly
transsexual do show some feminine traits in terms of appearance. And they
tend to react better to hormones. Do I ever have someone misperceive my
gender? I happens very rarely. When it does happen, it is either because
they don't really look, and perceive my height (ironically, I am the same
height as Princess Diana), or because they have some information that leads
them to an assumption (I once had a person at a pharmacy who called me
"sir." When I gave him a rather puzzled look and said, "Huh?" he sneered,
"Look honey, you are taking spironolactone and a large dose of Premanin, so
I know what you are." I said nothing, but when I left the store, I called
the local Human Rights Commission and filed a complaint. I didn't
particularly care, but I knew he would do it to others.
--
Jennifer Usher
Jennifer Usher
"Willow" <pang...@telus.net> wrote in message
news:f7aa8c31-f2af-415d...@u36g2000prn.googlegroups.com...
IF Willy Boy were not guilty of the same, and much worse, he might have a
moral basis for such a statement.
But, he doesn't.
--
Jennifer Usher
Jennifer Usher
"Helen Detroit" <FutureG...@invalid.invalid> wrote in message
news:lq8mi5tgo6603cheb...@4ax.com...
>>And no, I do not assign gender. I express an opinion. And I use
>>nicknames
>>for some people.
>
> Deliberately offensive ones.
Of course. I make no pretense that I have any affection or respect for
certain people.
--
Jennifer Usher
fluffybunnie
> On Wed, 16 Dec 2009 20:46:32 -0800, "Jennifer Usher"
><jenni...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>before he became angry with me for not believing that a man who wishes to
>>hang on to his penis is, well, a man.
>
> to me. If not, where are you getting "Goat Boy" from?
>
Yes, I am mtsg. Lardo started all this mess when he insisted on
trolling Willow, and turned on me when I called him on it.
Google has the record of the whole, sordid story.
And of course nowadays Lardo has taken to falsely claiming to be
post-op.
> There are TS who retain their penis for reasons other than personal
> preference. Do you know for a fact that this person prefers having a
> penis?
>
He knows that I spent several years battling lymphoma and MRSA, which
caused me to lose a great deal of time and money. But all he cares
about is his trolling. He's one disturbed puppy...
fluffybunnie
>
> Again, I do not attack unless attacked. Goat Boy, for example, got mad
> because I would acknowledge that non-ops are really transsexuals.
>
Very funny.
The reality, as you well know, is that I do not care a bit what you
think of "non-ops". I "got mad" because you stalked Willow to other
groups, insisting she is "a man", while simultaneously falsely
claiming to be a post-op. Google has the whole story for anyone who
actually cares to know (though why anyone should is frankly beyond
me at this point). All I do here now is pop in for a minute a couple
of times a week and post truth to counter your trolling. It's pretty
much pointless of course, but as someone else said once this group
is oddly compelling, like watching a train wreck.
So Lardo, once again: you have your tax-subsidized room in a facility
for indigent homeless people, doing a workfare job as a transgender
helping to provide services for the transgendered. IOW you could not
exist without welfare and TG-targeted social services.
Willow and I live in more rural areas without the support of any "gay
ghetto" or transgender resources. Still looks to me like all you're
doing is trolling your betters, of whom you are insanely envious.
Ruby
> On Thu, 17 Dec 2009 18:39:02 -0800, "Jennifer Usher"
> I think it is time to put you back in the killfile for a while. Don't
> forget your ball.
I'm very puzzled about why you and that other transvestite post here at all
in an SRS group. I understand about Willow a little better. After all she
did have SRS even though her reasons seem a little delusional.
You do seem a more pleasant sort than the usual people here but now you seem
to be supporting the lies that Bunnie and Willow keep spouting. Some of what
is said about Jennifer may be true but so what? I still have a couple of
friends in SF and she is as she says, postop. How she chooses to lead her
postop life is her business.
I've googled you some and the life you lead seems very alien to me. The
simple idea that all women are female but not all females are women seems to
be beyond all TVs. I mean anatomically female of course. The biology
argument is pointless.
I would think both you and Bunny would be more comfortable in a cross
dressing group where you could display your agression more comfortably with
other men.
Ruby
JenniferFlusher
>
> Of course. I make no pretense that I have any affection or respect for
> certain people.
Really Sparky? Really?
Because when YOU do it it's because ya just keepin it reel but when
Willow does it it's because she's a troll who likes the attention.
That's kind of like how when someone else lives in a City homeless
shelter for 5 years at reduced or zero rent they're a Loser leeching
off society but when YOU do it it's because you're a Harry Benjamin
Sufferer who just needs a helping hand (out).
Yeah - think I understand it all now.
JenniferFlusher
<FutureG...@invalid.invalid> said:
> What disturbs me most is they way you try to make this group into your
> own personal universe, where it is all about you and for you. It reminds
> one of the child who wants to dictate the rules of the game, and you
> play her way or she takes her ball and goes home. Well, there reaches a
> point where others don't really mind if she takes her ball and goes
> home.
>
> I think it is time to put you back in the killfile for a while. Don't
> forget your ball.
Well ... that didn't take long. About a week?
I could have told you so ... oh wait - I did :)
Helen - there is a reason people stay in homeless shelters or other
State Institutions for years and years. They aren't able to interact
or operate with normal people.
JenniferFlusher
<FutureG...@invalid.invalid> said:
> There is a psychiatric term for a person like
> that. I think it's "sociopath".
Personally I think Usher is hiding away in that shelter sewing a "woman suit"
<shudder>
Ruby
> On Fri, 18 Dec 2009 09:22:56 -0800, "Ruby" <ru...@qwest.net> wrote:
>
>> Helen Detroit wrote:
>>> On Thu, 17 Dec 2009 18:39:02 -0800, "Jennifer Usher"
>>
>>> I think it is time to put you back in the killfile for a while.
>>> Don't forget your ball.
>>
>> I'm very puzzled about why you and that other transvestite post here
>> at all in an SRS group. I understand about Willow a little better.
>> After all she did have SRS even though her reasons seem a little
>> delusional.
>
> account isn't going to fool anybody. And you know better than I do
> what a TV is, and that I am not one. This nym is killfiled, as well.
I couldn't care less if you killfile me. I don't read this group that much.
From what I read you're a kind of trans fan who like to dress in drag. a
crossdresser to me is a transvestite and a trans fan is a man.
I don't know who you think I am but chances are you're wrong. I was here
frequently years ago when there was a large family of postops here, many of
whom were here before and after SRS trying to help others going through the
same process. You wouldn't have last 5 minutes here back then because there
was a strong bond between the women and they did not discuss SRS issues with
men.
Ruby :)
JenniferFlusher
<FutureG...@invalid.invalid> said:
> On Fri, 18 Dec 2009 09:22:56 -0800, "Ruby" <ru...@qwest.net> wrote:
>
>> Helen Detroit wrote:
>>> On Thu, 17 Dec 2009 18:39:02 -0800, "Jennifer Usher"
>>
>>> I think it is time to put you back in the killfile for a while. Don't
>>> forget your ball.
>>
>> I'm very puzzled about why you and that other transvestite post here at all
>> in an SRS group. I understand about Willow a little better. After all she
>> did have SRS even though her reasons seem a little delusional.
>
> Changing to lookout express and using your free eternal september
> account isn't going to fool anybody. And you know better than I do what
> a TV is, and that I am not one. This nym is killfiled, as well.
LMAO !
You see? Didn't I tell you so a couple of weeks ago albeit in a rather
nasty and mean way?
You can't argue with it.
You can't reason with it.
You can't be friends with it.
Usher is a psycho-sociopathic idiot.
And , no, his sockpuppett Ruby doesn't fool anyone.
Do you know why he used that sockpuppett?
Because he has been prohibited from posting to this group at work
because he couldn't control himself and his work didn't want their IP
address attached to one of his posts. And he STILL risks his job to
take a jab at you because you committed the unpardonable sin of
disagreeing with him and pointing out his shortcomings.
You can't reason with it - I told you so 2 weeks ago Helen.
JenniferFlusher
> You wouldn't have last 5 minutes here back then because there
> was a strong bond between the women and they did not discuss SRS issues with
> men.
Thomas, you have no idea what you are talking about. Pretty much every
post-op, including myself, knows that there are many legitimate choices
available and pretty much any post-op, including myself , has had or
does have TG , gay TV or whatever friends. It's all good.
I don't know or care what Helen is - she appears to be at least
sane,polite and nice , if somewhat naive. I'm sure if we ever met we'd
get along fantastically.
YOU, Thomas on the other hand are a horrible person with no redeeming
qualities and frankly you even smell bad in person (been there smelt
that).
Big difference between her and you, Tom. Big difference.
Ruby
> On 2009-12-18 12:21:38 -0800, "Thomas Jennifer Usher"
> <ru...@qwest.net> said:
>> You wouldn't have last 5 minutes here back then because there
>> was a strong bond between the women and they did not discuss SRS
>> issues with men.
>
> Thomas, you have no idea what you are talking about. Pretty much
> every post-op, including myself, knows that there are many legitimate
> choices available and pretty much any post-op, including myself , has
> had or does have TG , gay TV or whatever friends. It's all good.
You know that I'm not Jennifer, Diane. And everyone knows that you have
never had SRS.
Ruby :)
JenniferFlusher
>>
>
> You know that I'm not Jennifer, Diane. And everyone knows that you have
> never had SRS.
>
> Ruby :)
I see - you make a big fuss about NOT talking to me as Thomas Usher but
then you jump at the chance to do it under your other ID , "Ruby" ,
that everyone, literally all five of us here on this newsgroup, know
and have stated is you.
And that makes you not crazy how exactly?
barbie
> "Willow" <panga...@telus.net> wrote in message
>
> news:d9e352aa-76a6-4c59...@y10g2000prg.googlegroups.com...
>
> > Helen,
>
> > I believe we agree on this issue...
>
> > Thinking back, I believe that Jennifer has attacked many others here
> > here for not bring up to her standard of "femininity". In this, I am
> > not alone. More recently, there was a person called Barbara Hudson,
> > who was only the last (that I remember at the moment) of a long line
> > of members here who were denigrated for their lack of supposed
> > femininity or supposed male traits. It has been repeated endlessly.
> > Indeed, at the root of the Willow/Jennifer posts was the start when
> > Jennifer decided to use male pronouns and other silliness in posting
> > about me.
>
> How very weasely. No, I don't attack people on the basis of standards of
> "femininity."
Willow may have mis-spoken, because off-hand, I can't recall anyone
attacking me "on the basis of standards of femininity". However, you
do continue to attack others by misusing pronouns, etc., and using
names like "Willy Boy" and "Goat Boy". What is this, if not an attack
on their "femininity" or womanhood? It's certainly not a compliment.
> Now, Barbara Hudson is an interesting case. Barbara and I
> were good friends...sort of like Willy Boy and Sue Ann were good friends.
> Barbara even attacked Willy Boy quite a bit. Then Barbara decided she was
> going to end the wars here. Barbara wanted to start a forum and have every
> one move there. She claimed that, because of "Canadian law" that people
> would be severely restricted as to what could be said. I declined to join,
> and she got mad at me. She then left the group. She returned for a while,
> attacking me regularly, and when I had my fill, I basically treated her
> appropriately.
A bit of history:
1. I realized that your reasons for attacking Willow were wrong, and I
apologized to her, both publicly and privately, for my part in
following you.
2. After that, I learned that you had been misleading me and everyone
else here, in that iIn *every* aspect that you have attacked Willow,
you are more than equally vulnerable. You've attacked her appearance
- and yet you don't pass. You've attacked her weight - and then we
saw your pics. You made nasty remarks about a wig - we've seen yours.
You've attacked her lifestyle as "living next to a trailer
park" (which, btw, is not the same as living in a trailer park, and
what would be so bad about that, anyway?), and yet you are one step up
from fighting over a cardboard box above a heating grate. You attack
her for, in your mind, being dependent on Sonia - but what's wrong
with two people being mutually dependent if they're happy? (hint -
it's called a relationship).
3. Canadian law doesn't allow for hate speech, which is why I thought
a forum hosted in Canada would be a good idea - it would have been
easier to keep the nastiness at bay. Your continued "Willy Boy" is
mean - and it's also hate speech against a protected class of citizens
in this country. It's nothing less than speech designed to denigrate
Willow. You claimed then (and still do) the right to "call them as
you see them", rather than just be polite. At the time you said that,
as far as you were concerned, laws against hate speech are stupid.
Maybe they are, maybe they aren't, but if you want other people to
address you in your preferred gender, you have to do the same. It's
not a one-way street. Freedom of speech doesn't mean you can be a
hypocrite and not expect to take some flack for it.
Being polite doesn't hurt. It got me a job this summer as a
receptionist, which was a nice change of pace, being the first person
people see when they come into the office, rather than working in a
cubicle. You might want to try it here. Or not. The choice is up to
you. Helen has a point - how you address others reflects on you.
4. You continue to portray yourself as some sort of "traffic cop" here
"because someone has to refute Arunes' posts" - which is insulting to
everyone. People can make up their own minds, and they have. Nobody
believes you about anything any more, because you misrepresented so
much. Maybe you don't see it as lies, in the same way the Bill
Clinton didn't see it as "sex", but people felt deceived.
5. I left because your continued lies and attacks on others, your
insistence on continually engaging in what can best be portrayed as
"pissing matches" rather than real discussion, and your inability to
see the contradictions in your own positions rendered this place a
sewer. I see that nothing has changed over the years, except that
everyone else now knows your opinion is worth nothing.
You're in no position to judge anyones' gender or presentation. You've
changed your name legally at least 5 times that we know of (so much
for your claim of consistency), you first claimed to be a transvestite
(we've all seen your transvestite fetish fantasy writing), and now you
insist that you have "Harry Benjamin Syndrome".
What did Harry Benjamin say about that?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transsexualism
&<========&<========&<========&<========
> Harry Benjamin wrote, "Summarizing my impression, I would like to repeat here
> what I said in my first lecture on the subject more than 10 years ago: Our genetic
> and endocrine equipment constitutes either an unresponsive [or] fertile soil on
> which the wrong conditional and a psychic trauma can grow and develop into
> such a basic conflict that subsequently a deviation like transsexualism
> can result."
&<========&<========&<========&<========
Harry Benjamin considered male-to-female transsexuals to be
psychological deviants suffering from a mental trauma. Not women in
mens' bodies, but men in men's bodies, traumatized deviants.
> Actually, the start of problems between myself and Willy Boy was when he
> started attacking people who did not accept his ridiculous story as being
> typical and normal for a transsexual. He claimed he sought surgery and
> became a transsexual because a therapist told him to after he was raped. We
> raised some legitimate concerns about such a reason, and pointed out that
> this was not remotely normal and he got mad.
Each person has their own story, and to many in the general public,
all of our stories are "ridiculous" or "atypical" or "abnormal." In
the end, whether you accept it or not is meaningless; that said, rape
is rape (unless you're Whoopie Goldberg, but even she wouldn't have
equivocated in Willows' case - it was rape) and not something you can
expect everyone to be able to communicate all that eloquently.
> > As you state, "I have never heard anyone except religious
> > fundamentalist types say that. I think many people truly do exist in
> > some shade of gray and not at
> > absolute polar opposite extremes of black and white." Jennifer is, of
> > course, fundamentalist in her religion and fundamentalist in her view
> > of transsexuality, To her, abuse of normal civil behaviour is a norm,
> > not an exception. Again, that applies not only to me, but to a string
> > of others who have come here, stayed awhile, been attacked and left.
>
> Actually, I never start attacks against anyone.
But you sure do cling to them - for years and years. Is that all you
have?
> > As with any braggart, the image she projected was destroyed when her
> > picture and residence were exposed. Far from being the ideal woman,
> > passable in all ways, she was shown to be in her true colours. That
> > has, of course, led to a constant state of "No-it-ain't-so"itis.
> > After so many have been insulted by her (and you may check the
> > archives for proof of this, going back years) her true circumstances
> > were laid bare. Those who had been abused by her, as well as those
> > who had been silent and no doubt afraid of being attacked, were
> > delighted to offer up the "facts" which totally destroyed the "myth"
> > she had created for herself. Her transition from transvestite to
> > transsexual to "true transsexual" (whatever that might be) to HBS -
> > all of which were very public due to her own rantings - was nothing
> > but a shallow attempt to shore up what most believe to be a poor self-
> > esteem. The same holds true with her supposed love affairs, from the
> > night of her arrival in SF by bus to the lurid affair with "Sugir",
> > her insistence that still with a male member she had a female orgasm,
> > and tales nurses mistaking her gender in certain circumstances - all
> > set out here in some strange effort to bolster her "image".
>
> Now, this is typical of Willy Boy (and a good example of why I call him
> that). I have never claimed to be "the ideal woman." I have no problems
> with people seeing me as anything other than a woman. I created no myth. A
> bit of truth has been mixed with a lot of lies. I was never a transvestite.
There's a bit of truth mixed in with a lot of lies. You previously
claimed to be "more than a transvestite, but less than a transsexual."
That sounds a lot like what we'd call "transgendered" today.
> "True transsexual" is a term used by Harry Benjamin himself, and Harry
> Benjamin Syndrome is a proposed terminology for what Benjamin called "true
> transsexuals."
And as I point out, Benjamin considered transsexualism to be deviants
- his words, not mine. Why do you insist on using a label that paints
you as a mental case? A shrink might have fun exploring that.
> Of course, Willy Boy denigrates these terms because they
> obviously, by his own admission, do not apply to him.
I would be insulted if anyone tried to apply it to me. We've come a
ways since Harry Benjamin, both scientifically and socially.
> Now, I had no love
> affair the night I arrived in San Francisco (all I wanted was a shower and a
> bed) and while "Sugir" was a bit of an interesting diversion, he proved to
> be quite the disappointment.
Do you really want to revisit the whole "Nutra-Sweet" thing?
Nah, didn't think so ...
> > Simply put, many who have been here, some who remain here, have many
> > reasons to strike back. Is that nice? No, but after not one, not
> > two, but repeated attacks by her, it is little wonder that many have
> > replied in kind. This is why this place is as it is, and shall remain
> > so. Jennifer will never behave in a civil fashion, falling back on
> > "I say what I think" and similar excuses for her falling to follow
> > normal rules of conduct. I note that most recently she has stated
> > that she would behave the same in person as she does on line. Her job
> > is to assist TG and TS who have issues with AIDS. It is hard to
> > imagine a less well suited person for such a position, given her
> > comments her and her stated ways of behaviour "in person". Of course,
> > I have no intentions of visiting San Francisco, so she is free to brag
> > about her supposed "victory" in a non-existent meeting.
>
> Again, I do not attack unless attacked. Goat Boy, for example, got mad
> because I would acknowledge that non-ops are really transsexuals. Another,
> Diane Lask, got mad because I would not obey the demand that I join in
> leaving this place and "shutting it down." I behave in a civil manner when
> I treated in a civil manner.
But why the lies and hypocrisy, and the insistence on drawing lines
the way you do? THAT is what angers people about you, because if you
want to start drawing lines, most of the world would not call you a
"real transsexual" or a woman. It reeks of hypocrisy. If you want
tolerance, you have to show tolerance in return. Remember, we've seen
the pictures, and you're not all that passable.
> Actually, the only time that happened (we reached a truce) it lasted until
> Willy Boy started attacking Sue Ann without provocation or cause. I tend to
> stand by friends and when I saw that Willy Boy had not really changed, I
> dropped the pretense and let him have it.
Again, you are not a traffic cop. AND you admitted in this post that
"making nice" was just a pretense - you weren't serious about it, and
couldn't wait to go back to your little war. Freudian slip?
> When all is said and done, I am consistent.
No, you're not. Your life history, and especially your postings over
the last decade, make that obvious. Transvestite to transsexual to
Harry Benjamin Syndrome. "Religious fundamentalist" to having to
leave the church. "100% woman criticizing those who are unpassable"
to 100% clockable. "Living well" to living with bedbugs in the Vice
Hotel. I feel sorry for you. I'm sure others do too.
> One may, or may not, like what
> I say, but I will say what I think. Unlike some, I don't see this place as
> a competition,
Really? That's all you seem to do.
> and I don't change what I say to fool people.
... except that a few sentences back you said that you were running a
pretense ... so you do ... so again, you're not consistent ...
> If someone
> left here for a month or two, and returned, they would find Willy Boy back
> to his usual insults (well, most of which he tried to slip in here anyway).
s/Willy Boy/Usher/g;
Look, we all understand that, barring a miracle or some sort of
intervention, you will continue to behave as you always have. You're
so psychologically invested in it that you can't change, which is
sad. It also unfortunately still has the potential to do harm, since
people searching for answers might accidentally stumble upon this
group and reject or delay seeking help because they certainly don't
want to identify with your rude and offensive behaviour.
And to everyone else, Hi! and seasons greetings. Take care :-)
Jennifer Usher
"Helen Detroit" <FutureG...@invalid.invalid> wrote in message
news:qccni5h1bidj2mt6u...@4ax.com...
> In the absence of any better pictures, by what I have seen, I can't
> imagine her looking any less like a fluffy bunny than you do. That was
> catty and judgemental, and I think hypocritical.
No argument there, but then again, I don't call myself "fluffy" or "bunny."
Granted, the pictures that circulate of me are not very good ones. They are
being used without permission and in at least one case were obtained by
deception. But that is beside the point. Granted, you might note that Goat
Boy absolutely hides his appearance, all the while claiming to be quite
different from what he really is.
> making nasty remarks about post-ops? Does that mean disagreeing with
> you? By your posted comments in this thread alone, one could not be
> faulted for surmising that you respect a person or not, declare her a
> woman or not, depending on whether or not she agrees with you.
No. Once again I will point out to you, hopefully for the last time, that I
do not attack or insult people for simply disagreeing. No, I mean he has
made nasty remarks about post-ops. That
> An outsider would understandably think that you are on some sort of ego
> trip, that you have set aside a category of super-TS for yourself and
> anyone who agrees with you (at the moment that means just you) and that
> you think yourself qualified to determine what sort of brains other
> persons have, and that determination is always that others have inferior
> male brains. Professional therapists don't even tell someone that they
> are a man or a woman... their job is to help the patient come to her own
> determination.
An outsider is free to think whatever they wish. Actually, I know quite a
few people, both on-line and off, who I think quite highly of. There were
some such people here in the past. Most have either left, or possibly died.
Ruby I tend to agree with at the moment, but she is not here much. And a
decent therapist will, when necessary, intervene to prevent a patient from
making a potentially tragic mistake.
> A newcomer to this group would be instantly aware that you deliberately
> insult other people, and go to great lengths to justify your offensive
> behavior. You seek to HURT people and often you succeed, and claim your
> little victory. You say you don't mind when others insult you, but when
> they do, it's on, and out come the male pronouns and the masculinized
> "nicknames".
This group has long ago become a cesspool. My first advice to anyone coming
here for help is to go to a moderated group where people like Willy Boy and
Goat Boy wouldn't last five minutes (actually, almost every such group knows
about Willy Boy and he would not make it in). Funny, those places are
pretty peaceful.
But I will be blunt. You seem to have no problem with it being done to me,
but you see determined to "reform" me.
> A person with time on her or his hands who did any research would also
> notice that in all the times you have offended others, you have never
> once apologized. You apparently simply do not believe that when it is
> you against the world, the rest of the world is irrelevant and you
> cannot possibly be wrong. There is a psychiatric term for a person like
> that. I think it's "sociopath".
Actually, there have been several times when I have apologized. And when I
make a mistake, I admit it.
> A newbie just reading a day or two worth of posts would immediately be
> struck by how hypocritical you are. The same behavior that you condemn
> in others, you practice, and go to wild lengths to justify.
This group has few newbies, and most of them quickly flee. That is probably
for the best.
> What disturbs me most is they way you try to make this group into your
> own personal universe, where it is all about you and for you. It reminds
> one of the child who wants to dictate the rules of the game, and you
> play her way or she takes her ball and goes home. Well, there reaches a
> point where others don't really mind if she takes her ball and goes
> home.
Oh, really? Actually, I rarely post anything that is not a response. Or
have you missed that?
> I think it is time to put you back in the killfile for a while. Don't
> forget your ball.
As you wish.
--
Jennifer Usher
Jennifer Usher
"Ruby" <ru...@qwest.net> wrote in message
news:hggdna$jmk$1...@news.eternal-september.org...
> I'm very puzzled about why you and that other transvestite post here at
> all in an SRS group. I understand about Willow a little better. After all
> she did have SRS even though her reasons seem a little delusional.
Who knows?
> You do seem a more pleasant sort than the usual people here but now you
> seem to be supporting the lies that Bunnie and Willow keep spouting. Some
> of what is said about Jennifer may be true but so what? I still have a
> couple of friends in SF and she is as she says, postop. How she chooses to
> lead her postop life is her business.
Actually, very little of what is said about me is remotely true. Most of it
is pure fantasy.
> I've googled you some and the life you lead seems very alien to me. The
> simple idea that all women are female but not all females are women seems
> to be beyond all TVs. I mean anatomically female of course. The biology
> argument is pointless.
Too true.
> I would think both you and Bunny would be more comfortable in a cross
> dressing group where you could display your agression more comfortably
> with other men.
I agree. But, we always seem to have someone of that type here. I'm sure
your remember...uh, he who must not be named. <g> Granted, he posted here
and in the crossdressing groups.
--
Jennifer Usher
Jennifer Usher
"Helen Detroit" <FutureG...@invalid.invalid> wrote in message
news:0kkni59lkdu9arpjj...@4ax.com...
> Changing to lookout express and using your free eternal september
> account isn't going to fool anybody. And you know better than I do what
> a TV is, and that I am not one. This nym is killfiled, as well.
ROTFL!
--
Jennifer Usher
Jennifer Usher
"Ruby" <ru...@qwest.net> wrote in message
news:hggo65$1ga$1...@news.eternal-september.org...
> I couldn't care less if you killfile me. I don't read this group that
> much.
I honestly wondered how long it would take this person to lose it. This is
not the first one who was going to save this group, and probably won't be
the last. They always get totally frustrated and turn nasty.
> From what I read you're a kind of trans fan who like to dress in drag. a
> crossdresser to me is a transvestite and a trans fan is a man.
>
> I don't know who you think I am but chances are you're wrong. I was here
> frequently years ago when there was a large family of postops here, many
> of whom were here before and after SRS trying to help others going through
> the same process. You wouldn't have last 5 minutes here back then because
> there was a strong bond between the women and they did not discuss SRS
> issues with men.
Yes, those were the days. Then a few people ran the place into the ground.
Granted, I probably didn't help, but this place is what it is now.
--
Jennifer Usher
Jennifer Usher
"Ruby" <ru...@qwest.net> wrote in message
news:hggtm4$pgc$1...@news.eternal-september.org...
> You know that I'm not Jennifer, Diane. And everyone knows that you have
> never had SRS.
I am not sure that this is the idiot troll known as Diane Lask, though it
could be. But if it is, then he has switched to a Mac. I still suspect
this is Goat Boy sock puppeting. But, I could be wrong.
--
Jennifer Usher
Jennifer Usher
"barbie" <openvid...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:325273f2-ad92-447e...@k4g2000yqb.googlegroups.com...
I believe when last we met, you were I my kill file. I will give Helen
credit...if you don't like what someone says, that is usually the best
approach. And since you have said nothing that warrants a reply, I shall
bid you goodbye again....
<PLONK>
--
Jennifer Usher
barbie
> "barbie" <openvideocl...@gmail.com> wrote in message
Truth hurts, doesn't it?
You have continually mis-represented yourself to everyone here over
the years, abused anyone who didn't agree with you, and can't deny a
single thing I've written. And of course I have more ... but I'll
save it for another time.
Just to let you know, you've managed to ruin at least one persons'
life that I know of with your stupidity in this newsgroup. She was so
taken aback at the contrast between your "news-group face" and the
reality of ...er ... um ... you ... that her attempts to deal with her
life were completely derailed. Of course, you're going to crow "well,
if it rattled them that much, then they couldn't have been a true
transsexual." Anything to ignore the reality that you are the most un-
supportive person this group has ever seen - yes, worse even than
Blake.
And of course there are the ones none of us know of, because they just
lurked, never posted. But with the holidays coming up, people in
difficult situations are going to be taking the time to do a little
research, maybe with a New Years' resolution to "finally do something
about it" ... and they should know that their life in all probability
won't follow your pattern - rejection by family and friends, living in
abject poverty, getting eaten alive by bedbugs, looking at a lifetime
of workfare ...
Be proud of what you've done - because you have no shame.
Be happy with your current life - because that's as good as it's ever
going to get.
Be mean to everyone - because it's easier than admitting that you were
wrong with the way you treat Willow and a few other people here.
http://img518.imageshack.us/img518/9884/17236mistakes1221080loso8.jpg
It didn't have to be this way for you, but by being self-righteous,
bombastic, rude, and always willing to pour more gasoline on the
flames when others, including me, were trying to put them out, you've
reaped your karmic blessing.
So to all those on the outside looking in - don't let what's going on
here deter you. Usher is the exception, not the rule. They don't
call them net-kooks for nothing.
And to everyone else, Merry Xmas !
PS: So drag your sock-puppet out ... or not ... it makes no
difference to me. In the spirit of the holidays, we're ALL laughing
at you. Ho ho ho!.
JenniferFlusher
Hope that you don't mind me top posting above your on-point analysis of Usher.
It's what everyone has been saying ever since Usher arrived anywhere.
It wasn't just confined to transexual groups. In previous postings I
have pointed out posting examples where Usher was run out of online
conservative religious groups, online hacker groups and even online
hobby groups. Usher's behavior has been documented since before he
claimed to transition.
Usher is a sociopath and he thinks he can pick on women online from the
safety of his halfway house. In real life any one of us would
bitch-slap his cowardly butt into the ground if he ever had the nerve
to talk to us that way.
Nothing any of us says will ever make him go away because this is his
life. He has, as you can imagine, zero friends and he does nothing in
his halfway house aside from post on the internet. Look at him
answering to his own sockpuppet, Riby, here - it's pretty pathetic.
This is pretty much the rest of his life until he declines enough to
not be able to log on anymore - like Blake did.
One thing you said made me chuckle . You said , "You made nasty
remarks about a wig - we've seen yours."
LOL - That ratty mop is actually Usher's own hair
Have a good holiday - don't let crazy people get to you. They are
never worth it :)
>> Harry Benjamin wrote, "Summarizing my impression, I would like to repeat
> here
>> what I said in my first lecture on the subject more than 10 years ago: Ou
> r genetic
>> and endocrine equipment constitutes either an unresponsive [or] fertile s
> oil on
>> which the wrong conditional and a psychic trauma can grow and develop int
> o
>> such a basic conflict that subsequently a deviation like transsexualism
>> can result."
> &<========&<========&<=======
> =&<=======
>
> h. �A
>> because I would acknowledge that non-ops are really transsexuals. �Anot
JenniferFlusher
<jenni...@gmail.com> said:
ROTFLMAO - Thomas we ALL know that you read each and every thing . I
know that you are reading this right now . Look - the only two new
people this newsgroup has had in years and you have manages to alienate
them and make them hate you in less than two weeks.
The newsgroup actually has enough people in it to start up convo again
between people. What if we all ignore you when we do ? WIll you be
sad?
fluffybunnie
>
>
> "Ruby" <ru...@qwest.net> wrote in message
> news:hggtm4$pgc$1...@news.eternal-september.org...
>
>> You know that I'm not Jennifer, Diane. And everyone knows that you have
>> never had SRS.
>
> I am not sure that this is the idiot troll known as Diane Lask, though it
> could be. But if it is, then he has switched to a Mac.
>
A look at the headers of the last message from "Ruby":
From: "Ruby" <ru...@qwest.net>
Newsgroups: alt.support.srs
Subject: Re: The Difference Between Men and Women
Date: Fri, 18 Dec 2009 13:54:28 -0800
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 18
Message-ID: <hggtm4$pgc$1...@news.eternal-september.org>
References: <uagai5t6vveo7rgeg...@4ax.com> <hg3kqt$jgk$1...@news.eternal-septemb
X-Trace: news.eternal-september.org U2FsdGVkX19aaR2lrIYKTslu9p49qaBlCRovCo7LrP90Qn6yTjPNisf
X-Complaints-To: ab...@eternal-september.org
NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 18 Dec 2009 21:54:12 +0000 (UTC)
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.5579
X-RFC2646: Format=Flowed; Response
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.5512
Like I would be caught dead using outhouse express!
We know Ruby is your sockpuppet, Lardo.
barbie
> On 2009-12-18 17:59:19 -0800, barbie <openvideocl...@gmail.com> said:
> Hope that you don't mind me top posting above your on-point analysis of Usher.
> It's what everyone has been saying ever since Usher arrived anywhere.
Be my guest.
> It wasn't just confined to transexual groups. In previous postings I
> have pointed out posting examples where Usher was run out of online
> conservative religious groups, online hacker groups and even online
> hobby groups. Usher's behavior has been documented since before he
> claimed to transition.
It's sad, but there's always one ...
> Usher is a sociopath and he thinks he can pick on women online from the
> safety of his halfway house.
You know the old saying, when life hands you lemons, make lemonade.
Usher still has a constructive use - same as Lyle Blake did.
Consider Usher as:
1. A negative example: If you're as unsympathetic and judgmental as
Usher, don't be surprised if people don't accept you - and this
applies to everyone, not just transsexuals;
2. A practice dummy (since Helen brought up football :-): There's
always someone who's going to try to make themselves feel superior by
making you feel inferior. Rather than ignore Usher, far better to get
some practice in so that when you encounter it in 3D, you know how to
name it and shame it - again, this applies to everyone, not just
transsexuals
3. A reality check: If your life isn't like Usher, and your
attitudes aren't like Usher, and you find all the macho territory-
marking behaviour Usher engages in are inconsistent with what you feel
inside, you're probably human.
> In real life any one of us would
> bitch-slap his cowardly butt into the ground if he ever had the nerve
> to talk to us that way.
Fortunately, there's not much chance of that happening. Someone like
Usher never gets much of a chance to deal with the general public.
"You never get a second chance to make a first impression" - and
Usher just has too many negatives to be "the face of the business" for
a commercial entity that needs to make a profit, same as the anti-
social smelly geek who toils away in the back room, or the
temperamental foul-mouthed mechanic who you don't dare let customers
talk to.
What would happen if a customer brought in their whole family? I
handled it by keeping their kids occupied while they talked to the
boss ... I can't see anyone feeling comfortable trusting Usher with
their kids. I've always had the habit of, whenever I get the chance,
going around and seeing if anyone (worker or customer) wanted a cup of
coffee or anything else (which is probably one of the reasons why the
boss ended up complaining that the guys in the back would rather deal
with me). Would you even trust a cup of coffee made by Usher?
It's all about attitude. It's not about "who's right", or "my dogma
ran over your karma". If you really want to help people, people pick
up on that almost immediately. Some of them might eventually come to
suspect that there's more (or less) than meets the eye, but by then it
simply doesn't matter. But when you have an "enfant terrible"
attitude, people are going to be just as unforgiving as you are.
Most people want to do the right thing, because most people want to be
treated properly, and understand that it's a mutual obligation. That's
a good thing for women in our situation, because once we learn this -
and I mean *really* learn this, and internalize it, we can handle the
occasional jerk-face. It's a bad thing for some one with Usher's
attitude, because without an attitude adjustment, Usher is doomed to
remain confined to the gender ghetto.
> Nothing any of us says will ever make him go away because this is his
> life. He has, as you can imagine, zero friends and he does nothing in
> his halfway house aside from post on the internet. Look at him
> answering to his own sockpuppet, Riby, here - it's pretty pathetic.
> This is pretty much the rest of his life until he declines enough to
> not be able to log on anymore - like Blake did.
>
> One thing you said made me chuckle . You said , "You made nasty
> remarks about a wig - we've seen yours."
>
> LOL - That ratty mop is actually Usher's own hair
That's funny, because we have one of the largest novelty stores around
only a few miles away. I went to pick up some fake police tape and
fake blood so we could play a joke on the men in the office when their
macho posturing got out of hand. Some background - once in a while, a
dozen police cars would park in our parking lot while they went for
breakfast, so if you picked the right day, you had lots of cops on
hand.
We taped off the mens' washroom, the other woman "claimed she forgot
her key at home", and I told the guys that I simply didn't have time
to escort them to the womens' washroom and check all the booths to
make sure it was empty - "go use the one downstairs" (which they
quickly found out doesn't use the same key).
Anyway, what did I see further down the aisle at the store? USHER'S
HAIR! A wig that looked EXACTLY like Usher in the photos with the bed-
bug scabs. It was scary enough that I bought it for Hallowe'en! :-)
The manufacturer? Rubie's Fashion Wigs. www.rubies.com It's in the
under-$20 range if you look elsewhere online.
> Have a good holiday - don't let crazy people get to you. They are
> never worth it :)
You too.
barbie
wrote:
> On Sat, 19 Dec 2009 10:03:52 -0800 (PST), barbie
>
> <openvideocl...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >You know the old saying, when life hands you lemons, make lemonade.
>
> sometimes it is better to not make anything at all. :o\
There was a guy who made a bet that he could sell dog crap. His
friends took him up on it, so he posted an ad saying "100% organic
manure, blah blah blah $10.00"
He ended up with so many orders he couldn't fill them all. Now cities
are experimenting with recycling pooch do-do to make methane.
http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2006/03/0321_060321_dog_power.html
Life has handed us what many would consider a "crappy situation", but
we get to know ourselves better than many, since we have no real
choice except to do some pretty deep self-exploration and
introspection. Who's to say that doesn't make us better people,
provided we don't let the experience turn us into sourpusses first.
Of course, this kind of begs the question of what would the
alternative be if we weren't confronted with this particular
situation ... we wouldn't be who we are, so the question really
becomes - "Are we happy with who we are?" And *that* question is one
that everyone, no matter what their situation, eventually has to
confront anyway. We just get a different (perhaps better) prep
course.
Personally, I'm of the "better prep course" school of thought, which
probably marks me as an optimist. It may not *be* better by any
objective standard, but that's okay - it works for me. Besides, it's
too much *work* to carry around your own personal dark cloud. I
worked with someone like that a couple of years ago. As far as he was
concerned, "Everyone only does things when it's to their advantage.
All politicians are crooks so I'm not voting. The boss is out to get
me."
I pointed out that all the times that I covered for him, it certainly
wasn't to MY advantage, that politicians don't in general go into
politics with the intent of being crooks, and if you don't exercise
your vote, your silence is complicity in the status quo, and that the
boss wasn't out to get him, but if he kept on with that attitude, it
would become a self-fulfilling prophesy. And I certainly wasn't
getting any benefit helping him compose his "looking for a special
friend" lonely-heart club ads. Like most men, he had NO clue as to
what a woman wants to hear - at least when I wrote them for him, he
got responses, but then he began to "over-think" it - "they can't be
too good if they're on the net looking for a friend", so he never
replied to any of them.
He blamed everyone and everything for his attitude. "This person did
this to me!" "That person did that!" I can't count the number of
times I took him into the conference room to try to do the "white
board thing" about why his perceptions and expectations were an
integral part of what was happening in his life, and how he could
start to take command of it by changing his attitude.
Eventually, it got to the point where everyone else just plain hated
him. He had never said "good morning" or "goodbye" to anyone, never
asked anyone how their day was going, nothing. The other woman in our
group finally had it with him. Nobody had ever before heard her say a
single curse word - but one day he went too far with his stupid
arguments and she let him have it three ways - loud, long, and nasty,
then moved her computer and stuff to a vacant cubicle.
When he wasn't around, everyone asked how I could stand him looking
over my shoulder at what I was working on for 5, 10, 15 minutes at a
time. I told them that I felt sorry for him - pity is probably what
kept me from being too creeped out by it.
After he finally got fired and the boss got an earful from everyone
else, the boss asked me why I had never complained, and I told him
that it was his job to hire and fire, and that I would work with
whomever he chose provided that they were willing to learn.
I've always found that you own attitude can make a huge difference -
more than whether you're "right" or "wrong". If you're seen as a nice
person, people will generally cut you some slack or make allowances
for your personal foibles or idiosyncrasies. If you're dogmatic,
people will hold you to your strict dogma, and point out where you
fall short even by your own standards.
Later :-)
Willow
> I've always found that you own attitude can make a huge difference -
> more than whether you're "right" or "wrong". If you're seen as a nice
> person, people will generally cut you some slack or make allowances
> for your personal foibles or idiosyncrasies. If you're dogmatic,
> people will hold you to your strict dogma, and point out where you
> fall short even by your own standards.
Too true. And we have all seen Usher's attitude. "I am entitled to
voice my opinion". Well,no, you are not. Not if it means insulting
others, not if it means being impolite, not if it means hurting
others.Not if you wish to have a civil discussion or debate an issue
on its merits. If you claim such a right, others can as well, their
opinion, after all. And then a donnybrook results. Usher has claimed
this "right" for far too long here and has thus insulted many here,
forced others to leave and generally made an ass of himself.
Well, after all it is the only place that has not kicked him out. His
only small claim to any fame or status. The rest of his life
is....nothing.
Usher is one of those few people who suffer from a lack of self-esteem
honestly, for he has no reason to have any self-esteem...
Willow
Jennifer Usher
"Willow" <pang...@telus.net> wrote in message
news:7ad17172-1995-4748...@2g2000prl.googlegroups.com...
> Too true. And we have all seen Usher's attitude. "I am entitled to
> voice my opinion". Well,no, you are not. Not if it means insulting
> others, not if it means being impolite, not if it means hurting
> others.Not if you wish to have a civil discussion or debate an issue
> on its merits. If you claim such a right, others can as well, their
> opinion, after all. And then a donnybrook results. Usher has claimed
> this "right" for far too long here and has thus insulted many here,
> forced others to leave and generally made an ass of himself.
ROTFL! Given Willy Boy's well documented history of harassing transsexual
women, this is nothing, if not hilarious.
Ironically, I have tried having a civil debate with Willy Boy and I quickly
realized it was impossible. Yes, I claim the right to speak my mind, but I
do not try to deny it to others. I simply allow them to make even bigger
asses of themselves.
> Well, after all it is the only place that has not kicked him out. His
> only small claim to any fame or status. The rest of his life
> is....nothing.
ROTFL! Another of Willy Boy's infamous claims that apply to him, that he
tries to turn on another. No, I am actually a member of a number of
moderated lists. He, on the other hand, managed to get himself booted from
TRANSGEN. What makes it so hilarious is that I was relatively civil to him
there, but he could not stop with the insults. He is gone, I remain.
Granted, it is not a very active group anymore. In fact, I am a member of
62 Yahoo discussion groups. Most have nothing to do with transsexual
issues. Willy Boy, on the other hand, got himself booted off of Yahoo.
And actually, this little cesspool is but a very small part of my life.
> Usher is one of those few people who suffer from a lack of self-esteem
> honestly, for he has no reason to have any self-esteem...
Willy Boy can go on thinking that all he wants. I know better, my friends
know better, and that in the end, is what really matters.
--
Jennifer Usher
JenniferFlusher
>
> Usher is one of those few people who suffer from a lack of self-esteem
> honestly, for he has no reason to have any self-esteem...
Got to disagree with you there LOL . I truly believe hat Usher suffers
from an enormous EXCESS of self-esteem. So much so that he is
completely blind to his choice of living conditions (funded homeless
shelter) , hygiene (smelly!) career (low level admin asst at 50) and
education (high school ). He is completely blind to all that and has
concocted a life story about himself - FOR himself - that makes him out
to be some sort of hero instead of the dead-end schlub he is.
Two Things: Forgive me everyone here - I respect your decision to use
female pronouns with him but I will not. Maybe that makes me as bad as
him in this respect but having met the man - and I was unfortunate
enough to have spent several days with him - I can not possibly think
of him as a woman nor refer to him as one. I do respect anyone's
decision here to do otherwise of course.
To Willow: We have had many disagreements in the past and we have both
done things we regret I know that I do and I imagine that you would
perhaps have done or said some things differently in the past .
Hindsight , 20/20 and all that. Willow I imagine that we still
disagree on a great deal in TS / TG things but after reading you over
the years I have come to believe that you are a kid of person that I
would probably enjoy having lunch with and who , at least in this point
i our lives, could agree to disagree with on certain things. I hope
someday we may have coffee together.
Wishing you and Bunnie and Helen and Barb all here a wonderful holiday
season. We may disagree on lots of things but we can at least respect
one another (unlike ...ummm... some here ;) . We've all been
through a lot - probably more than any of us know about one another .
My wish is that we all get to go through many more years of going
through stuff.
Ruby
> Wishing you and Bunnie and Helen and Barb all here a wonderful holiday
> season. We may disagree on lots of things but we can at least respect
> one another (unlike ...ummm... some here ;) . We've all been
> through a lot - probably more than any of us know about one another .
> My wish is that we all get to go through many more years of going
> through stuff.
You have a happy Hanukkah too Diane.
Ruby :)
barbie
> On 2009-12-19 12:59:27 -0800, Willow <panga...@telus.net> said:
>
>
>
> > Usher is one of those few people who suffer from a lack of self-esteem
> > honestly, for he has no reason to have any self-esteem...
>
> Got to disagree with you there LOL . I truly believe hat Usher suffers
> from an enormous EXCESS of self-esteem. So much so that he is
> completely blind to his choice of living conditions (funded homeless
> shelter) , hygiene (smelly!) career (low level admin asst at 50) and
> education (high school ). He is completely blind to all that and has
> concocted a life story about himself - FOR himself - that makes him out
> to be some sort of hero instead of the dead-end schlub he is.
Or maybe it's just that, having the personality of a rusty cheese
grater, Usher can only rub people one way - wrongly. Usher seems to
need antagonism, same as Usher needs to Roll On The Floor Laughing
(btw - if anyone has a picture of Usher rolling on the floor -
laughing or otherwise - please don't post it :-(
> Two Things: Forgive me everyone here - I respect your decision to use
> female pronouns with him but I will not. Maybe that makes me as bad as
> him in this respect but having met the man - and I was unfortunate
> enough to have spent several days with him - I can not possibly think
> of him as a woman nor refer to him as one. I do respect anyone's
> decision here to do otherwise of course.
I sidestep the issue by not using pronouns. That being said, Usher is
the one who started the pronoun silliness, and kept it going after
soooo many futile attempts (by many of us) to stop with the "Willy Boy
| He" garbage. In that sense, it's only fair that "What goes around,
comes around." Of course, with the HBS BS that Usher identifies with,
and Harry Benjamin himself repeatedly saying that m2f transsexuals
were men who were "psychically damaged deviants", and not "women in
men's bodies" ...
> To Willow: We have had many disagreements in the past and we have both
> done things we regret I know that I do and I imagine that you would
> perhaps have done or said some things differently in the past .
We all do - we're only human.
> Hindsight , 20/20 and all that. Willow I imagine that we still
> disagree on a great deal in TS / TG things but after reading you over
> the years I have come to believe that you are a kid of person that I
> would probably enjoy having lunch with and who , at least in this point
> i our lives, could agree to disagree with on certain things. I hope
> someday we may have coffee together.
>
> Wishing you and Bunnie and Helen and Barb all here a wonderful holiday
> season. We may disagree on lots of things but we can at least respect
> one another (unlike ...ummm... some here ;) . We've all been
> through a lot - probably more than any of us know about one another .
> My wish is that we all get to go through many more years of going
> through stuff.
For myself, I say thank you, and all the best to you too.
JenniferFlusher
<FutureG...@invalid.invalid> said:
> Well, thank you, J-Flush. Not sure what to call you, but I assume you do
> not really wish to be called Jennifer.
Call me Jennifer if you like - or JF or whatever suits your fancy :)
Just don't call me usher ;)
Willow
> To Willow: We have had many disagreements in the past and we have both
> done things we regret I know that I do and I imagine that you would
> perhaps have done or said some things differently in the past .
> Hindsight , 20/20 and all that. Willow I imagine that we still
> disagree on a great deal in TS / TG things but after reading you over
> the years I have come to believe that you are a kid of person that I
> would probably enjoy having lunch with and who , at least in this point
> i our lives, could agree to disagree with on certain things. I hope
> someday we may have coffee together.
Yes, indeed. All of that is true and yes, I do so hope we might meet
for lunch one day. Friends, acquaintances - none agree on
everything. With civil discourse, we can explore other ideas and
perhaps even change our minds on some issues. I know I have changed
my mind on many issues as I gain further understanding, often from
civil discussions with those that I initially disagree with totally.
We have our regrets but we also have grown beyond those things.
I would be very distrustful of someone who agreed with everything I
thought! Bored too, I dare say...
Ah well, the new doors are mounted in the hallway. I have learnt a
new skill - how to chisel out openings for locks and hinges. Just
about finished all the upgrades in time for Christmas (Do you think
they paint the rooms at the Mission Hotel? No, I suppose not. And
certainly Usher would not undertake any improvement on his own.).
Willow
Willow
holiday
season. We may disagree on lots of things but we can at least
respect
one another (unlike ...ummm... some here ;) . We've all been
through a lot - probably more than any of us know about one
another .
My wish is that we all get to go through many more years of going
through stuff."
And to you, and Bunnie, Helen, and Barb, best of the season and happy
solstice.
Here's to a happy new year for all of us.
By the way, we all know how many posts Usher has made here and on
several other groups. He now claims to belong to 62 other groups. Cna
you imagine that number of posts that he must send out daily. No time
for anything else - and now wonder. Up to the room, locak and bolt
the door, and don't go out in that scary hallway!!!!
62 groups. Someone should tell him to get a real life....
Willow
Willow
holiday
season. We may disagree on lots of things but we can at least
respect
one another (unlike ...ummm... some here ;) . We've all been
through a lot - probably more than any of us know about one
another .
My wish is that we all get to go through many more years of going
through stuff."
And to you, and Bunnie, Helen, and Barb, best of the season and happy
JenniferFlusher
> Here's to a happy new year for all of us.
Yes Indeed! I suspect that we all deserve it.
> 62 groups. Someone should tell him to get a real life....
Yeah but that probably like 20 sock puppets on 3 groups really
Jennifer Usher
"Ruby" <ru...@qwest.net> wrote in message
news:hgjknp$425$1...@news.eternal-september.org...
Oh well....
--
Jennifer Usher
Jennifer Usher
"Helen Detroit" <FutureG...@invalid.invalid> wrote in message
news:4ssqi5ddthhfim4i9...@4ax.com...
> Well, thank you, J-Flush. Not sure what to call you, but I assume you do
> not really wish to be called Jennifer. Yes, we disagree on a lot of
> things, but that does not mean we can't get along. Sure, we have all
> been through a lot of crap. I certainly don't wish to share very much of
> mine, so I assume others here have been through a lot more than they
> have posted, too. Anyway, wonderful holidays to everyone here, even
> those who are killfiled.
Well, personally, I think of him as Dickhead David, but Diane Lask is the
name he claims.
--
Jennifer Usher
Jennifer Usher
"Willow" <pang...@telus.net> wrote in message
news:7da62a41-ef5a-42c9...@y10g2000prg.googlegroups.com...
> By the way, we all know how many posts Usher has made here and on
> several other groups. He now claims to belong to 62 other groups. Cna
> you imagine that number of posts that he must send out daily. No time
> for anything else - and now wonder. Up to the room, locak and bolt
> the door, and don't go out in that scary hallway!!!!
>
> 62 groups. Someone should tell him to get a real life....
I kind of expected this silliness from someone, with Willy Boy being the
most likely to go for the cheap shot.
I said I was a member of 62 groups. Most of them I only post to when I have
a specific question. There are actually only a very few I bother to read
with any regularity, and only about three I post to with anything
approaching regularity.
Of course, Willy Boy missed the point entirely. We know he is persona non
grata pretty much everywhere on the Internet. That is why he posted that
lie about me.
--
Jennifer Usher
Jennifer Usher
"Willow" <pang...@telus.net> wrote in message
news:e7901a21-eab0-4e48...@15g2000prz.googlegroups.com...
> Yes, indeed. All of that is true and yes, I do so hope we might meet
> for lunch one day. Friends, acquaintances - none agree on
> everything. With civil discourse, we can explore other ideas and
> perhaps even change our minds on some issues. I know I have changed
> my mind on many issues as I gain further understanding, often from
> civil discussions with those that I initially disagree with totally.
> We have our regrets but we also have grown beyond those things.
Oh, this is just too funny! I mean, it is so perfect. Diane Lask, who went
out of his way to make Willy Boy's life miserable a while back just tosses
him a couple of ego strokes and all is forgiven. He forgets that Lask is,
for example, the one who actually pursued him to the book groups. I only
posted there AFTER Willy Boy's hilarious demand that I denounce Lask or "the
other shoe was going to drop." That incident was one where Willy Boy showed
his male bravado to the extreme. And he also forgets that we know he lives
in a crappy part of town because of Lask's efforts. We know that the house
he loves to brag about is actually owned by Sonia, because of Lask as well.
In fact, quite a bit of the best dirt on him came from Lask. His
involvement with Satanism, his bizarre nudist past, etc. Yes, all courtesy
of Lask. But all is forgiven because he strokes Willy's ego. Just shows
how truly desperate for approval he really is.
> I would be very distrustful of someone who agreed with everything I
> thought! Bored too, I dare say...
Yes, but stroke his ego and he will forgive the worst of abuse. Ah, such a
joke.
> Ah well, the new doors are mounted in the hallway. I have learnt a
> new skill - how to chisel out openings for locks and hinges. Just
> about finished all the upgrades in time for Christmas (Do you think
> they paint the rooms at the Mission Hotel? No, I suppose not. And
> certainly Usher would not undertake any improvement on his own.).
Well, actually they have done quite a number of improvements here. And I
have added a few nice touches. And I find it very hard to believe that
Willy Boy is actually doing any manual labor. After all, isn't he supposed
to be on total disability? Could it be that he is really stupid enough to
brag about working when that could subject him to a fraud charge?
--
Jennifer Usher
Jennifer Usher
"Willow" <pang...@telus.net> wrote in message
news:72b529ff-56f6-4e65...@u18g2000pro.googlegroups.com...
> By the way, we all know how many posts Usher has made here and on
> several other groups. He now claims to belong to 62 other groups. Cna
> you imagine that number of posts that he must send out daily. No time
> for anything else - and now wonder. Up to the room, locak and bolt
> the door, and don't go out in that scary hallway!!!!
>
> 62 groups. Someone should tell him to get a real life....
I guess he thought this bit of drivel so clever that he posted it twice....
Too much!
--
Jennifer Usher
barbie
> On 2009-12-20 17:52:39 -0800, Willow <panga...@telus.net> said:
>
> > Here's to a happy new year for all of us.
>
> Yes Indeed! I suspect that we all deserve it.
>
> > 62 groups. Someone should tell him to get a real life....
>
> Yeah but that probably like 20 sock puppets on 3 groups really
Actually, Google says it's 79 under just the "Jennifer Usher"
profile. Here's the list.. I've added comments to 12 of them - feel
free to add your own.
soc.support.fat-acceptance, ("I'm my own zip code, I'm my own zip
code ...")
alt.support.depression, (for when soc.support.fat-acceptance doesn't
work)
alt.suicide.holiday, (it's that time of year again ...)
alt.obituaries, (for when alt.support.depression doesn't work)
alt.sex.telephone, (research for the next job)
alt.support.sex-workers, (see above)
alt.sex.bondage, (see above)
alt.sex.stories.gay, (no surprise)
alt.penthouse.sex.stories.gay, (see above)
alt.fan.rush-limbaugh, (fits right in with the next one)
alt.usenet.kooks, (lifetime achievement award nominee)
misc.consumers.frugal-living, (Vice Hotel, passing off bedbug bites as
eczema, etc.)
alt.support.menopause,
alt.support.impotence,
alt.romance.teen,
alt.flame,
alt.support.srs,
rec.photo.digital.slr-systems,
alt.gossip.celebrities,
alt.fan.howard-stern,
alt.politics.homosexuality,
alt.support.crossdressing,
soc.support.transgendered,
alt.california,
rec.collecting.books,
alt.fashion.crossdressing,
ba.general,
alt.usenet.legends.lester-mosley,
ba.jobs,
alt.religion.christian.baptist,
ba.broadcast,
alt.transgendered,
soc.penpals,
sci.psychology.psychotherapy,
rec.arts.movies.current-films,
alt.true-crime,
soc.men,
ba.jobs.resumes,
alt.tv.aeon-flux,
alt.support.single-parents,
alt.tasteless,
tw.bbs.newgroups,
ba.personals,
alt.politics.bush,
alt.test,
rec.arts.dance,
alt.politics,
it.hobby.giochi.gdr,
alt.society.labor-unions,
alt.feminism,
alt.religion.christian,
de.org.ccc,
alt.food.sushi,
alt.recipes.babies,
alt.christnet.calvinist,
comp.soft-sys.matlab,
sci.anthropology.paleo,
rec.arts.tv,
alt.bible,
van.chatter,
alt.philosophy,
van.general,
rec.sport.pro-wrestling,
alt.design.graphics,
rec.travel.air,
uk.misc,
alt.culture.alaska,
alt.sports.basketbal...ba.la-lakers,
social.support.Postops,
bionet.neuroscience,
alt.atheism,
alt.activism.children,
alt.law-enforcement
misc.consumers,
soc.culture.thai,
soc.genealogy.australia+nz,
alt.support.anxiety-panic,
alt.circumcision,
ba.transportation
Add in the other accounts, the sock-puppetry ... Usher could be in the
6 digits.
JenniferFlusher
>
> Actually, Google says it's 79 under just the "Jennifer Usher"
> profile. Here's the list.. I've added comments to 12 of them - feel
> free to add your own.
LMAO !! I thought you were just teasing but I looked under Usher's
Google profile and ALL those groups and then some are listed. OMG.
Who knew?
JenniferFlusher
> free to add your own.
> alt.support.menopause, ( mistakenly thought it was a group for slow men)
> alt.support.impotence, ( founding member )
> alt.romance.teen, (shudder )
> alt.flame, (well duh!)
> alt.support.srs, (home base)
> rec.photo.digital.slr-systems, ( Major photoshoot in Vice hotel)
> alt.gossip.celebrities, ( occasionally checks to see if anyone wrote
> anything about him )
> alt.fan.howard-stern, ( tried 58 times to get on show )
> alt.politics.homosexuality, ( Larry Craig fan club )
> alt.support.crossdressing, ( more than just a crossdressing group ..
> les then a ts group)
> soc.support.transgendered, ( PLan B )
> ba.general, (mistakenly thought it was a local sheep 'special interest' group)
barbie
Nice ones :-)
alt.recipes.babies (Usher the baby-eater)
soc.genealogy.australia+nz ("Honest officer, a dingo ate her baby!")
alt.activism.children (not as tender as babies, but in a pinch ...)
alt.support.single-parents (back child support claims? or just looking
for a tasty morsel or two ...)
alt.tasteless (another newsgroup that's now synonymous with "All
Usher, All the time")
rec.sport.pro-wrestling (if the sex trade and bondage thing doesn't
work out)
alt.circumcision (maybe Usher's looking for a mohel who will "take a
little extra off the top" to help quiet the doubters ...)
rec.arts.dance (when donkeys fly!)
This is as bad as salted peanuts ...
fluffybunnie
>
> Wishing you and Bunnie and Helen and Barb all here a wonderful holiday
> season. We may disagree on lots of things but we can at least respect
> one another (unlike ...ummm... some here ;) . We've all been
> through a lot - probably more than any of us know about one another .
> My wish is that we all get to go through many more years of going
> through stuff.
>
Thanks. And to you, Willow, Barb, Helen and everyone else here* best
wishes for a bright and merry holiday season.
--
(\__/)
(=^.^=)
(")_(")
*Yes, even Lardo -- I still wish him well, I just wish he'd behave himself.
fluffybunnie
> On Dec 20, 9:05?pm, JenniferFlusher <jflus...@imaman.org> wrote:
>> On 2009-12-20 17:52:39 -0800, Willow <panga...@telus.net> said:
>>
>> > Here's to a happy new year for all of us.
>>
>>
>> > 62 groups. ?Someone should tell him to get a real life....
Truly amazing.
I often have trouble making time to keep up with 4 other groups
plus a half-dozen mailing lists. He must do almost nothing else.
That's just sad, really. No wonder it's so important for him to
go on and on about how "well" he's living. Such herculean effort
just to keep that denial propped up, what a waste.