So as I’ve noted before, I seem to have many, many little birds out there who tell me many, many things about what people are saying about me all over the internet.
I don’t know why, exactly — as most of you will already know, I’m usually able to predict what people will say about me with fairly decent skill. And I’ve had people say some rather incredible things, so it never quite gets comfortably predictable.
So imagine my surprise this evening whilst I go through emails in the hour approaching midnight, and what I come across is someone letting me know that sometime earlier this same day the Cockroach (a name I dubbed her that is consistently being used by others) has put up a post wherein she gives me credit, yet again, for something I haven’t done.
Basically, it comes down to this: I have, however uncomfortably for her, taken up residence in Brennan’s brain, and I have made myself a comfortable arrangement in so powerful a way that Brennan has managed to ascribe to me, as an individual, the actions of others for some unknown and peculiar reason.
Now, from a political standpoint, I am informed that her doing this could be part of an effort to sabotage me politically.
To me, that sounds probably as ludicrous as it does to most of you — this blog’s history and my propensity for saying the most offensive things to people is far more effective at politically damaging stuff than anything someone as well known for hating trans people as she is. Even before her infamous cosigned report to the UN, she had earned a reputation among those she worked with in the LGBT rights scene in her locality as being a person who hated trans people. Someone who would say all the right things publicly, but do her damnedest to cut out anything for trans people and to undermine it when push came to shove.
Toss into that the fact that any political efforts I do undertake will be done entirely as a open trans person, and well, the idea that anything she does or says could be damaging sorta just seems like really bad advice.
So that isn’t it.
It is certain she dislikes me as a person. there’s no question there, and it has been an ongoing issue since long before we met in person — where she was, while not cordial, at least not openly hostile (which is par for the course with her should the situation be public).
In the post, she speaks about how Guilt and Shame — two tools she wields with fervor and force, usually backed up by some “moral imperative” — are used by the leadership of the LGBT organizations that she’s managed to decide to declare a personal war on. This is a good line to use, as it draws those who are disaffected and not satisfied with things not going the way they want to them to go to her, and makes them think she is a kindred spirit to them.
She follows this with some sort of copy and paste from somewhere (where is not clear) that she then accredits to me by saying “hai Tony!”.
I can only assume that it is the comparison to Gallagher that gets her to thinking it must be me, along with the fairly reasonable tone of voice it uses. It isn’t me, however, which is pretty apparent since the person describes themselves as a gay man.
Which I am most certainly not. I am a bisexual woman. Marked difference there.
She then goes on to misrepresent much of what is said about her and those who share her trans hostility. She describes it as thinking that their objections to gender identity are rooted in some conservative religious belief.
That is a false statement. Which, as I am wont to point out and often with glee, makes for two different lies she’s supporting so far. Which is expected — she is, at this point, incapable of speaking about trans issues without lying. Lies are all she can turn to since she has to support the other lies she has already told, the majority of which I have slowly but surely demonstrated were lies, using stuff that pisses her off and makes her, well, obviously, paranoid when it comes to issues relating to me.
Which I should expect. After all, for a while she took to responding to trans people with the “sorry about your dick” thing and so I took to responding to her with sorry about her brain. Eventually she stated that she’d had a stroke, and my saying that was hurtful to her. As long term readers can expect, I sorta really didn’t give a fucking shit.
I also don’t believe it, but that is an issue of belief, not fact, and I have no evidence either way as to its truthfulness or absence thereof. So it is possible she did have a stroke, and, if so, then that would explain her paranoia regarding me, as well as her slow descent into yammering on about how terrible trans people are without any sort of practical regard.
Strokes are frequent in my family history, and I am very familiar with both the visible and not so visible effects of them on people. Sorta required for me.
The ideas about gender identity they hold are based in belief — which doesn’t have a religious nature any more than my disbelief of her claim regarding her haivng a stroke is based in a religious thing. A belief need not involve religion or be based in religious idealism. It is based in accepting somethign without proof or evidence.
In their case, it is entirely based in refusing to accept the science behind it that stretches back decades. So it isn’t based in fact, but in their own personal superstition.
The other thing that is said is that they are using a conservative idealism — and that isn’t in the sense of a republican party thing, but in the idea of conservatism that resists change, that prefers things the way they were, not the the way they could be.
The final aspect to that is the language they use. She, in particular, seems to lift whole passages directly from speeches and statements made by MassResistance and other far right looney birds.
Now, what’s really great about the Cockroach is that she does, in fact, know what she’s doing most of the time, even if she’s not aware of it. Indeed, she’s well aware that the statement she made is, in fact a lie.
she even calls it such — in order to give her the ability to attack it, because she is going after those who are weak of mind and malign of spirit.
She then says that it is the LGBT community which is in line with conservatives — because she says so, not because she can draw any lines or show any links to such, as I have done and as others have done using her own words against her.
She describes a scientific concept as a Conservative effort, then — because gravity and physics and social dynamics are either conservative or liberal in her sadly twisted little world, instead of being facts. Because facts and reality are troublesome for her to accept, and because her grasp of sceince is entirely lensed through politics, which are changeable and changing — but for her, subject to her will.
She then says that the work of Judith Butler is conservative. Which would probably be a pretty big surprise to Butler.
She then uses more of the usual transphobic links she uses and even pulls a video from a trans woman who offends her (easy to do, since all trans women offend her) to make the point that we are are not women, and therefore do not get a say in being in women’s spaces.
THis despite the fact we are women, and therefore do have a say there. Which, as I’ve noted in the past, is the key element for her.
That’s the joy of watching her. She doesn’t need to show her claims, they just are true, no matter what. She can use outliers and rare cases to make her points because to her, those are what make it up (which is probably also why I occupy so much space in her head, as I challenge all her hard worked out preconceptions).
And that is the justification for everything — that women are not women. Because they don’t meet her particular set of rules about who is and who isn’t woman enough (which is fascinating, to me, since she also decides who is and who isn’t a lesbian for other people).
And she caps it with a mention to the time honored symbol of hate for her — sex. But not before saying, once more, that it is people who seek change that are conservative instead of those who seek to stop it, reversing the ideas themselves because she sees herself, despite her hatred for this change, as supporting it while she seeks to keep things the way they are and have been.
And all of this is built around the idiocy that I keep showing she engages in.
Which is why I have taken up so much space in her head. Because I am not only not intimidated by her ludicrous attempts at circular logic such as this, because I am not hurt by her slights and her half assed and predictable attempts at insulting me, because I sit back patiently and teach others how to deal with her type of skilled hate.
Because I am not one to back away from her in fear and hurt, and instead I laugh at her, because she’s the funny one, not I.
And so, since I make this visible, and because I have a very specific way of writing things, that is easily copied, since it follows a very traditional format and is very basic and very cold, she sees me everywhere. She sees what I do in all the stuff that others say to her now. She sees me.
That’s pretty potent stuff.
That’s also par for the course when dealing with me.
Why, one could almost say that dealing with me for too long can drive you mad…