I try to hold respect for other’s beliefs.  Sometimes that is more difficult than it would seem on the surface.  The problem is when I inadvertently let my own beliefs take on an elevated status over the other person’s belief.  The word “belief,” as is so often with modern languages, has several definitions depending on the context of its use.  For the purpose of this discussion, the definition is “confidence in the truth or existence of something not immediately susceptible to rigorous proof.”  I think the key words in that definition are “susceptible to rigorous proof.”  As a rule, that often applies to one’s religious beliefs.

We each have the right to believe in a religious/spiritual belief system.  It doesn’t matter what comprises that belief system; be it Baha'i, Buddhism, Confucianism, Hinduism, Islam, Judaism, Catholicism, Shinto, Scientology, Taoism, or the Frog Queen, we each have the right to believe what we wish to believe as long as we don’t infringe on the rights of others to practice our belief.  No belief system is the right one, and none are the wrong one.  Each is as valid as the next because they are BELIEF SYSTEMS!  We take our religious/ spiritual beliefs on FAITH, not rigorous proof.  One can not say that another’s beliefs are false when we can not prove our own beliefs are true.

Religious/spiritual intolerance is nothing new in the history of human existence.  What I find surprising is that the “guidebook” for so many of these belief systems teaches against intolerance.  There is a bit of an oxymoron there, would you say?

First, I must say that the following text is just my opinions. I am sure that there are errors in some of the statements. However, they are just my opinions so don't get your knickers in a twist over some little thing. Don't start nit picking it apart with comments like, it was the fifth largest. Doing so just shows that you are missing the forest because you are looking at the tree. If you don't agree, then enlighten me with facts that you can back up with links to the source of your data. Saying I am wrong without proving me wrong with concrete data with quoted reference material is just your opinion versus my opinion. If you want to write an opinion, go do it in your blog. This is my blog where I post my views, and my opinions; hence the title, "Views of a Transsexual Woman." However, if you must post your opinions to my opinions, then do so. Just be aware that I probably won’t read them.

The past Iraq of Saddam Hussein is but a blurred memory. It is sad to see what has become of the freest Middle Eastern country. Most American citizens did not know the prewar Iraq or the prewar Iraqi citizens.

What is different about this war and the war with Iraq that preceded the current war? Does anyone remember why we invaded Iraq the first time? If you recall, Iraq had invaded Kuwait and the US intervened. Why did we intervene on the behalf of Kuwait in the first war? I think most will agree it was the US interest in the Kuwaiti oil fields. Furthermore, it was the Kuwaiti oil fields that Hussein was after in the first place. Resistance against US involvement in the conflict between Iraq and Kuwait was high. So a little lie of many was perpetrated to rile the American citizens into a battle cry. The lie was that Iraqi soldiers had entered into nurseries and dumped newborn babies out of incubators. The bloody bastards; how could they do such a thing! Death to the Iraqis! Let’s go take care of the bastards. This is an old tactic in persuading citizens of a country to go along with invasion. It was used during World War II by the president of the US to gain entry into WWII and acceptance by the American citizens to do so. The incident, in case anyone’s memory fails them, was the Pearl Harbor incident. I won’t elaborate on Pearl Harbor but will be glad to furnish the information to any who asks for it. The Iraqi-Kuwaiti lie was further embellished by the appearance on US national television of a nurse from one of the nurseries crying tears and retelling of the horrible Iraqi soldiers cruel acts. As we now know, the nurse was actually a princess of the Kuwaiti royal family. However, the lie worked, and the American citizens were a lot more eager to enter the Iraqi-Kuwaiti conflict.

I can see some justification for entering into a conflict where a country has been invaded by a stronger power without true provocation. However, where is the justification for the second war against Iraq? Iraq was beaten during the first war. It was quickly proven that the fourth largest military power on the planet at the time was only on paper. What is the real story here? Again, the answer can be found in oil.

One day I was doing some research and by accident came across an article in which a statement caught my attention. The statement was that the size of the Iraqi oil fields had been miscalculated and that in reality they were probably the largest in the Middle East; larger than the Saudi oil fields. That made me curious so I started doing a bit of research on Iraq and oil and oil agreements. As it turned out, Hussein had been making exclusive rights deal with many countries to be the sole supplier of oil and I found deals going back into the seventies. Now as anyone knows, the US has been involved with oil agreements with the Saudis for many decades. President Franklin Roosevelt met with the Saudi Royal family on oil agreements during his administrations. It is no secret that the Bush family has very close ties with the Saudis. You may be wondering why the jump from Iraq to Saudi Arabia? The Saudis were taking note of the many exclusive rights deal that Saddam Hussein was making with other countries. These deals were cutting into their sales of oil and also the lost of control over pricing. Money that is flowing into the coffers of Hussein is money that is NOT flowing into the coffers of the Saudis, and indirectly, the coffers of the Bush oil family. The Saudis wanted something done about Hussein and Iraq. The Saudis went to Bush and demanded that Hussein had to be dealt with and quickly. The result was the current war with Iraq. Now I will admit that the last few sentences are only speculation on my part and I have no real data to back them up. However, the statements leading up to my speculation are true.

When I look at the state of affairs in Iraq I weep. I openly weep. The destruction of lives and property in Iraq is horrible. The pictures of the Iraqi war are out there if people will just go and look. Yes, it is horrible to see so many children killed or maimed; legs and arms blown off of their bodies. It is horrible to see and watch the suffering that the Iraqis are enduring, but we have to watch, and yes it is just as hard to see what the soldiers who are being misled are enduring. As responsible human beings, we have to watch. I am not sure that Iraq can endure another two years of this war. While Hussein was no saint, the world of pre-war Iraq was a paradise compared to what the Iraqi citizens have now and what they will have if we ever leave the country. It will be a long time before the Iraqis have the freedoms they had under Saddam Hussein. The new Iraqi constitution actually grants fewer freedoms to Iraqi citizens than they had under Hussein.

Now here is the scary part, Bush is claiming that he does not need permission to attack countries. If you are not scared, you better well should be scared!

As I mentioned in an earlier post, I recently brought a new coffee maker.  I love coffee.  I love a good hot cup of tea as well, but I have to confess that coffee is my first love in hot drinks.  I had a coffee maker that I liked; it had a great looking design that was different from most of the standard makers on the market.  It also made a great cup of coffee when it was new.  However, as so many products tend to be today, it was made cheaply and after about a year of use parts started failing.  The final straw was when the warming plate gave up the ghost.  The coffee would start cooling as soon as it entered the carafe and only the first cup of coffee would be warm enough for my tastes.  I like my coffee hot, not lukewarm.

Last week I decided to go in search for a new coffee maker.  I wanted something that was different, something that would be attractive since it would always be on display.  I don’t keep a lot of clutter on my kitchen worktops preferring to keep the blenders and food processors and other tools stored out of the way when not in use.  However, as I sated above, I love coffee and sometimes I will end up making it several times a day.  Therefore, the maker has a permanent place on the worktop beside my cooker and as such, I wanted something attractive.  Finding a coffee maker that was a bit different without breaking my budget proved to be a bit difficult, so I had to skimp a bit on that aspect.  I did want a coffee maker with a thermal carafe instead of a warming plate.  Warming plates only end up cooking the coffee and the first cup is the best.  The longer the coffee sits on the warming plate, the worst it will taste.  I have dumped a lot of cups down the sink because of this bad side effect of warming plates.

The maker I ended up buying was a DeLonghi DC55TC.  This maker comes from an Italian company and their products have been known to be excellent.  However, before I buy any products, I do a good lookup of reviews from actual users.  I found a mix of reviews for this coffee maker.  Most of the reviews complained of problems with the water not entering the carafe and making a mess on the worktop.  I also found a couple of reviews in which the reviewer had encountered this problem on first use and stated that it was not the maker; they had failed to place the carafe completely under the drip.   Most of the reviews stated the maker made an excellent tasting coffee, so I decided that I would give it a try and if it did spill coffee onto the worktop, I would take it back immediately and get a refund.  I am happy to say that I have had no problems from spillage when the maker is brewing the coffee.  Furthermore, the carafe pours without dripping; a problem that I had with the carafe from my old maker.  My boyfriend poured coffee all over my worktop one morning when he went to get a cup of coffee.  I am glad that I won’t have to watch him when he is getting a cup with my new maker.  The only problem I have found is that the coffee isn’t as hot as I would like it to be.  I like my coffee hot and while the coffee is hot, it is not hot enough.  I add cream to my coffee and of course the cream cools the coffee down a bit.  The thermal carafe does a reasonable job of keeping the coffee hot.  Of course it will cool down if it sits long enough, but a pop into the nuker will take care of heating it and since the coffee isn’t cooking on a warming place, tastes as almost as good as a fresh brewed cup.

I have only had the maker for a short period, but so far it seems to be a nice coffee maker.  If that changes, I will let you know.

I hear so much about “The Community.”  Either the meaning of the word community is not known, or “The Community” doesn’t really exist.  The definition of the word community as it is used in the context above is: a social, religious, occupational, or other group sharing common characteristics or interests and perceived or perceiving itself as distinct in some respect from the larger society within which it exists.  Sharing common characteristics or interests; that is the part that I think is the most important and also the part that most likely excludes me from “The Community.”  Of course the community in question is the trans-community.  However, there is another community where I am not excluded, the community of women.  I do share common characteristics and interest with the community of women.  If I have to choose between the two communities, the community of women wins effortlessly.

I hear so much about “Sisters.”  Either the meaning of the word sister is not known, or “Sisters” doesn’t really exist.   The definition of the word sister as it is used in the context above is: a girl or woman who shares a common ancestry, allegiance, character, or purpose with another or others.  Shares common character or purpose; that is the part that I think is the most important and also the part that most likely excludes me from the “Sisters.”  Of course the sisters in question is the idea that we are trans-sisters; a term that I often hears toss around so casually.  However, I am a sister in the community of women where I belong.  If I have to choose between the two groups of sisters, my sisters in the community of women wins effortlessly.

I read the article concerning the research on gay sheep and I feel that there is a bigger issue at stake; mainly, the issue of manipulating embryos and fetuses to make “recipe” babies. However, I am going to leave that to a different rant and concentrate on the gay sheep research.

As far as the preventing homosexuality or transsexualism question, if I had been born as a man in a man’s body and grew up from birth as such, everything would have been fine. I don’t think I would have spent my life from birth up to a year and half ago suffering from Social Anxiety Disorder. I would have been able to function socially and I would be surprised if I did not have a wife and children and a good job and a happy life as a man. The problem I experienced was that while in the womb, my brain developed as a girl’s brain, while my body developed as a boy’s body. The two needed to match and which steps to take to make them match can be debated. With present day science, nothing can be done while the child is in the womb and only cosmetic physical changes can be done to the body after birth and no changes to the mind. All attempts at bringing the mind in alignment with the body have not been successful. Now here is where I think the real rub is for transsexuals and why so many are upset. How many transsexuals want to have their mental sex or gender changed? I certainly don’t want to be a man. We are our minds, our brains; we are not our bodies. I am happy being female and my frustrations come from being too poor to do anything about my body. There is a big difference in preventing a condition from happening in a fetus, and in changing one’s identity as an adult. Many of the problems facing adult transsexuals arose from allowing the body to go through puberty and hopefully, with better understanding, children will not have to face what we faced. Once a child has been identified as a transsexual, a condition that is simply a form of being intersex, then the child can have his/her hormones balanced to fit their gender and prevent some of the secondary characteristics that cause undue emotional stress and will later require medical procedures to correct.

The article in question discussed the possibility that changes could be made to the chemistry of fetuses to prevent homosexuality. The article did not deal with transsexualism. Even in the case of homosexuality, increasing or decreasing hormone levels may or may not change one’s sexual orientation. The experiment in question is still in its early stages. Just because researchers were able to get gay sheep to mate does not imply that they changed the sheep’s sexual orientation. Animals are not humans. Most animals mate from an instinctual need to procreate. It is possible that all the researchers did was to place the sheep in a highly sexual state that they were compelled to mate from an instinctual level; not because they were attracted to the opposite sex.

If the research is to gather an understanding of sexual orientation that may help to convince the general public that homosexuality is not a lifestyle choice…. Here I need to pause and insert a comment. One could just as well make the statement that heterosexuality is a lifestyle choice as well. If one can choose one’s sexual orientation to be gay, then can not the reverse be true as well? However, I am guessing that you if ask heterosexuals if they consider their sexual orientation a choice they made, you would get some strange looks and remarks in return. Continuing, if the research is to help educate the public, then it will be a good thing. All research has the potential to be misused. We always have to consider the misuse and the need for legislation to help prevent the misuse.

Hello:

My name is Kimberly Wilson and I am a transsexual woman.  There are many of us in this world living side by side with each and every one of you.  We are your neighbors, your friends, your doctors, your teachers, and even your children.  It is estimated that over 40,000 post operative male to female transsexuals live in the United States.  The number of female to male transsexuals is likely equal to the number of females.  Therefore, over 80,000 post operative transsexuals are living in the United States today.  If you add in the number of transsexuals who can not transition, the number will soar into the millions.  You have probably met some of them without ever knowing it.  We come from all walks of life, from the poor to the filthy rich, and we are just like you.

Believe it or not, we are just like you.  We want the same things that you want from life, a good job, a nice home, and a family.  We are as a productive member of society as anyone else.  We go to church, we contribute to our communities and we are ready to help our neighbors.  We are not freaks of nature, or perverted Godless souls.  We are human beings just like you.