I’ve been wanting to lose weight for more than a year now, but for whatever reason, I knew my brain wasn’t in it – until the beginning of this year, when I realized I’d taken off 13 lbs. in the course of 2005, but by January had put back on all but 4 of those pounds.
So this year I’m trying an escalating workout program: started with 10 minutes of workout in January, and have been adding 5 minutes to my workout time every month – which means I’m up to 25 minutes’ workout time for April. It’s a lot easier this way because it just feels like you’re adding another set of crunches or leg lifts.
Better still, www.myfooddiary.com is proving to be really helpful, and not just for “dieting” but for keeping track of my carbs, saturated fats, protein, vitamins = the works. So I feel like I’m re-learning how to eat decently, instead of just losing pounds.
And it’s already yielding results: 2.2″ off my hips and waist, and a total of 5.5 lbs in 14 days. At this rate, I’ll be at my goal weight by our anniversary in July, which would rock. Only 18 more lbs. to lose.
If you’d like to join the MHB crew’s support forum for weight loss, do!
Five Questions With… J. Michael Bailey
J. Michael Bailey is the author of the much-heralded The Man Who Would Be Queen as well as one of the authors of a groundbreaking study on bisexuality released last year.
1. So, Prof. Bailey, what amazing things have you discovered about tomboys? Have you worked out that we’re more likely to beat you up in the bathroom if you say stupid shit about us, like you do about everyone else you study?
Thank you, Helen. I’m glad you asked that question. In fact, the title of my next book is “Tomboys: The Girls Who, if They Existed, Would Be Dykes”. It is a nonscientific scientific popular nonscience book, so it is pretty easy to digest. I’m proud to say that much of the work that went into writing the book was conducting in and around the campus. We’re engaged in exciting, cutting edge research here at Northwestern, and, assuming that human subjects rules apply, or even if they don’t, we are doing it safely. I think. Yes, there has been some controversy stirred up by a few hysterical ‘tomboy activists’, or, as I like to call them, ‘dykes’, but when you are on the cutting edge of scientific nonscience popular science, you learn to take these, um, blows.
Mostly, these dykivists have taken issue with the last third of my book, which deals with the simple fact that tomboys do not exist. Oh, they think they do. Their parents may even think they do. But I can quote many esteemed references I’ve never actually read to bolster the point that people often are deluded and lying when they speak to me. I mean, it just isn’t possible that so many people dislike me or disagree with my work. It has to be delusion. Has to.
But, in answer to your question: yes. If tomboys exist, then, yes, please don’t hit me.
2. From your “research” methods in The Man Who Would Be Queen, you seem to hang out in gay/trans bars a lot. I do too, so I understand. But I hang out in them because I love trannies, while you seem to have more of a love/hate relationship with transwomen. What gives?
Any reasonable person will conclude that I am very sympathetic to the plight of gender nonconforming boys. Very sympathetic. Very, very VERY sympathetic. Any reasonably observant person who happened to be at my favorite bar, Chick or Meat, will conclude that I absolutely love young, hot, feminine trannies.
As far as love and hate, well, yes, it is only natural. I love my time with the hot ones. When I come home, however, I have to spend a few hours in my Punishment Closet. Longer if I had to settle for one of the uglier ones.
As I have written in my lovingly crafted book, there are two kinds of transsexuals: the Faggos and the Uggos. So you have the “Homosexual Transsexuals” (Faggos), and, let me tell you, they are all pretty hot. These guys tend to transition early, date macho, straight guys like me, and make money as strippers. Then you have the “Autogynephilic Transsexuals” (Uggos) who transition later, are pretty homely, and if they can get a date, it is usually with themselves. Usually these guys can only find work as low grade prostitutes (ones who charge about $25 for a handjob, which really sucks because they won’t break a $50 or cash an NSF check).I wouldn’t date one of those men. Unless I was really hard up.
Or I couldn’t find a Faggo.
I love the Faggos. I’ve even loved an Uggo or two in my time, though human subjects and several pending law suits mean I can’t mention their names. I am not gay, though, just so you understand. I’m married, and everything.
3. Do you think bisexual men are really gay and bisexual women are really bisexual because that satisfies your fantasy of watching two women together? Or it because all of your research is really a life-long struggle to convince yourself that your interest in chicks with dicks means you’re still really het?
Yes.
4. So what makes your plethsmograph really bump up?
I am so glad you asked me that, Helen. As a matter of fact, Everything gets my Penile Plethsmograph stiff. How do I know this? I’m not just a researcher, not just a dedicated scientist in search of the truth, not just an advocate and humanitarian who deeply cares about the plight of transsexual faggots. As someone once said, I can’t ask the troops to do something I wouldn’t do myself. And while that isn’t completely true, I do find that I prefer wearing a PP. All the time. Sure, it can be an inconvenience; for one thing, not a few people have asked me what the wires sticking out of my belt were for, and I’ve had to switch to wearing sweats most of the time. The side benefit is that the PP does really make it look like I’m packing some major Academic Rolls, if you know what I mean.
Let’s try a test. I have in my desk a selection of photographs. I’ll view them one at a time and give you the PP feedback. Here we go.
First up: A picture of Seigfried and Roy. With a soft, furry tiger. Oh, look, it’s a boy tiger. A big boy tiger. PP reading: “Tingly”.
Next: The Eiffel Tower. Long, tall, hard, erect, with a bulbous end. Years to build, by hundreds of sweaty Frenchmen in the hot Parisan sun. PP reading: “Ooo, la la!”
Next: Captain Kangaroo. Moustache. Side Burns. Deep, deep, deep pockets. Sailor. PP reading: “Ping Pong Balls!”
Next: A place of Nachos. PP reading: “Call Doctor if Erection lasts longer than 4 hours.”
Next: Tula.
Right, Helen, I’m going to have to get back to you. I need to, ah, recalibrate and rewire the PP. Yes, recalibrate. And change my pants.
J. Michael Bailey at Homecoming, date unknown.
5. I know you think you can tell a gay man by the sound of his voice, but did you know most gay men can tell you really like sucking cock if you suck cock all the time?
This has been a real source of frustration for me, Helen. When some in the Stanford audience giggled at some of the demonstrations in my talk (e.g., my playing the voices of gay and straight people), this was all in good humor. I can’t understand the fuss. It reminds me of when I was an undergraduate, and I demonstrated how you could tell the difference between real black men and white men in black face (in that groundbreaking study, white men with black face did not want watermelon). It was all in good fun. At least, it seemed funny to me, and that’s all that matters, in the end.
There is a difference, I would suggest, between cocksucking for pleasure and cocksucking For Science. I would not engage in the former. I admit that, in my nonscientific pseudoscientific science studies, I needed to sample–I’m sorry–collect information about the oral sex habits in the gay community. As senior researcher, it was encumbant upon me to collect this data first hand if possible. It was a great sacrifice, especially once my wife found out about it.
So, yes, I have sucked my share of cock. But you have to understand that I was not so much sucking cock as placing some strange man’s penis in my mouth, then stimulating this wonderful reproductive organ until ejaculation. There is a difference, and it does not mean I am gay. I swear, the hundreds of blowjobs I have given have meant nothing to me. Not a thing.
Except that one time in Bermuda. Oh, wait, that wasn’t for research. Can that be off the record?
(Happy April Fools, everyone! Thanks to Mad Megan Bailey for standing in for Mike.)
Five Questions With… Becca and Dixie
Becca and Dixie are a crossdresser & wife combination that are hard to beat. Both of them are committed to unity within the trans community as well as having alliances with the larger LGBT community. They run the Eureka En Femme Getaway (which is one of our favorite events) as well as the online group A Crossdresser’s Secret Garden and its website.
< Sis Becca
1. How did you come to start running the Eureka En Femme Getaway?
The idea of the Getaway actually started with our wedding – we were married in the Beckham Cave house in Jasper Arkansas and had 4 other couples join us (crossdressers and their wives), as well as a TS friend of ours from Florida. We were talking one night and someone mentioned we should do this more often. We started tossing ideas around and Becca mentioned Eureka Springs, thinking mainly because of its diversity and acceptance of the Gay community, it would be the perfect place to give it a shot.
A few weeks later Becca and I, along with another couple, took a trip to Eureka Springs and looked at the hotels there. The few that were in the downtown area were either too small, too costly, or not accepting. We walked into the Basin Park and after just a short talk with Misty, the hotel’s events coordinator, knew we had found a home. We signed a contract with her for 20 rooms. We got in the car and headed home and thought, WHAT have we done! WE do not KNOW 20 crossdressing couples, how in the heck will we fill the rooms! The small Tri-Ess group we belonged to at the time only had about 10 active members and those were husbands and wives, so assuming all would attend that is only 5-6 rooms out of 20. It was then that I (Dixie) decided to build the En Femme Getaway website with the hopes that we could fill the 20 rooms we contracted for. I worked furiously posting the Getaway on any and every TG website and online group I could find on the internet. By the time all was said and done, we had sold not 20 but 27 of the rooms (which was all we could get as the others had been booked!) So in the Spring of 2002 the very first Eureka! En Femme Getaway event was underway.
Everyone seemed to enjoy their time there so much, they were asking WHEN the next one would be…… Next one? We had not thought any further than then this one! Becca and I talked about it and thought ‘OK let’s give this a shot,’ so we planned one for the Fall of 2002, contracted with the hotel for all the rooms, and sold out. Since that time we have held the event twice a year (the only TG event to do that) and have sold out each and every time. This spring will be our 9th event, and many of those that attend have been back several times, with some of them having attended all 9 events!
Our first guest Speakers were Linda and Cynthia Phillips, who were instrumental in helping Becca in the early days. They were the originators of the first TG event (that we know of) – the Texas Tea Party. Since the first Event in the Spring of 2002, we have been blessed with many wonderful speakers: Helen & Betty, Lacey Leigh, Gina Lance, and Peggy Rudd to name a few.
What do you think are the best parts of it?
The people – seeing the joy and excitement on their faces as they step out of the hotel. Many of our guests have NEVER been out of the closet. The Getaway event was their first time to actually get out and enjoy themselves. The Getaway is quite unlike other event – we don’t have a plethora of seminars to attend that only tend to lead to a closet inside a closet. We encourage the girls to get out on the town and have FUN! After all, isn’t that what it is all about, getting out, having fun and being yourself?
Family. The Getaway has been described as a “Family Reunionâ€, and I think that is exactly what it is. I look forward to each Getaway and the chance to see ‘family’ members again.
Continue reading “Five Questions With… Becca and Dixie”
Eating, and Drinking, then Talking
Betty and I are off to the Connecticut Outreach Society’s Annual Banquet tonight, where I’ll be giving the post-dinner speech. We’re pleased to be going again, because we really enjoyed ourselves the first time I spoke at this event, in 2004. You’d think they’d have had enough of me by now, but my guess is that they want to know if I’ve gotten any better since then!
We also made the smart move to take the train. I love trains about as much as I hate cars and planes. So it’ll be nice to stare out the window, each of us with our headphones on, and read, and write, and stare out the window.
Our thanks to those at COS for having us again.
Five Questions With… Josey Vogels
Josey Vogels is the author of the nationally syndicated relationships column My Messy Bedroom and the dating advice column Dating Girl. She has published five books on sex and relationships – the most recent is entitled Bedside Manners: Sex Etiquette Made Easy. Her fourth book, The Secret Language of Girls, has been published in several languages and was made into a documentary. Her website – www.joseyvogels.com — is visited by thousands monthly and she is a popular speaking guest at universities and colleges across Canada.
1) I was a little amazed at the ‘revelation’ of She Comes First – considering women have been basically saying the same thing as Ian Kerner (the author of She Comes First) did, for years. Why do you think it took a guy to say it before anyone seemed to listen?
It’s funny, I felt exactly the same way. In fact, this is what I wrote in a column I did about the book: “That Kerner comes off as the Neil Armstrong of oral sex is a little insulting when you consider how many women (several of whom he refers to throughout the book) have been saying for years that intercourse alone doesn’t cut it for the ladies when it comes to orgasm. But the fact that Kerner is on a mission to turn men into enthusiastic cunning linguists like himself is a welcome one. Because, clearly, they aren’t listening to us.”
I think sadly, the fact that it was a man made the mainstream media take notice. It was truly a bizarre thing. I thought it was interesting how though also how Kerner’s language in the book was very “male” which again, might have made it more palatable for a media that likes that kind of male authoritative approach to things.
As I wrote at the time:
“She Comes First may have indeed changed the focus from intercourse to oral sex but it’s still all about male performance. Kerner’s just shifted the pressure from the penis to the tongue. He even describes the tongue as the best “tool” for the job.
In fact, at times, with all the references to hoods and shafts and some rather creepy technical illustrations, She Comes First, reads more like a car manual than a guide to becoming a good lover. So while Kerner now describes himself as “happily married and able to make love successfully” (wonder what a good cunnilinguist pulls in these days?), being a “successful” lover isn’t just about having a skillful tongue — though that is, of course, welcome. It’s about knowing how to stimulate a woman’s mind, to make her feel amazing and sexy in bed and out. I’m all for improving your technique. But like a good mechanic, a good lover doesn’t just know how to operate the machinery, he knows how to make it purr.”
Happy Valentine's
When I was single, which seems a long time ago now, I hated Valentine’s Day. One glorious year, I had forgotten about it entirely. I went to work that day like it was any other day and I didn’t think about who I wasn’t dating or who I was dating who would no doubt do something horrible to ruin it. I remember having a pleasant day at work and starting the walk up Christopher Street to the subway in the cold and seeing a line of people standing outside. And I honestly thought, for one quick minute, what is so important that those fools are freezing in line for? And then it hit me, like a ton of truffles: they were standing on line outside the famous Li-Lac chocolate store because it was Valentine’s Day. And after trying to make fun of those shivering fools for a bit, I gave up and realized I had been much happier when I didn’t know it was Valentine’s Day.
I wish that for all of you who don’t have a Valentine – to just go about your day, as happy as a clam. The irony of course is that this post of mine might have been the thing that reminded you of it. If so, I apologize. Go get a massage or buy yourself chocolates or eat that pint of Ben & Jerry’s. If there’s a guilt-free day to indulge yourself, this is it.
I don’t really like Valentine’s Day much better now as I always feel this weird social pressure to be the woman, or the girlfriend, or the {insert traditional feminine gender role here}. This year, Betty and I are thinking we might reverse things, or make things normal, for us. That is, I get to buy the flowers and pull chairs and open doors. The only problem is, I’m still the one who likes chocolates, and we both like silk lingerie, and I’m not quite cool & groovy with my butch side yet. It’s natural, but after repressing it for so long, it still feels weird, and likewise for Betty, so we end up either both of us waiting for the other one to get the door, or both of us grabbing the door to open it, at the same time.
That is, we have no idea what we’re doing in this gender nebulous space. We’re always guessing and second guessing what the ‘correctly gendered’ role is, and what we actually feel naturally, and then trying to figure out if those two things align or don’t.
So for the record: I do want chocolates. Betty does want underwear. And after that, I have no idea. I would like to think we might be creative about how to combine eating chocolates and taking off underwear, perhaps.
Way, WAY Too Much TV
Okay, I’m going to hope this is the last installation in my recent series about my TV viewing. (Previous installations includes posts about Coke and Adam Ant, Jenny Craig and street harassment, Beauty & the Geek, and one about a reality show that never aired, despite its feel-good homo-friendly vibe). Okay, I might still write about the Abigail Adams biography that’s been running on PBS, but not right now.
Right now I want to talk about the most lovely and bizarre – and uniquely American – merging of capitalism and philanthropy I’ve ever seen: Extreme Home Makeover.
Here’s the premise: family beset by hardship or doing really cool stuff is recommended to the show and its host, Ty Pennington, by a friend or neighbor and occasionally a member of the family.
The Extreme Home Makeover team show up at the family’s door, send them on vacation for a week, and during that very same week, completely re-build their entire house.
They use products that get prominent display during the show and on the show’s website: tools from Sears, and appliances from Kenmore. Basically, it’s free advertising in exchange for donated goods to use for the home makeover.
Local construction companies help out, and/or volunteer types, and often a celebrity gets involved. The family returns home, their community gathers, everyone shouts “move that bus!” and then everyone cries and smiles and hugs everyone else (especially the Design Team).
It’s the corniest shit ever and I love every minute of it. It’s so bizarrely American. In a way, it’s all win-win: cool families that do things like rescue injured animals get a great house and free dog food and kennels, Sears gets to show off their power tools, and millions of viewers are entertained.
Really, Betty and I have been watching weekly for a long while now, and we fight over tissues. Dunno, maybe during such shitty times, it’s a relief to see nice people who do good stuff get rewarded – and the only strings attached is a little bit of ‘good karma’ advertising for the companies that donate.
I think shows like this are what we should be exporting to the rest of the world instead of Baywatch or whatever other crap we export (there are some cultures, I’m sure, that find those damn Survivor shows insulting, since so much of the world’s population isn’t living in much better conditions than the contestants). We all know that Ford isn’t going to give any trucks to the employees they just laid off when their families apply in a year or so after not being able to find replacement work. No, of course not.
But at least it’s not crap news, of which we’ve got plenty.
Receipt, Please?
Natalie posted a “quit bickering” type post in a recent thread full of hot debate, misreadings & misunderstandings (since closed) about mosaic intersexed conditions, and her list, although well-intentioned, immediately garnered objection from Andrea – and from us.
Betty and I have both long hated the phrase “gender gifted” to describe this insane state of affairs.
The first time I attended the Eureka En Femme Getaway, I conducted a Saturday afternoon workshop with Gina Lance where I said something along the lines of wanting a receipt for this fabulous “gender gift.” I think at the time I compared it to the pink slip Betty got two weeks before our wedding – which to this day takes all awards for worst gift ever. (Later, when Peggy Rudd gave the banquet speech, she used the term “gender gifted” positively, and two partners next to me elbowed each other and then me, trying not to laugh too hard outloud. It really was, in some ways, the summation of the difference between Peggy’s and my styles, notwithstanding our respect for each other.)
And while I understand the way people come to understand transness as a gift, I really can’t think of it that way myself. I also understand why people need to think of it as a gift, but I can’t go to the mat asking partners to accept it that way – I just can’t. I can barely get partners to accept it as the worst freaking thing that’s ever happened to them, so asking them to consider it a gift would more likely end up perverting the meaning of the word ‘gift’ than making them positive, forward-thinking, supportive types. (Most likely result would be that they’d tell me to go to hell.)
So, the gender gift: being misunderstood by friend, peers, and larger society. With transition this gender gift implies extraordinary expense, job loss, and often divorce; without it, a sense of uncertainty at the very least.
That’s not to say there aren’t positive things that can come out of transness for the transperson and the partner – of course there are. But positive things come out of negative things all the time, depending on the outlook of the people making their way through the adversity. It can make you a more thoughtful person, deeper, more accepting of diversity, maybe even downright philosophical – but that doesn’t mean it will. People learn tremendous, important things about themselves and the universe when they get cancer, too, but that doesn’t mean anyone wants it.
To me, a gift is something unequivocally good, something you wanted when you didn’t have it, or something someone gave you that makes you happier. In the second sense of the word, transness could be a gift the way a high IQ or good vision is a gift, and I suppose that’s the way people mean it. But even in that case, it’s a lot harder to have any benefit come of transness the way good vision or a high IQ might; you might not use the latter, but it doesn’t harm you to not use it, either – where transness, more often than not, is a kind of niggling annoyance (at least) when it’s ignored, or a major disruption, or, at worst, leads to straight-up tragedy.
When people tell me they would choose being trans, I think they mean they would choose the things they learned as a result of being trans, and that they appreciate the journey of self-discovery they had to go on because of transness. But mostly I think if people could gain those things without the frustration, ostracism, self-isolation, shame, and cost – they would.
I know: I’m just a regular bucket of cheer, but I talk to partners a lot.
In my own experience, transness is more like fire: naturally destructive, but powerful when it can be harnessed; it’s difficult to harness in the first place, and still, ultimately, always a little dangerous. But you know I used to take the A train at 2am, too.
The Mad-ness of Partners
I’ve been thinking a lot about the anger of partners.
I wonder sometimes about the correlation between anger & empowerment.
I’ve never been a plate-breaking type; I’ve never thrown someone’s stuff out a window. And I wonder, when I see the kind of rage that partners can kick up, what it is in their brains that allows them to go so out of control. I have a lot of anger; Betty sometimes says I’m one of the angriest people she’s ever met. But at some point in time, I found yelling and screaming at the injustice of it all was perfectly futile, so I (mostly) stopped doing it. That’s not to say I don’t rant – I’m a professional ranter, actually – but I stopped thinking that my ranting was going to change anything.
My mother always tells me that I spent more of my time convincing her of why I shouldn’t have to do more chores than it would have taken me to do them, and it strikes me that misplaced anger is a similar waste of time. If being angry or sad or screaming is not going to change the situation, then why keep doing those things?
But what I’ve noticed is the anger and sadness don’t satisfy people either. They stop being angry just at the thing that made them angry, and start spreading it around. In our case, we had to deal with an ex of Betty’s who not only targeted Betty, but me, and a friend of ours who introduced us, Betty’s parents, etc.
I’ve heard recently that one of the reasons therapists used to recommend divorce if one partner was transitioning is for fear the therapist, or doctor, might be sued by the angry partner. And while I can understand the urge of a partner who wants to sue a therapist for being “encouraging,” I don’t really understand the misplaced anger: the therapist didn’t cause the transsexualism.
A couple of weeks back I put up a post about having to decide what to do when you’re done crying, and sometimes I wonder if the crying and anger doesn’t continue for some people because they simply can’t face doing something, either because they don’t feel that they can do anything, or have generally felt unable to exert real power over their lives, or that they don’t feel up to following through on whatever decision they might make. That is, I wonder if they keep being angry and sad because the other emotion they’ll have to confront is outright fear.
JT LeRoy: Will the Real Tranny Please Stand Up?
I was recently asked a few questions by Ron Hogan (of Beatrice.com and GalleyCat.com) about the news that JT LeRoy is a sham.
He asked:
As a writer in a relationship with a transgendered person, what is your reaction? Have you and Betty ever wished you could simply send a “stand-in” to deal with all the hassles of going out in public, let alone the threat of attack? And what’s your take on “Leroy’s” taking up an identity which, for Betty and other transfolks, is a real day- to-day struggle and, apparently, using it as a cover for a pseudonym?
For that matter, I should ask: Did you have any awareness of/contact with JT Leroy prior to these revelations? If so, have your feelings about his writing/your acquaintance changed?
It turns out that JT LeRoy is not only not trans, but she was never a he in the first place. (NY Times, New York magazine, SF Chronicle).
“‘As a transgendered human, subject to attacks,’ the statement read, ‘I use stand-ins to protect my identity.’ In the past, JT Leroy has invoked transgenderism to explain confusion over his identity.”
I’m not sure if I’m more frustrated as a writer or as a transgender educator – probably a combination of both. That JT LeRoy used transness as an excuse for this sham just adds to the heap of misinformation about transpeople. The association of transness and ‘big fat liar’ – when transpeople are everyday accused of being deceitful, and often harmed as a result of that perceived deceit – is supremely irresponsible. I think once the dust settles, some of the money she collected from celebrities should go to organizations like NCTE and the IFGE – organizations that help diminish the myths surrounding transpeople and work on legislation that makes harming transfolk hate crimes.
Because of stuff like this (& the various negative portrayals of transpeople, in general) Betty and I don’t have the luxury of sending someone else in our stead. As talented, reasonable people, we feel a real need to go out there and present any kind of example that isn’t so negative.
As someone who writes about trans subjects, it’s even more frustrating. So many good books about transness don’t get light of day – no reviews in the Times, no reviews in magazines, etc – yet people can’t stop talking about JT LeRoy because of her transnes. Believe me, the irony isn’t lost on me.
But then there’s the history of women writers and pseudonyms, and for that I can’t really blame her for using any kind of “cover.” Being reminded of being a “woman novelist” or a “woman writer” is enough to make any woman who writes borrow whatever front she might in order to stop hearing that. “Helen Boyd” is a nom de plume, after all, and I chose it in order to protect my family from the kind of transphobia that JT LeRoy claims she was protecting herself from.
Does being trans mean you’re subject to attacks? It can. Especially for less priveleged transpeople, trans people of color and those lower on the economic scale. None of us feel especially safe, but you take the risks you have to in order to educate people as fast as you can.
JT LeRoy certainly didn’t do trans people at large any favors.