Sunday, 16 March 2008

Gilding the Lilly

Humans have rights. The right to privacy, for example. The right, absent evidence that they would harm their children, to see those children. The right to marry in the first place. The right not to be made figures of public scorn and derision, to be called "it" and have their very humanity denied.

Others don't have those rights. The contrast can be seen clearly at http://clipsyndicate.com/publish/video/541159?wpid=1904



From USA Today OnLine
http://blogs.usatoday.com/ondeadline/2008/03/woman-goes-to-c.html
Jennifer Jack says she didn't realize that her ex-husband, Andrew Mireles, was a woman until after their marriage ended, according to KRIV-TV.

"It's actually a very bizarre set of facts. There's no way around that," attorney London O'Dowd tells Fox News Channel.

He says Jack was 16 when she met the 21-year-old Mireles.

"He, and with the help of his family, were able to convince her and her family and everyone around her them that she was a he," the lawyer says.

O'Dowd says his client learned the truth about her ex-husband, who has not undergone a sex-change operation, when she came across a yearbook photo of Phyllis Ann Mireles.

Mireles, however, claims that he told his wife the truth about 18 months into their relationship.

"We talked about it, discussed it and then we decided to stay together ... she decided to stay with me," Mireles tells the local Fox affiliate.

Either way, now that a judge has nullified their marriage, Jack wants the court to order Mireles to stay away from the two children they were raising
There's more (unconfirmed) detail from a (supposed) family member in the comments section (spelling as in the original)
I knew Andrew/Phyllis for 10 years I never once suspected he was a female. Andrew is a pathological liar and has carried this lie on for half his life. As far as the sex he claimed he was a hermaphidite (which was never shared with the family for privacy)and was embarassed for anyone to see him nude. He always wore a shirt and boxers and she was not allowed to touch him.
...
She did have one indiscretion during a brief seperation before they married and never thought the 1st child was anyone but Andrew's. The second child was conceived by insemination since she was unable to get pregnant. Well it would help if Andrew had all the male parts! The sperm was bought over the internet and the child was created in their home.
...
Andrew is a convicted felon for buglarizing a former employer and is on parole. His parole can be revolked now for falsifying State documents (Marriage License). Yes he served his time in a male detetion facility.
...
His family even stood at the wedding and let it go on knowing he was truly a girl. That is sick in its own way!
The complainant is an innocent flower not intimately (so to speak) familiar with male anatomy. Despite her getting pregnant before marriage, by a man not her husband. It was not having sex, it was an indiscretion. Right...

She didn't have to gild the lilly, Even if Andrew had had his Birth Certificate changed, as is possible in some states after "top surgery", even if he'd had the $100,000 "bottom surgery", the one with the 30% success rate (and so *not* required for gender recognition) , a Texas court would still have anulled the marriage. Even if the ex-wife was told all the details.

From the Court Decision in Kantaras vs Kantaras:
"Courts in Ohio, Kansas, Texas, and New York have addressed issues involving the marriage of a postoperative transsexual person, and in all cases the courts have invalidated or refused to allow the marriage on the grounds that it violated state statutes or public policy.
...
We agree with the Kansas, Ohio, and Texas courts in their understanding of the common meaning of male and female, as those terms are used statutorily, to refer to immutable traits determined at birth.
...
Our holding that the marriage is void ab initio does not take into consideration the best interests of the children involved in this case. While we recognize that the trial judge went to great lengths to determine the best interests of the children, the issue of deciding primary residential custody was dependent on the trial court's conclusion that the marriage was valid."

Source : http://www.jenburke.com/2005/02/kantaras-v-kantaras.html

Let's see... if the comment isn't bogus, this guy has served time in a male correctional facility, was married in front of his own family, and yet is still "Really a GIRL!!!!!!!!! (Shock Horror)". And HIS wife only just found out after the divorce, and two pregnancies. One of which she really, truly thought was due to him, honest.

Of course, under normal circumstances, a guy whose fiance was pregnant by another man might be less understanding when it came to actually getting married. But sometimes love really is blind. And you might expect a guy who was willing to bring up another man's child as his own might get some respect.

I'll leave aside the "buying sperm over the Internet" bit. I'm not buying it, anyway. So to speak.

So he did it twice. Now by his own admission, he didn't reveal his medical past until wayyy too late, but you can see why he might have thought a woman so evidently experienced at a young age when it came to sex might actually know that his apparatus wasn't the standard factory model on his wedding night. Assuming she waited that long, but that's a safe assumption, innocent lass as she is, honest as the day is long.

But divorce - and the usual child support - wasn't good enough for her, when things went sour. No, in order to really put the boot in, she needed to cut off his visitation rights (being unable to cut anything else off), and send him to jail for "falsifying state documents" or whatever.

But she's Human, so it's her right to do that. And the media and court system will gladly oblige. And leave two small children, children without a father, in her tender care.

I'm glad I live in Australia. Where all people are humans, not just some, and have rights.

2 comments:

Stellewriter said...

Every ten minutes a child is born, 1/2500, in which the doctor cannot determine the sex, or gender. These children are Intersex; they are born into a life of not male or female. Likewise in similar fashion the Transsexual is identified with a Bioneurological congenital condition they too are locked into something not quite so clearly defined as male, or female. The best we can do is live as close to what we seem to believe we are. That may preclude the wants, and often ignorant and bigoted beliefs of others. In what case do we ignore this issue and abandon the children who now cannot hide? How can anyone continue in hate and prejudice so as to deny simple equality and justice? It is either time for change and understanding, or simply wheedle out the transgender element as inhuman and adopt the final solution as Hitler visualized? Not an easy thing to resolve, but one that is present and will not go away.

Yet, the question that stands, is one for which no one seems to want to address. If the court says a transitioned person’s marriage is not acceptable, then would the same court allow same sex marriages under the same definitions? (i.e. transitioned male - FtM to genetic male, or transitioned female MtF to natal woman) Can the courts have it both ways and an individual be denied any hope of existence as a human being?

Set aside the bizarre and oddities of the story spoken of here, what about me? Can I remarry my spouse now that I am transitioned? What are my options? I have none! I guess it is, in fact, the plan to eradicate the Transsexuals and Intersex, rather than recognize special needs. The final solution is a reality! We only have to make abortions mandatory for all who are not included in the defined social binary.

Zoe Brain said...

It's easy to give in to despair sometimes, when confronted with that kind of attitude.

Except...

Those of us our age who were capable of giving in have already done so, and are no longer with us. Like it or not, when it comes to you and I,"I can see she is made of sterner stuff!" to quote Cardinal Fang.

My son was born Intersexed.

My activism isn't altruistic, it's personal, you see. Not for me, but for my child.

If anyone actually tries the Endlosung on us, they won't find it easy. My main worry in that eventuality is preventing collateral damage. I don't consider that possibility very likely though.

Our current battle is for hearts and minds, and the coming year will be more important than most.

Our profile has been raised in the US recently. That means we will take greater casualties - currently running at confirmed transphobic 1 murder per 8 days, three times last year's rate. It may continue to increase.

It's going to be a very bad Transgender Day of Remembrance this November. I think we've already exceeded last year's figure, and it's only March.