TeeYiYi
TeeYiYi's JournalSo, in the final analysis, Michael Brown was murdered for jaywalking...
Where's the toxicology report on Darren Wilson? Like everything else surrounding this case, initial reports have been withheld while the corrupt Missouri 'justice system' takes 2+ months to craft a narrative.
The family had their own autopsy of Michael Brown's body performed which disputes the original "official" autopsy report.
As described by multiple witnesses to the murder, the independent autopsy suggests that Michael Brown died as a result of the "kill shot" to the top of his head after he was already on the ground.
By Taylor Wofford
Filed: 8/18/14 at 1:27 PM | Updated: 8/18/14 at 1:29 PM
An independent, preliminary autopsy performed on the body of Michael Brown shows that the 18-year-old was shot “at least six times,” according to Dr. Michael M. Baden, formerly the chief medical examiner for the City of New York, one of two experts who performed the autopsy.
<snip>
Dr. Baden and Prof. Parcells said the two shots to the head were probably the last two shots fired. All of the shots, with the exception of the one to the top of the head, were survivable, Dr. Baden said. An attorney for Brown’s family described the shot to the top of the head as “the kill-shot.”
The autopsy did not reveal signs of a struggle, Dr. Baden said, which casts doubt on an earlier statement by police that a struggle between Brown and Wilson precipitated Brown’s shooting. Police have said Brown forced his way inside Wilson’s cruiser, where Wilson shot at Brown for the first time.
Dr. Baden said he found no gunpowder residue on Brown’s skin, which could mean that the muzzle of Wilson’s gun was “at least one or two feet away” from Brown when he was shot. However, Dr. Baden was adamant that he would need to examine Brown’s clothing for gunpowder residue to make a conclusive finding.
Brown’s clothing was not available for Dr. Baden and Prof. Parcells to examine, Baden said, though it was almost certainly examined during Brown’s first autopsy performed by the St. Louis County Medical Examiner. If no gunpowder residue was found on Brown’s clothing during the first autopsy, it will likely throw the Ferguson PD’s timeline of events into question.
http://www.newsweek.com/what-we-learned-michael-browns-autopsy-265247
TYY
They ARE all transgender…
You might want to investigate the definition of "transgender."
That was the point of the photo essay on butch women that you linked to; tombois, diesel dykes, drag kings, he-shes, etc. All labels for masculine women whose gender identity and outward expression doesn't match the genetic sex they were assigned at birth; nor does it match society's opinion of what they should look like, based on traditional binary gender roles and stereotypes.
"an homage to the bull-daggers and female husbands before me, and to the young studs, gender queers and bois who continue to bloom into the present."
http://www.policymic.com/articles/86527/9-portraits-of-butch-women-proving-masculinity-is-a-trait-not-a-gender
I suggested that a few of them might actually be in the process of transitioning, which is pretty common in the butch lesbian community.
"I would even go so far as to guess that a few of them are in the process of transitioning, hormonally and/or surgically"
I based my opinion on the women who have obviously got their breasts bound and at least one who is likely taking steroids. Another looks like she may have had a breast reduction. This is all clearly conjecture, based on personal experience, since the information provided is inadequate to confirm or deny my suggestion.
Nowhere did I say that all of these women are in the process of transitioning through surgical or hormonal means.
You seem to be saying that you're comfortable with butch women as long as they're not taking hormones or considering sexual reassignment surgery. That's a pretty tall order and not really fair to these women that you say you admire. Their inner identity struggles are outside your purview.
The diversity of butch women is vast and covers a broad spectrum. This photo project is an attempt to make masculine women a little less scary to straight people while reaffirming their right to exist within the gay community. Maybe they'll stop feeling the need to alter their bodies when society, as a whole, can begin to accept them for who they are. Sadly, that day is a long way off.
TYY
Well, MadrasT…
…as someone who also identifies as genderqueer, I find myself fascinated that you would openly defend this charade by redqueen. The very headline challenges the concept of transgender by calling it a trait. Redqueen even goes so far as to refer to gender issues as "bullcrap" on iverglas' blog:
Not even in the same universe.
Shouldn't we dismantle patriarchy and eliminate the 'gender' bullcrap first, and *then* address the issues resulting from whatever it is that makes people think they were born with the wrong sex organs?
http://members.boardhost.com/duckies/msg/1338907811.html
So, really, could redqueen's disdain for transgender issues be any more transparent? But let's get back to you, MadrasT.
You refer to these butch women as members of your tribe and yet I'm willing to bet money that every single one of them is sexually attracted to women; something that makes them a little less 'your tribe' since you sleep with men.
I would even go so far as to guess that a few of them are in the process of transitioning, hormonally and/or surgically; something that you don't personally approve of, do you, MadrasT?
In fact, you believe that transgender people who opt for hormones and/or surgery have psychological problems. Something "your tribe" would probably throw you off the island for, if they heard you say it out loud.
"Shouldn't we dismantle patriarchy and eliminate the 'gender' bullcrap first, and *then* address the issues resulting from whatever it is that makes people think they were born with the wrong sex organs?"
Yes a thousand times yes.
This train is moving too far, too fast.
I think a huge part of "transgender" issues are psychological.
Body dysphoria is a psychological problem, not a medical problem to be "corrected" with surgery and hormones.
As inveigle has said, if people want to adopt social gender roles that they think belong to the "opposite" sex, have a party. I think it is COOL!
But when it gets to physically altering your body, I start to have big problems with it.
And then to talk about doing it to CHILDREN?
Makes me extremely uncomfortable. Extremely.
http://members.boardhost.com/duckies/msg/1338908111.html
~and~
I have always been a vocal, active supporter of "transgender rights" because I passionately support everyone having the freedom to break free from societally imposed gender roles.
I was basically raised nongendered and always did whatever the hell I wanted to do, and it suits me fine.
So I think everyone should do whatever the hell suits them, with no regard to what sex they are.
But this business of transgender people taking hormones and undergoing surgeries to alter their bodies to fit what they think the gender in their head is... I have always felt queasy about that.
Now I have decided I am dead set against it.
I think actual females getting breast implants and labia enhancing surgeries and lip enhancements is beyond f*cking ridiculous.
So there is no way I can support people taking drugs and mutilating their bodies to fit some notion of being "the wrong sex".
I am still thinking about this. My position evolves over time.
Maybe my idea that "passionately supporting everyone having the freedom to break free from societally imposed gender roles" just means I am (gasp) an actual feminist, but never knew it???
http://members.boardhost.com/duckies/msg/1338920057.html
Kinda' makes me question your spot under the transgender umbrella. Quite frankly, I'm ready to take your umbrella away.
So, let's get back to the purpose behind posting pictures of butch women in various stages of transgender transition, in the HoF group. Why do YOU think she posted it , "Misstee?"
I agree with you, that gender "expression" is not a "fucking joke" or "a source of mindless entertainment." You're actually making my point for me.
Maybe you can help me to understand why two people who have serious issues with the very definition of transgender, would feel that it would be copacetic to post this OP; and just maybe, while you're at it, you can explain how it fits within the HoF Statement of Purpose.
Everyone knows that the popcorn smilie means you're waiting to see how a thread is going to roll out, before commenting. In fact, I waited almost 6 hours for clarification.
After reading some of the comments at DUckies, I think my comparison to LOLcats is a perfect fit. It was never meant as anything more than a curiosity piece.
TYY
What is your interest…
…in "what a (lesbian looks) like now?" As a gay woman, I was unclear as to the intent behind your post; multiple images of genderqueer women, any one of whom could be me.
Your only explanation for posting a photo array of butch women pertains to a quote from the article, that you claimed would "reinforce the hierarchical structure of patriarchy." I expected to see a constructive discussion regarding your claim. Giving you the benefit of the doubt, I waited to see if your post would begin to make sense.
Quite honestly, redqueen, I was hoping that your OP came from a place of sincerity and sensitivity. Now, after reading your vicious response to me, I realize that was not the case. Your hit and run, image-heavy curiosity piece about butch women appears to be nothing more than the HOF version of 'Sunday LOLcats.'
TYY
redqueen…
...it appears that you've abandoned your OP…
…a blog exposé that challenges lesbian masculine gender identity by referring to it as simply a 'trait,' replete with photographs and stereotypes; whitewashed to appeal to "a broader, heteronormative audience" and posted smack dab in the middle of HOF. A bold move.
I was hoping that in your subsequent contributions to this thread, you might shed light on the intent behind posting a 'butch women' photo essay in HOF and highlight how it falls within the HOF statement of purpose.
As it stands, this OP feels more like an exercise in patronizing voyeurism than a legitimate opportunity for feminist discussion as it relates to the history of feminism.
I believe you when you say that you love the images you posted. Maybe you could elaborate on the 'why' of that proclamation.
You also state that "aggressive" and "dominant" are words that have been posited as replacement words for "butch." Perhaps you could weigh in on where this supposed suggestion is coming from and whether or not anyone is taking it seriously.
To reiterate, you posted a mouthful and then left it to languish. If there's a point to your OP, I wish you'd expound on it.
TYY
To all who answered my post…
Thank you.
My biggest concern was that this woman was unarmed. She also had a baby in her car which, in my mind, mitigates her suggested intent. The fact that the front end of her car is undamaged gives me pause over the barricade allegations.
Lots of people try to run from cops every day. I don't see that as a license to kill the fleeing perp. I'll be curious to see the dash cam video of the "80 mph" chase.
And finally, to chalk this up to her "mental health" is unfair. Her mental health doesn't explain why a group of cops mowed down an unarmed woman with a baby in her car.
Thanks again, to all who replied. I do appreciate your posts.
TYY
I'll weigh in on this one...
...because I can...and because I'm bored...and it's Friday, and...
The monthly photography 'contest' requires input from the majority of du members and not just members of the photography forum. Otherwise, ...what a circle jerk that would be. 
I think GD gets the biggest cross section of DU viewers outside of meta... 
(gratuitous shrug smiley)
If you have the time and inclination to weigh in each month, you should do so. If not, then don't click; just hide thread and move on.
Yay Friday! (gratuitous exclamation point)
TYY
Profile Information
Member since: 2002Number of posts: 8,028
