MgS: I Was Afraid This Might Happen (Guest Post)
Bill “Anal Warts” Whatcott is better known for the anti-gay fliers he distributed in Saskatchewan that had him fined by the Human Rights Tribunal, later overturned, and now heading to the Supreme Court (these fliers may be similar to the “anal warts” fliers he distributed in Edmonton, hence the nickname). Whatcott is a former addict and male prostitute who then had a religious experience that led him to be sometimes even too fringe for the far right. Why is it that the most anti-gay folks inevitably turn out to be gay?
At The Cracked Crystal Ball II, MgS notes that Whatcott is trying to connect Col. Williams’ horrific crimes to transgender people as justification for opposing Bill C-389. The rest of his article comprises of the Lifesite.ca article debunked yesterday, a Campaign Life Coalition mailing and a Christianity Today article from about a year ago (I think). MgS has been gracious enough to let me crosspost that here.
Before I post it, I’d also like to point to editorial writers that were better able to understand the difference between transgenderism and predatory behaviour, such as Antonia Zerbisias’ “Forced Entry,” which read:
The point is not the underwear. The point is that it belonged to a girl or woman who wore it and kept it in her dresser drawer. To break into the house, the bedroom, the dresser drawer of a girl or woman, try on her underwear and spend hours taking pictures of yourself wearing it while masturbating isn’t a fetish, it’s a VIOLATION of the personal space and the sexualized belongings of the girl or woman. To masturbate all over her bedroom is a VIOLATION. To tie her up and take pictures of her while masturbating and taking pictures is a VIOLATION. To do the same and then kill her is a VIOLATION. This is escalating predatory behaviour, not fetishism.
Sabina Becker also added:
Fetishists are rarely violent. Many are quite odd, but this is beside the point; their oddity generally harms no one. They tend to respect the dignity of others.
Predators are increasingly violent. Often they do not stand out as odd on first glance; their cultivated façade of normality IS the point. It enables them to escalate their crimes until they die or are caught, whichever comes first.
So, we can see that a fetishist ≠ a predator. If anything, they are diametrically opposed.
In my travels through the web this afternoon, I found that one of Canada’s more notorious anti-gay extremists has begun associating the images of Colonel Williams with transgender people as a whole by adding Williams’ pictures to his posts on Bill C-389.
Okay, Whatcott’s off his rocker to begin with – it’s not like he has a track record of sane and reasonable public utterances. That’s not the issue here – it’s the linking of a violent psychopath’s actions to transgender people as a whole. Unfortunately, the media’s coverage of the Williams court proceedings was so lurid and vivid that it is hardly surprising that Canada’s wingnuts would pick up on this as a reason to fight against Bill C-389. (Mercedes has a great summary of what Bill C-389 is really about on her blog)
However, let’s be clear about one thing – Col. Williams is closer to a rapist than he is to the broad spectrum of people who are transgender.
Yes, there are aspects of Williams’ crimes which involve cross dressing, but most important is that those crimes ultimately involve control and violence aimed at their victims. This is not typical of transgender people in any way shape or form.
The media has unfortunately published the most lurid pictures of Col. Williams, and in doing so given those who are most hostile to transgender people as a whole another club to use against that population.
Even if Col. Williams was a closet crossdresser before he started on his crime spree, he hardly stands as a representative of crossdressers – the vast majority of whom are perfectly peaceful people who never commit a violent crime of any sort. Col. Williams turned down a path to becoming a violent man. We may never know precisely what led him to that place, but it is unlikely that it had anything to do with crossdressing.
(as an aside, there are plenty of serial murderers out there who got some kind of sexual thrill out the underwear of their victims … they are still serial killers – and as such live in a class all of their own)