This is my second entry this morning. I typically don’t like to do more than one, but this morning has been particularly “interesting”.
I thought my discussion with Rover and his crew this morning was as respectful as could be expected. I realized that most of the people who listen to him probably think like he does (which is scary in and of itself) but I felt compelled to do it anyway. I have no problem standing up and defending the things I believe, even when surrounded by those who believe otherwise.
I have this thing called a “job” and I’ve been in meetings all morning. I came back to check email before lunch and found some “interesting” stuff in my in box.
I hope these things aren’t representative of most of Rover’s audience. Anyways, I’m happy to share a sample. Here’s one:
ROVER WAS RIGHT, YOU SET THE BAR FOR WHAT PPL EXPECT A HE/SHE TO LOOK LIKE. VERY UNNATURAL AND UGLY AS HELL, HOW THE HELL COULD YOU LET SOMEONE CUT YOUR BALLS OFF? YOU MUST NOT HAVE BEEN A REAL MAN TO START WITH.YOU SOUNDED LIKE A RETARDED ASS CLOWN ON THE RADIO TODAY, YA BETTER GO BACK TO SCHOOL AND GET IT RIGHT.
CHUCK
Hmmmmm. Thanks, Chuck, for sharing. Just so you know, I was going to put your email address on here so others can reply to you – you might make some interesting new pen-pals - but I didn’t want to over-stress your writing abilities with having to write an intellligent response.
I got another one who apparently disagrees with Chuck. He said:
holy crap ur smoking hott!!
That one made me smile.
The comments on this morning’s post are interesting, too. Here’s one:
While I know that the guy murdering the man for blowing him was way overblown, no one can blame him for being angry. If you think the guy was wrong for being pissed off after finding out it was a Mutant Freak was sucking him, you are an idiot who no longer is allowed to have an opinion.
And, I got several that expressed opinions different than mine in a more constructive, thoughtful way. They don’t resort to name-calling, or judgement, or other provocative language. I appreciate that. As far as I’m concerned, that’s the way that having a difference of opinion is supposed to be.
Some are saying that Rover isn’t trying to justify or condone Angie’s murder. If I can get a hold of the audio from a couple of days ago – that will speak for itself.
Anyway, I need to get back to work. As I say, it has been an “interesting” morning.
Donna:
You have to admit, Rover was VERY respectful of you today (although he vehemently disagreed with some of what you said), he didn’t attack you or call you a freak and let you speak your mind. People on this blog will tend to agree with you because they’re in your peer group. But I think the public at large would side closer to Rover’s opinion.
Kudos to you for calling and kudos to him for putting you on, it was very entertaining. I just hope a witch hunt doesn’t ensue, from either RMG fans attacking you or your group attack him. I thought it was very civil this morning.
Donna -
I find it interesting that there’s all this verbage like “your side” and “our side” – especially from people who appear to believe they are “fair minded”. Your peer group – wow! I’m proud to be part of your “peer” group – although I’m not transgendered. Sometimes those who are ignorant and bigoted come out lashing when they see themselves in the mirror – they don’t like what they see but they don’t know how to change – or they won’t change. Thanks, Donna, for your vision and your voice!
Donna,
First and foremost you are a very beautiful woman. I myself was listening to RMG this morning and I personally was offended by his remarks. Good luck to you and have a great day.
[...] on the air with Rover during his morning show, and she has posts up on her conversation here and here. Read freeper style comments by Rover listeners here. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~As I’m writing this [...]
Hi Donna.
I am on the west coast so I have no knowlege of your ‘Rover show’. I can imagine though, as we have similar shock jocks and their juvenile antics here too. The big problem is these stooges are doing what they can to keep their paychecks coming, and their fans take their stooge spew as gospel.
Thank you for your most appropriate stand.
However, the type of murders like Angie’s and Gwen’s are becoming all too frequent. I seriously wonder if disclosure very early in the relationship might have saved their lives. It probably would cost them a date, but not their lives. Disclosure would also give their dates a chance to respond, hopefully honestly.
Chrissy
Someone said you’re “smoking hott?” Hummmm. He might have a different opinion if he met you in person. (giggle) Just having a little fun with you. Can’t let you get a swelled head . . . again.
On a serious note, the radio show draws those in who have the same lack of intelligence as the crew. I thought of writing them, but they are about as much importance in the scheme of things as the soiled cat litter in Aragorn’s litter box. I’m happy you made the attempt to educate them, but I’m sorry you had to get responds like you did.
Tell you what, though. Send my Chuck’s address. Like a cat, I’d love to play with the rat before squashing him.
I was listening to the show this morning. I thougth both parties we’re very respectful of each other. I would tend to agree with Rover on his thoughts. Not as strong, but I know if I thought a lady was a lady, and found out she was a man or had a penis I would really feel disrespected and very angry. To me what god created us is what we are. A person with a penis is NOT a female. I didn’t really understand your point saying if someone wants to be something then they are. I’m pretty sure you haven’t listened to his talk show before, he usually gets really harsh with his guest who disagrees with him. I thought they all we’re very respectful. If people do not like what he says it’s easier to turn off the radio then go to the trouble of writing and trying ot get him off the radio. Just like Howard Stern. He is a lot worse than Rover.
They seem to be saying that Angie deserved to die because she committed the crime of being attractive to her murderer (also the audacity of giving him an orgasm).
We don’t know what happened that night. The murderer could have been hunting for someone like Angie. It could have been his plan all along to rob her and kill her. She could have disclosed everything before the whole date.
The problem is the only persons word we have to go on is the one who committed the murder and stole a car. There can’t be another side of the story because she didn’t survive.
Apparently, to some, the price of being attractive is death.
It’s not about being attractive. It’s about concealing your true identity. I have no problem with what people do with their lives. It’s theirs to live, but say a guy is a girl just because he wears girls clothes and says he is doesn’t make it so. Noone deserves to die outside of the law.
You are right no way for anyone to know what really happened. With a good lawyer he will probably get off. Which shows with money you can get away with almost anything in this world.
John,
I don’t really want to go over this in the context of your religious beliefs because I don’t believe they’re relevant here. I just want to point a few things out about Angie’s murder:
* The trans panic defense that Andrade used is historically successful in getting murderers off the hook (or at least a slap on the wrist). Recently, one man who was given such a light slap on the wrist after murdering a trans woman two years ago, was walking the streets just this past month, and murdered his two-year old daughter. The man was out on a $20,000 bail despite having murdered a woman. He beat his daughter to death over potty training. You can read about it here.
* Because the trans panic defense historically works, then all Andrade is likely to give is his trans panic defense. So, he could be lying through his teeth. He could have known that she was trans. There may not have been a blow job.
* Most trans women are savvy enough to disclose, but that doesn’t stop men from killing them. The man who murdered Chanelle Pickett plead trans panic, but he’d been having sex with her for months before he got around to strangling her.
* There’s no excuse for murdering someone. Ever. Seriously, even if Angie did lie and Andrade’s story is the whole truth,
1) Andrade had no business grabbing for Angie’s genitalia. That’s sexual assault against men or women.
2) Andrade’s actions were not panicked. He beat her head in with the fire extinguisher, proceeded to rifle through her belongings, steal her credit cards, her car keys, her cell phone…and when she started to stir, he attacked her again. That’s a murder from hate, not anger, not surprise, not panic.
That’s why they’re trying him for first degree murder, identity theft, and grand theft auto.
40 years ago in elementary school, my biology teacher said about chromosomes and gender “men are XY and women are XX” and then went on explaining that there was nothing in between.
Well, it turns out that even by that time he was kinda outdated; there is a lot more than the “two” ends.
Just to keep it simple for the simple minds I can cite from memory the XXY (Klinefelter) syndrome, the X0 or X- syndrome, and the androgen insensitivity condition. For instance, those affected by the XXY may be considered males (because of the Y chromosome) but they may develop female characteristics (like breast development). And I could talk about evidence pointing out to the neurological basis for gender identity disorder but I will just give a link to a academic journal,
http://jcem.endojournals.org/cgi/content/abstract/85/5/2034
Bottom line: the “binary” world does not exist.
I will conclude with this: the issue goes well beyond the choice of pronouns. There is something deeper and, to my view incontrovertible fact. Angie was a human being and as such her dignity is out of the question. No sense of “humiliation”, “betrayal” or whatever will ever justify taking someone’s life.
For those “justifying” her murderer, your task is explain why those who do not conform to “your binary world” have to be eliminated, segregated, whatever. In other words, you should elaborate why “they” do not have dignity as human beings. Better yet, you may try explaining why “they” are not human beings, and why “you” are human beings.
A little help: read this http://frank.mtsu.edu/~baustin/nurmlaw2.html
and you’ll be in good hands.
P
Hi Donna,I am just wondering how on earth can a radio show stay on air with such a nasty biggoted attitude I would have thought if you were insighting violence you would be taken off the air imediatley and the radio station management and advertisers need to look at them selves also,I can sympothise a little with someone who maybe caught by surprise in a compromising situation with Transgendered person who has not been completley honest but seriously to condone murdering someone is bloody ridiculous ans down right scary actually I thought society was improving with there attitude to GLBT society and it most likely is but people like this will allways make it difficult,oooh they make angry,but more determined to be myself,you are a great person to have in our corner Donna keep up the fantastic work.
Leah M.[Australian Transgendered and bloody proud to be]
This has totally blown out of proportion. Most of you did not hear the show and have no, none, zero grounds for judgment and or interpretation of what Rover said. The discussion started with the Rover disagreeing that this was a hate crime. The victim was not sought out for his/her differences he/she was sought out for sexual misrepresentation. Then one person asked Rover what’s he’d do in the situation and he said he’d respond much the same way. He said that he would aqquit the murder charges as they were based on the presumption of this being a hate crime. Then they goofed around about what do you call transgendered people? Rover has stated that he is against “hate” crimes in the past because a crime is a crime regardless of the victim’s race/gender/religion. Donna’s original point in her call was about the disrespect of the goofing on what to call transgendered people.