TERF fight down in the trenches

While engaged in both cultural and genital appropriation, Mr. George Metesky, NYC, demands to be allowed to march ALONGSIDE her new sisters

While engaged in both cultural and genital appropriation, Mr. George Metesky, NYC, demands to be allowed to march ALONGSIDE her new sisters

Sexually-addled males angwy with the real girls, who wouldn't let them join in all their girly games in Washington.

Transgender activists are upset that the women’s march over the weekend was not inclusive to biological men who identify as women, as the protest presented an “oppressive message” that having a “vagina is essential to womanhood.”
Saturday’s event to oppose the inauguration of Donald Trump was largely a “white cis women march,” with too many pictures of female reproductive organs and pink hats, according to trans women and “nonbinary” individuals interviewed by Mic.com.
A fight is brewing between “trans-exclusionary radical feminists,” or “TERFs,” and transwomen, according to the article, “How the Women’s March’s ‘genital-based’ feminism isolated the transgender community.”
The women’s march had an over-reliance on slogans and posters depicting gender norms, like using pink to represent women and girls, said some transgender activists who boycotted the march.
The “saturation of vagina-related messages and imagery,” such as a giant hand-knit uterus, “set the tone for a march that would focus acutely on genitalia at the expense of the transgender community,” writes Mic.com staff writer Marie Solis.
The article explained that transwomen are weary of “trans-exclusionary radical feminists.” “TERFs” are people who “equate womanhood with having a vagina” or feminists who “argue trans women are actually men in disguise trying to infiltrate their spaces.”
Mic.com also quoted a “nonbinary” individual—a person who does not identify with either male or female, has multiple gender identities, or a gender identity that changes over time, among other things—whose girlfriend is still a biological male.
“For 20-year-old Sam Forrey, a nonbinary student in Ohio, and their girlfriend Lilian McDaniel, who is trans, there had been other warning signs that the Women’s March might be a dangerous space for them,” according to the article.
The couple was upset by the “genital-based womanhood” espoused by the women’s march.
“Since legally McDaniel’s sex is still male, she worried that if she were to be arrested she would be placed in a men’s jail, a concern she said always lingers at the back of her mind,” according to the article. “McDaniel said she’d planned on attending the march despite these fears—until she saw that people were using it as an excuse to invoke what she called ‘genital-based’ womanhood.”
“I think it ended up being a white cis women march,” McDaniel said.
Forrey added that the march—focusing too much on genitals—represented a “rigid, Western concept of gender.”
“This two-gender system, of course, is excluding of Forrey, too,” Solis wrote.

Perhaps the best thing about Trump's election is that we can sit back and enjoy stories like this without having to worry that we're seeing the next constitutional right being presented by the lunatic fringe.

And a private sale on Jofran

5 Joran Lane

5 Joran Lane

5 Jofran Lane has sold via in-house agency sale for $3,237,500 million, a decent premium from its 2013 sale price of $2.725. The seller probably did well here; she didn't have to expose her house to the full market, which might very well have valued it at a bit less, and she didn't have to endure strangers tracking winter mud over her carpets.

Of course, sometimes bringing a house onto the MLS results in a higher sale price than that suggested by the owner's agent but in this case, I think the seller came out just fine, and if the buyer's happy, well that's nice too. 

2013 listing info

2013 listing info

Screen Shot 2017-01-23 at 5.19.08 PM.png
Screen Shot 2017-01-23 at 5.19.29 PM.png

Disposable weekender?

3 Little Cove Place

3 Little Cove Place

3 Little Cove Place, Old Greenwich, has sold for $2.175 million. Owners paid $2.150 for it in 2003 and renovated, so no money maker here, but they did get 14 years of enjoyment from it, and some close up looks at Irene and Sandy. What price, excitement?

In fact, I think this was a perfectly sensible purchase for someone who's aware of the risk of living in a coastal flood zone and has the financial wherewithal to deal with what may come (and go). It's a great neighborhood, 

And for the perfect house-warming gift ....

And for the perfect house-warming gift ....

The activity's still all in the low end

6 Stallion Trail

6 Stallion Trail

While the death of the Greenwich real estate market may have been exaggerated, what life it has is mostly centered around the bottom quintile of the price range. Case in point is today's sole pending contract (so far), 6 Stallion Trail, asking $1.295 million. Certainly no one's idea of the perfect street, and 1980s architecture hasn't improved since it was first unleashed on the world, but at this price, it's no surprise that it's gone so quickly after the owner gave up and dropped to this price.

He paid $850,000 for it in 1990, and has had it on the market since 2013, when it debuted at the relatively modest price of $1.750 million; even that proved too high for this location, this house, but $1.295? Sure