No, it was to align her body with her internal gender identity. And she had multiple surgical procedures, at least 3 of which I have documentation describing.
I could write a few thousand more words, but…no.
Threads like this are why I love the Dope. An obscure but interesting question, quickly, wittily and comprehensively answered. Well done, all.
Yes; but,
- It may not have been her woody
- She appears to be able, legally, to run her hands over somebody else’s woody without going to jail. Which, may have been the whole point.
- The look on her face says it all.
I only have one word, tho:
Whooshed!
Somebody already tried this pun in post 17. It wasn’t very funny then, it is less funny the second time around.
- The car in the photo isn’t a woody.
- Making jokes about transsexuals isn’t really very funny. Unless they are REALLY good jokes.
- running coach posted a link to Getty Images, where we learn the photo shows “Christine Jorgensen as she looks over her damaged auto that was involved in a 3 car accident at the above location. One person was injured.” So, yes that is definitely her car. If it were a woody, it would be her woody, but it isn’t a woody, it is a Country Sedan not a Country Squire.
We’ve been around this before, I believe. You have to learn how to take things as jokes.
I’m sorry for apparently upsetting you, but this is a text-based medium, and you have to learn to meet people halfway.
Without hitting their cars as you arrive.
I don’t have to “learn” anything of the sort when someone hijacks a GQ thread to make a primary-school-level genital joke in poor taste about a cultural icon of my people.
If you can make the joke, I can make a factual response. GQ, yo.
Wonder how the occupants fared in the accident? No seatbelts and all
I think that you are too, too attached to something here, as yet undefined. You should chill.
A. I wasn’t trying to break the “Woody Wall” I was adding to it.
B. No, you are wrong; it is funnier the second time around.
The moment GQ takes “cultural icons” totally seriously is the moment I leave this place and go back to Usenet.
The Sacred Chao goes Mu!
I thought fencers were your people. At least that’s my impression.
Now it is my turn to plead miscommunication due to text based medium: that apparently came out more strident than I had intended,
I disagree with you about being funnier the second time.
IF the car in the photo were a Country Squire, then the woody jokes would be juvenile, but we all are a little juvenile sometimes. It is good to let your inner 12-year-old come out and play.
But it isn’t, and that just makes them go clunk.
Derleth tried it, and at least elicited a smile. “I can tell you were trying to make a joke there, pity it didn’t work.” But to keep trying to build something funny on what has been show to be a damaged foundation is folly.
In the name of good childish jokes everywhere, please stop making them look stupid. 
“One person was injured” - Getty Images.
The short of it is, you read far, far too much into my first response to you. There wasn’t any upsetness or anything, I was being straight and factual correcting your post.
Yes I can actually take a joke. Your joke didn’t “upset” me, it simply just wasn’t funny. Not funny != upset.
'56 and '57 (and really, '55-'58) looked similar enough, the big difference was in tailfins and headlights. But yeah I’ll add another vote for '57, the curve of the trim was probably slightly different in '56. edit: I only once read about the year-by-year trim differences for '55-'57 Chevy, my passion is rather later Fords.
If it was a Chevy or a '49-'51 Ford I could pull out an issue of Hot Rod magazine from the '90s and nail it down to the month.
Too slow on the edit: I know it’s a '56 of '57 out of Dearborn from the chrome line down the side, the badge told me it was a Ford and not a Mercury.
