A lot of the blogs I'm finding that see you to be colonizing IS are also seriously transmisogynistic so it forces me to wonder just how much credibility they have overall if they're willing to exhibit so much bigotry (sort of an object lesson in how letting hate and insults into your arguments kills credibility, no?). They also think you and your peers (your methodology, your approach, your arbitrary lines) represent all transsexuals, which really puts them on the same level as you in credibility. It would be hypocritical to present them as evidence after decrying your poor evidence and methods. XD

So far, it looks as though those two blog sources that you provided are simply indifferent that you use the NI model and do not consider you IS in any way. The ISNA also separates TS (as well as TG) from association with IS. Of course, this makes me wonder what they think of some of your peers (or you, depending) saying "an intersexed brain condition". I'm guessing problems are avoided there by leaving the IS terminology in the NI model only within the brain condition part?

Anyways, until I can sort out genuine complaints from the blatant trans hate (and painting all transsexuals with the same brush, much like how you do with the TG folk) spilling out of those IS blogs that don't like the NI model of transsexuality, I'm going to drop that point on the IS community not appreciating it. If there arises a time as I find genuine complaints not tainted by bigotry in those blogs, or find good representatives that aren't transmisogynistic, I will bring it back up then.

Let it not be said I'm unreasonable or unfair. *nods*