Talk:Miriam Rivera

Miriam is the Transsexual Porn Star Victoria from Bob's Tgirls

As of this writing you can see Miriam on the front page of Bob's Tgirls:

http://www.bobstgirls.com

She's the girl with the black hair and black minidress. Just in case the above page changes, you can see an archived version of it below:

http://web.archive.org/web/20050304030657/http://www.bobstgirls.com/

Miriam did her first photoshoot for Bob's Tgirls. She also did three videos for Androgeny. She goes by the name Victoria when doing porn (just Victoria, no last name).

On Bob's below Yahoo! group you can read a message where Bob, the owner of Bob's Tgirls (and also a photographer for his site), says that the transsexual porn star Victoria and Miriam (from There's Something About Miriam) are the same person:

From: Bob <bk_btg@yahoo.com>
Date: Mon Jan 9, 2006 5:49 pm
Subject: Re: [Bob's Tgirls Yahoo Group] Victoria

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/bobstgirls/message/499

Note that you have to become a member of the group to read the messages, but the group doesn't require pre-approval. Hence, so long as you have a Yahoo! account you can instantly become a member by joining from the front page at http://groups.yahoo.com/group/bobstgirls/ . Of course, it's free to join this Yahoo! group.

Within the male-to-female transsexual porn community (of fans, producers, and the models) it is a well-known and undesputed fact that Miriam and Victoria are the same person. Only someone who doesn't know much about the subject would despute that fact (unless of course they're being dishonest; I'm not saying anyone here is, I'm just saying this to be logically complete).

On Bob's paysite at http://www.bobstgirls.com in the Victoria section Bob also states that Victoria is Miriam from There's Something About Miriam, and he also has a collection of articles about her involvement with the television show there. Of course, Bob knows Miriam/Victoria personally; as well, he is the first person to photograph her professionally.--Jamie, 209.208.77.117 01:59, 7 March 2006 (UTC)

For more information on Victoria/Miriam, see the below HungAngels forum links:

http://www.hungangels.com/board/viewtopic.php?p=22441

http://www.hungangels.com/board/viewtopic.php?t=1960

http://www.hungangels.com/board/viewtopic.php?t=1857

http://www.hungangels.com/board/viewtopic.php?t=1314

http://www.hungangels.com/board/viewtopic.php?t=862

http://www.hungangels.com/board/viewtopic.php?t=841

http://www.hungangels.com/board/viewtopic.php?t=646

http://www.hungangels.com/board/viewtopic.php?t=593

Jamie, 209.208.77.82 21:20, 27 March 2006 (UTC)

Citing sources

This is the background of the Star of TV show There's Something About Miriam. She has stared in at least 2 pornographic movies, which I can verify. Currently Getting title name of second movie. - — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jacks246 (talk • contribs) -- Longhair 13:51, 9 January 2006 (UTC)

What is required to "source" the pornography list? Will links to the videos be enough or is something else required? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 217.195.47.90 (talk • contribs) . -- Longhair 13:50, 9 January 2006 (UTC)

That depends on where the list is, and who's credited as starring in the films on such lists. -- Longhair 13:50, 9 January 2006 (UTC)

She is not listed as an actor at the link (adult content) provided as a source. Reverting. -- Longhair 14:14, 9 January 2006 (UTC)

She IS listed, look under the performers section. Listed as her stage name Victoria. In the DVD cover she is the redhead in the top left. Viewing movie would also confirm her appearance. User:Jacks246

Earlier you added and redirected [[Victoria (TS}]] to your own user page, User:Jacks246. I deleted the redirect (from the Deletion log, 00:51, 10 January 2006 Longhair deleted Victoria (TS) (content was: '#REDIRECT Jacks246'). I'm not convinced. Please provide a direct link to the source, or the information remains omitted. -- Longhair 14:54, 9 January 2006 (UTC)

The redirect was an accident, it was supposed to go to this page, a mistake on my part. Please give me some more details on what proof you will find acceptable? This is a well known fact in the transgendered community. Why do other pornstars non need linked proof for each movie they have been in? Jacks246

Please provide a direct link to your source. Readers of Wikipedia shouldn't be expected to research further. Also, why have you changed your ip address from

217.195.47.90 (talk · contribs) to

80.190.242.130 (talk · contribs) and again to

212.65.15.99 (talk · contribs)

during the course of this conversation, yet signed your edits User:Jacks246, all inside of an hour or so? -- Longhair 15:15, 9 January 2006 (UTC)

*Le sigh* I did link to proof. If that is not acceptable please state exactly what you would want. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 69.107.57.48 (talk • contribs) . -- Longhair 15:38, 9 January 2006 (UTC)

Refer to the link in the heading above, Citing sources, or here. A direct link not requiring the user to search endless performer names would be nice. -- Longhair 15:40, 9 January 2006 (UTC)

The link (above) lists 5 performers named Victoria.

1. Victoria Givens (18 titles)
2. Victoria Rose (2 titles)
3. Victoria Slim (2 titles)
4. Victoria Sweet (47 titles)
5. Victoria Vanoza (1 titles)

I'm going to impose a block if you persist with your blantant trolling. -- Longhair 15:52, 9 January 2006 (UTC)

Block away, if you do not want to see the truth for what it is. If you paid attention you'd see that the actress is Victoria and not Victoria <Surname>. As stated before viewing said title will also confirm this fact.

Correct dates?

Are Miriam's birthdate and/or adult video filming dates correct? Because if she was born in 1982 and did her adult videos in 1999, that would mean she was seventeen at the time of filming. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hiryu84 (talk • contribs)

We are about facts

Wikipedia is suppose to be pure facts, right? Then why do this article refer to a man as a "she"? Miriam Rivera is a man who is 'trying' to be female with the help of hormones and operations, right? But that does not make a man a woman. He is still a man.

For EXAMPLE removal of ones penis does not make you a woman. You are still a man, but with your penis removed. And trying to create a penis on a woman does not make a woman into a man.

Miriam is a he, right? Then why not write that? We are about facts and not political correctnes. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.226.234.26 (talk • contribs)

Facts of law do allow someone to change there gender & name if they feel they must change sex so if miriam has done this then by law she should be considered female & referred to a SHE, there are some backwards, hypocritical countries (USA for example) that havent adjusted their laws to reflect this change, but perhaps just like in the sixties this will be adjusted hopefully. so this is not about PC it's about law (in some countires) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.138.196.108 (talk • contribs)

Please sign in and sign you comments

The trouble with your arguements is that there exist many counter examples. let me ask you...Can a woman be a woman without a vagina? Consider the plight of the so called intersexed individuals. They are born without traditional well formed genitalia. They are ambiguous. What are they? In practice they end up being exactly what they want to be what they feel they are. Regardless of any surgeries performed at birth.

So you are right the state of one's genitalia does not make one a male or a female. The state of a persons mind does. (Such is why EXAMPLE a man who looses his penis in an accident does not become a woman. A transsexual was never quite 100% a man to begin with inspite of thier genitals.)

A transsexual is a person who has normal genitalia who by their behavior betrays a state of mind that is contrary to those genitalia. There is much speculation about what causes this. (see Transsexualism, or for another view point Blanchard, Bailey, and Lawrence theory) The final analysis is though that the true gender of a person is determined by their state of mind, their behavior, and their acceptance in that role by society at large.

Miriam, has lived as a female and been almost 100% accepted as such since she was about 13. She is now 24. She has had to deal with life as a woman for 11 years. She has earned her right to be called she. NOT BECAUSE IT IS POLITICALLY CORRECT. No that is a poor reson to do anything but because it is more correct and true to call Miriam She than he for most practical everyday pruposes she is the right description.

Last but not least, read the article, she has not had the operation and has no plans to. Many younger TS's are not in a big hurry to have the op. It's expensive. --Hfarmer 23:16, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

You do not earn another gender. Miriam was born one gender and will always be that gender. It has nothing to do with mind. Nor accaptance in society. The body is the body. You can not sneak around the laws of nature and simple facts. Sure, call Miriam a "she". But she is a he. Thus this "factual", not practical, article is innacurate. No offence. I bet Miriam is a great person. And he sure does look like a beautiful woman. But from a "Wikipedian" point of view Miriam is a he. --- — Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.226.234.26 (talk • contribs) 1:58, 1 March 2007

If you are such an expert wikipedian then why dont you have an account with which to log in?

A persons gender is different from their physical sex. The EXAMPLE of the intersexed person who has no definate genitalia (which does happen by the way) is proof enough of that. Miriam is as much a she as a girl born with Androgen insensitivity syndrome who also has XY chromosomes and all that. Then there are people born XXY Klienfelters syndrome a condition that cannot be really diagnosed without a chromosome count. For all we know Miriam could have such a condition. What of her gender then?

The fact is that gender is more complicated that the simplistic approach you have advocated mystery person. Re read the archives of this talk page and others on ohter transsexuals you will find that the conclusion is always to use the pronoun of the subjects choosing. --Hfarmer 04:32, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

Please limit the discussion on this page to improving this article, and not general discussion. Jokestress 11:48, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

Unsourced statements removed

I have done some preliminary cleanup on this and removed all the unsourced statements, especially the claims about a recent attack. If this is the case, it should appear in the news, at which time we can include it here. Blogs and message boards do not meet WP:RS. Jokestress 11:38, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

That's the logical fallacy known as a non sequitur. It doesn't follow that if an attack such as this happened that it "should appear in the news." It possibly should in the moral sense, but in the existential sense that doesn't follow. Brutal attacks happen all the time which don't make it into the news.--209.208.77.128 18:09, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

I'll also add that you've been shamelessly hypocritical in your edits (that is to say, self-refuting). You've incompetently deleted passages supported by mainstream major media news articles, while at the same time leaving in passages unsupported by said documentation. Such as Miriam's birth date, or that "She is sometimes credited as Victoria or Miriam D'Abo and has also gone by Miriam Xtravaganza." Indeed, Miriam's porn career is not documented in any mainstream media news article. Instead, the fact that she has been in porn and that she has worked while in porn under the name of Victoria is entirely and only supported by the very references which you say have no place on Wikipedia.

Not only have you acted as an illiterate and incompetent editor, but so also you have acted as a hypocritical editor. Nor is my pointing out these facts a personal attack, as they are directed toward your fallacious edits, and not you as a person.--209.208.25.219 00:15, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

Hey long time no talk. I have no idea why this has not appeared in the news but it is definately the case. She was attacked. Her friend Nikki has posted pictures that show her injuries and that it is definately her. If you checked out that particular message board you would notice that it does not take registration to read it. Darn. she just went ahead and took those pictures down. They were here.

Why hasn't this been reported in the news. Afterall the firing of someone who was a no name prior to being fired has been reported. I don't know. In one of the threads they talk about this having been reported on telemundo but does not say when or where. To be honest I don't think this has or ever will be reported in the news. Why the "transgender activist community" does not seem to give a crap about this? ? --Hfarmer 13:38, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

About the Photo's

Perhaps you should look at the editing history of the page and see who added those pictures before you go removing them. [1]. Notice the name of the contributor? "Mariamarcen" the user only existed it seems to put those pictures of her here. Including the picture of Miriam as a kid which only Miriam or a blood relative would have had. Look at that picture that's from grade school, generally there is no yearbook from that level. The picture looks...like one that the parents would get to keep in their wallet you know what I mean. The second picture does not look like a photoshoot or anything. A very early picture of her "dressed". I cannot imagine who other than Miriam herself would have access to those pictures. All together this is a good circumstantial case that these pictures where added by the subject herself. She held the copyright and she released it properly. There is no reason to remove the pictures. Further this article is one of a few where a transperson seems 100% comfortable with thier transness mostly because a picture of her "as a boy" does not seem to bother her.

I could be wrong, I just don't see how. --Hfarmer 14:20, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

About the name used in the article

I just noticed that you changed the name within the body of the text from Miriam to Rivera. If that was the last name that she used consistently that would be ok. But it is not these days it seems she prefere's the last name "Xtravaganza" in reference to the house she belongs to "the house of Xtravaganza". To be correct to what you are thinking of the last name in the article should be changed to this.

I personally would rather stick to the first name because that has remained constant as the name she went by (at least with people she knew personally) for many, many years. It will simplify our lives to do this. --Hfarmer 14:40, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

News: it does seem that this should be covered in the news. I suggest her friends contact the LGBT press and local activists, which will likely lead to an outpouring of support once it's confirmed. The lack of specifics makes this difficult to confirm: no police report, no name of hospital, no explanation of attack, etc. If she is willing to speak with the press, I can personally arrange this so it can be independently confirmed. As it stands, this information is insufficiently sourced for including in Wikipedia.

Photos: The one photo remaining on that message board says the patient's name is Miriam Mendoza, and the bands appear to have been altered manually or digitally. The photos here on Wikipedia do not appear to be properly sourced. Some are copyrighted photos taken for promoting her reality show, so we may be able to use those. We cannot confirm those were added by her, though, and the sourcing information does not say that. The Wikipedia issues are separate from other press issues. The first step is to get her in touch with activists and press to confirm details. As I said, I will be happy to confirm this and get a reporter, as I am very good at getting to the bottom of situations like these. Jokestress 19:43, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

I understand the wikipedia issues. If we cannot source the pictures then so be it. I can't imagine where some random person would have gotten a picture of her from like 5th or 6th grade. That's all I'm saying about that. As I have heard it...certain facts including where Miriam is hospitalized are being closely guarded by her friends for fear that whoever did this may try to finish the job. The best way I know of to get initial contact with them would be via a private message on the message board that I linked to, "HungAngels". --Hfarmer 20:17, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

I wanted to add. Nikki, a close friend of Miriam's says that they have been contated by GLADD (or was it the other way around?) either way that was almost a full week ago now. --Hfarmer 20:30, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

Please Stop the Incorrect and Illiterate Editing

I reverted your changes for reasons described on the talk page. Also, please review WP:NPA. Jokestress 17:29, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

Your edits are illiterate. That's not a personal attack, it's a statement of objective fact. It has nothing to do with who you are personally, as possibly you're the most literate person in the world, but that you simply chose to make illiterate edits on purpose.

For one thing, you apparently do not know how to properly use quotations. At least you have been changing proper use of quotations to illiterate and improper usage, such as using the incorrect ""..."" in quoted passages, and changing correctly-formatted mutli-paragraph displayed quotations to incorrect single paragraph non-displayed quotations. For more on this, see my comments at the below link:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Operation_Northwoods#Please_Stop_the_Incorrect_and_Illiterate_Editing

As well, you have been getting rid of sentences within the article which were sourced via mainstream major media news articles, such as "When she was 11 years old she met another male-to-female transsexual person who explained about feminizing hormones: how they make breasts grow and make a person appear more feminine."

So please stop your damaging and illiterate edits.--209.208.77.128 18:00, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

Many of these quotations are unecessarily long and irrelevant to an encyclopedic article on the subject. This part of the sentence is certainly not relevant to this article: "how they make breasts grow and make a person appear more feminine."

Calling people's edits "illiterate" violates WP:CIVIL and WP:NPA. Please stop, or you may get blocked. There's no need to be unpleasant like that. Jokestress 18:14, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

Clearly you're on a power trip, as per, e.g., your threat. You have damaged this article with your incorrect (i.e., illiterate, per the dictionary definition) edits, as well as your deletions of passages that were referenced by mainstream major media articles. Pointing that out is not uncivil, it's an objective fact. You are the one who is being uncivil by your insistence of maintaining your incorrect (i.e., illiterate) edits. It is a fact that you are changing proper quotations into improper (i.e., illiterate) quotations. It is a fact that you are deleting passages that are supported by mainstream major media news articles.

But maintaining your ego intact is obviously more important than the integrity of the article.

I have put a lot of work into this article to make it better, but you came along a took a big dump on it (figuratively speaking). I gave the above link to the Operation Northwoods article talk page to demonstrate that I very well know what I'm talking about and that I am *very* skilled at greaty adding value to Wikipedia articles. But obviously none of that mean anything to you. Your ego is what is important here. Very well, crap on this article to your heart's worth. Don't defer to people who have more knowledge, skills, and attention to detail than you.--209.208.79.164 21:33, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

I'll also add that you've been shamelessly hypocritical in your edits (that is to say, self-refuting). You've incompetently deleted passages supported by mainstream major media news articles, while at the same time leaving in passages unsupported by said documentation. Such as Miriam's birth date, or that "She is sometimes credited as Victoria or Miriam D'Abo and has also gone by Miriam Xtravaganza." Indeed, Miriam's porn career is not documented in any mainstream media news article. Instead, the fact that she has been in porn and that she has worked while in porn under the name of Victoria is entirely and only supported by the very references which you say have no place on Wikipedia.

Not only have you acted as an illiterate and incompetent editor, but so also you have acted as a hypocritical editor. Nor is my pointing out these facts a personal attack, as they are directed toward your fallacious edits, and not you as a person.--209.208.25.219 00:15, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

Well the fact that she has been in adult films is also evidenced by all the pictures that exist and the DVD that was commercially released. As for the message board postings...I guess jokestress is right by the letter of wikipedia's policy those have no place here. As for what it says about her having found out about hormones from a slightly older transsexual when she was 11 that is backed up by mainstream media reports. I have one picture that is a very high res and readable scan of a newspaper article about Miriam. Further I think that detail is remarkable enough to mention.. It helps explain how she can look the way she does. I mean hormones at 11 getting them any sooner would not do much good.

Also to the IP editor there is no need for personal attacks. --Hfarmer 01:46, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

I agree there is no need for personal attacks, which is why I don't engage in them. What I do do is point out when someone has made fallacious edits. Regarding Miriam having been in porn films, per Wikipedia standards, that is what is called "original research." In other words, there is not actually a so-called (by Wikipedia) "reliable source" for that conclusion (since no mainstream major media outlet has ever reported on it), but rather an individual looks at that and says something along the lines of "Hmmm, they look a bit alike, don't they?" Of course, there does exist much hardcore documentation that they are indeed the same people, but all such strong documentation falls under what Jokestress terms unreliable sources.

Of course, by these standards, one would have to deny the nose on one's face until the New York Times (or some similar outlet) told you that it is there.

The cognitive dissonance arises when a person thinks that the major media (or journal publications) somehow equals truth. They don't. Often quite the opposite.--209.208.77.212 02:42, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

It is clear based on your posts that you are an educated person. This does not excuse you from violating the civility and personal attack policies, and dismissing the comments of other editors. I am not going to get involved in the specifics here, although I will point out that the Wikipedia manual of style allows for both inline and block quotes, as do most major style manuals such as APA and Chicago. Further personal attacks will be removed, and eventually you will be blocked from editing. I'm posting this here since you change IP addresses. You are encouraged (but not obligated, of course) to sign up for a Wikipedia account. Rhobite 05:46, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

Rhobite, clearly you do not know proper quoting typesetting. I have read the Wikipedia manual of style, and apparently you have not (or at least not very well). When a quote goes over three lines, the standard (default) typsetting style is to format it as a displayed quotation.

Nor do I change my IP address. That is my ISP doing that. I have no control over that.

And Jokestress is being shamelessly hypocritical in her edits. Many things about Miriam in the article are not backed up by mainstream media articles, such as that "She is sometimes credited as Miriam D'Abo," as well as her porn modeling. Or for that matter, that she was born on February 20.--209.208.77.109 01:53, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

I've always read that the general rule is over four lines (this is actually what WP:MOS says). This is not a hard-and-fast rule, it is just a stylistic guideline and it is open to editorial interpretation. It isn't worth an edit war or personal attacks. This is your last warning; further personal attacks will result in you temporarily losing your ability to edit Wikipedia. Rhobite 04:03, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

Yes, I meant to say over four lines. But I got you to admit here that Jokestress was making incorrect edits, since she didn't conform to this standard typesetting rule. Getting that much out of you is quite an accomplishment.--209.208.77.109 08:47, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

I came here to say the same thing, but Rhobite beat me to it. A lot of your comments are personal attacks, however you try to justify them and your tone is often not CIVIL. Tyrenius 02:29, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

I have never made a personal attack on Jokestress. Rather, I have pointed out that she is debasing this article and <personal attack removed>.--209.208.77.109 01:53, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

Indeed, even her last name used for the article, "Rivera," isn't sourced by a mainstream media article. It's not sourced by anything in the article.--209.208.77.109 01:57, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

Proposed page move

I propose we move this page to Miriam (entertainer). Per comments above, since there are conflicting and unconfirmed surnames and stage names, we should stick to the stage name used in published sources. Miriam alone is obviously taken, so we need a parenthetical. We don't want a name that describes who she is, like Miriam (transwoman), since the naming conventions are to disambiguate by what someone does. "Entertainer" covers both the alleged pornography work and the reality television appearances. I hesitate to say Miriam (actress) because she was essentially appearing as herself, but I guess that would be my second choice. Thoughts are welcome. Jokestress 03:55, 21 March 2007 (UTC)