Susan's Place Logo

News:

Visit our Discord server  and Wiki

Main Menu

I'm deeply concerned...

Started by Omika, March 05, 2007, 03:16:15 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Omika

My friends, I have grown concerned.

I am concerned with this recent discussion of labels, of varying degrees of ->-bleeped-<-, of categories and numbers and quizzes and results and things.  It is easy to forget, in an international society so focused on numbers and results, a simple fact. 

People are not numbers.

People are people.  We have measurable components, but deep down, we are humans.  That simple realization is all that is necessary to propel us forward into a prosperous future.  Pride in humanity.  Dignity in all things humane.

This is something I wrote in another post I wanted everyone to read.  Take it with a grain of salt, or bust out the shaker.  Your choice.  I feel it needs to be heard.

~ ~ ~ ~ ~

Look, there are a lot of fun words out there.  Arguing semantics and definitions and apples and oranges and split hairs is fine.  Hoo-rah.

Let's just bear in mind that a transsexual*, in this modern era, is someone with an instinctual drive towards having their physical body match their soul.  With the assistance of society's veritable black hole of understanding and acceptance, they often mount up on their own crusade to vanquish and do righteous battle with these "simply wicked" thoughts.  However, this is much akin to a man doing battle with his own reflection.  It's a complete stalemate, and it ultimately drives you mad (as any pointless conflict will.)

This statement of "must transition" is simply what it is.  The spirit must match the body, for everyone (not just transsexuals), and therefore in order to achieve this astral/material harmony, the offending flesh must be discarded (see suicide) so that the spirit can be freed to realign, or the flesh must be sculpted into a form that is satisfactory to the afflicted.

Why do "punks" spike their hair and wear torn jeans?  Why do "cowboys" wear big belt buckles and chew tobacco?  Why do "goths" (my category, according to some) wear black, baroque styles and makeup?  Why does anyone feel the urge, the need to appear in one way or another to other human beings?

See my above statement.  We display our emotions.  We display our subconcious, our feelings, our hurts and hopes in the way we dress, the way we act, the way we speak, the way we write or draw or dance or make love in an attempt to communicate on a deeper level than words.  Here I am, we say with our appearance, this is my soul, this is what I love, this is what I am.

To deny any human being the basic principle of self-expression is to deny them their humanity.  Thus, a transsexual, one who has a spirit that is contradictory in overall gender to their physical sex, must transition into a state that they feel is acceptable.  Whether or not this is simply living full-time and presenting as a woman (something more would do if SRS was not a legal requirement to have birth certificates changed, I imagine) or completely transforming oneself into the opposite, satisfactory sex is as irrelevant as hair color.

A blonde is a person who has hair that appears blonde.  My mother is actually brunette, but dyes her hair blonde.  I am a natural blonde, but I dye my hair black.  Why?  We are compelled to have our physical form represent how we feel at all times.  There is no choice in that, only varying degrees.  It is humanity, and in my personal, candid opinion, it is beautiful.

~ Blair

* See, human being.
  •  

kaelin

#1
On some level, accepting people for their feelings is key.  Labels are useful for identification, but they should [EDIT: not] serve as an end-all for anything.  The important thing is the person can find what is best for them, rather than assign them something that seems to work for people "similar" to them.
  •  

Brianna

Quote from: Kaelin on March 05, 2007, 06:42:19 PM
On some level, accepting people for their feelings is key.  Labels are useful for identification, but they should serve as an end-all for anything.  The important thing is the person can find what is best for them, rather than assign them something that seems to work for people "similar" to them.

I agree with this, albiet with the caveat that the science behind transsexualism and transvestisim is generally quite solid and is quite relevant is determining a proper medical course of action.

Self-labeling is fine to a degree. But not in terms of treatment for transsexualism.

Brilala
  •  

ChefAnnagirl

I must say - I deeply agree and strongly echo the sentiments expressed by Blair in this thread. I think too many people get too wrapped up in what i would call either mass (in the case of say. religions for example) or personal "intellectual ownership" of principles, values, beliefs, or various kind of labels which seemingly can actually limit the dialogue between fellow members of the human family, which we all are without exception (those claiming otherplanetary status are of course excepted) - in fact, i was thinking in recent days how to publicly address this very issue myself.

Blair, i think what you wrote was perfect - beautiful, succint, intelligent, and to the point without being ostentatious about it (one of my particular habits)....

Sincerely,


Annagirl
Level the playing field
  •  

Suzy

Hi Blair!

I couldn't agree more.  And I find it intresting that at this time I am struggling so hard to be free to be what I truly am meant to be.  If it only means emerging to be forced into a box that doesn't quite fit, why bother at all?  I know that some here are very comfortable with their labels and I am happy for them.  Does that mean everyobody should be?  No.  However we try to avoid it, labels will be listed in an order, which will become a hierarchy, and some of us will become more equal than others.  Some will not be worth our dealing with.  Just look at that awful she-male thread.  Labels are fine as long as they are descriptive.  But it is inevitable that they eventually become prescriptive.  If I end up being virtually like somebody else, so be it.  It won't be something to celebrate, necessarily.  Nor will be be a problem.  It just is.

In short, if there is one thing I am certain about right now, it is that nobody, and I mean, nobody, is going to tell me how and what to be any more.  I am finished giving society or any person that right.  And they will not have it if I refuse to give it.

I'm off to test my wings.  Sure, they are different.  But they are mine, and I'm gonna fly.





Kristi
  •  

kaelin

Quote from: Tinkerbell on March 05, 2007, 07:51:28 PMOh I see, you don't want hormones or surgery, or perhaps you only want hormones but not surgery, well then you are not transsexual; it is as simple as that

Indeed.  However, I think the point of the thread there is that too much attention is paid to the label and not the feelings and symptoms as they emerge.  If you start quizzing someone about whether they feel they are a certain type of person, you introduce ideas and a thought-process that isn't really consistent with the feelings involved, and it can leave the person more confused.  This labels we are introducing would not be a problem if 1) we weren't in such a rush to figure out what label someone falls under and 2) we regularly recognized the identities and labels that correspond to possibilities besides TS, Androgynous, CD, and TV.

To motivate the point, if someone identifies as their non-biological gender, perhaps wants hormones (for non-erotic reasons), but does not want surgery, you can say they are not TS, but it is a bit unfair to just deny them an identity for their condition.  I suppose a word I read somewhere to describe someone fitting this criteria is transgenderist.  With that in mind, it should be rather apparent why TGists feel like they are in limbo -- their label is often confused for TG, TGs rarely acknowledge the possibility of it, TGists do not have their own forum section to justify their identity and clarify the confusion, and their resulting desire to fit it with TSs as "non-op TSs" and leads them to being rejected by the ("elitist" or "purist") TS crowd and leaves them without a home.

Is there any reason we should not have a "Transgerist Talk" forum section?
  •  

Kate

Maybe we should just focus on the individual and their needs, and what would best make them happy? Ya know, treat the person, the human being who feels and loves and hurts, rather than processing them through some arbitrary idealogy into some pre-packaged, neatly boxed solution?

Coming here used to fill me with strength, with resolve. I came here for HOPE.

But something's changed lately. Heck, maybe *I changed, I don't know. But now all I see is oneupMANship, everyone rushing to step on everyone else's head just to get to the better label, the prettier diagnosis. Oh sure, "being a true transsexual isn't better." Right, tell that to the False Transsexuals you wantonly stepped on in your climb to be Better Than. I leave here these days hurt and broken, hope leaking from wounds that came from I don't know where.

And I thought it was just the Born Agains twisting things into personal idealogies to bolster their own egos. The religious right have their bible, the True Transsexuals have their diagnostic manuals. Holy Scripture being used to curse the damned, and save the Righteous. Same story, same theme being played out everywhere I look. Hurt the weak, the vulnerable, and climb up their broken bodies into heaven. Damn the unbelievers, dehuminize them into labels and problems, invalidate their motives as being impure and ugly, and maybe we can seem almost pretty in contrast.

People I've come out to have often mentioned my "transsexual culture," and I've angrily denied there WAS such a thing. How utterly naieve I was, blinded by my own submission to it.

And I'm ashamed I got caught up in it. I know better. So I bow out of the game. I turn in my applications for womanhood and True Transsexual, relinquishing any claim to such things. I'm NOT a woman. I'm NOT a Transsexual. I'm donating my unsigned cards back into the pool.

WHAT I am isn't important to me anymore. How I live and love and hurt and feel is.

I know what I need. I've found ways to get it. And I'm going to keep at it until I can't anymore.

Kate
  •  

Jolene4ever

 Kate that was beautiful. You got it girl. :eusa_clap:Jolene
  •  

kaelin

* Kaelin offers Kate a second sympathy hug in as many days.

Quote from: Tinkerbell on March 05, 2007, 08:57:44 PM...I don't have a problem with anyone who identifies as transsexual, is on therapy for transsexualism, currently takes hormones and is awaiting for her SRS; however, I do have a problem with a person, who has erotic fantasies when he wears dresses, does not want to get rid of his genitalia because he enjoys it, has a male gender identity and calls himself transsexual.

I did say non-erotic, didn't I?

You seem to be contrasting Types V-VI and Types I-III.  I think I-III are generally accepted as TV, and we can reject those people as TS.  Type IV and anything that falls outside the listed six types may not necessarily have an established label for themselves.  These people without a well-recognized label deserve some mercy.

Quote from: TinkerbellTYPE IV - Transsexual - Non-Surgi[c]al
Gender "feeling" : Uncertain Wavering between TV and TS. May reject "gender".
Dressing Habits and Social Life : "Dresses" often as possible with insufficient relief of gender discomfort. May live as man or as a woman.
Sex Object Choice and Sex Life : Libido low. Genrally asexual or autoerotic.May be bisexual.
Conversion Operation (SRS) : Attractive but not required.
Hormone Therapy/Estrogen Therapy : Needed for comfort & emotioal balance.
Psychotherapy : Only as guidance, most often refused and unsuccessful.
Remarks : Social life dependant on circumstances. Often identifies as "transgenderist".

I've underlined a critical piece as it pertains to my previous post.  In this sense, non-op TS is a cohesive thing provided their motivation is non-erotic.  They should either be accepted as TS or TGists.  We must not lump them in with TVs or leave them nameless.
  •  

Brianna

Kate,

I don't agree with you at all. As I've been studying the literature lately in preparation for grad school, I've come to understand that part of the frustration that therapists deal in treating clients with gender issues  is

1. A patient's indignation when a professional finds they don't fit into the diagnostic criteria.
2. The tendancy of such people to self deny all clasification.

I hardly think this science is rapatious, as you suggest.

Bri

  •  

Thundra

QuoteThere are clearly different approaches on how to treat transvestism, transsexualism, and other non-TS gender dysphoric conditions.  The medical community takes this very seriously and anyone who "believes" to be transsexual should as well.  Why? because giving hormones or surgery to a ->-bleeped-<- or to someone who is not transsexual can be catastrophic.

I think it should also be noted that NOT giving hormones or surgery to someone who IS transsexual can also be just as catastrophic. Which is why it is so important for someone going through this process to find someone that (a.) they are comfortable with (b.) someone that understands where that individual is coming from -- how they work.

Like any other treatment regimen, not all processes work with all individuals. And since it is the relationship between the caregivers and the client that will determine the success or failure of the treatment regimen, it is EXTREMELY important to find the right place, and practitioner to work with that particular individual. This is not an objective science by any means -- it is subjective. And the caregiver can either help the client, or cause a lot of damage.

QuoteOh I see, you don't want hormones or surgery, or perhaps you only want hormones but not surgery, well then you are not transsexual; it is as simple as that; transvestism, transsexualism and other non-TS gender dysphoric conditions are very easily identifiable such as cancer, diabetes, or down syndrome.

Well, I am concerned with the certainty of your point of view. Since so many individuals seem to morph or evolve over time, as do their self-identification and desires, I am not sure how any level of certainty can be established. I think at best it is an inexact science, especially since each practitioner is going to evaluate each client differently, as it should be. I would guess that if someone were to line up several practitioners of the same discipline (endo, therapist, etc), that each of those practitioners would have a different opinion (from slightly different to completely different) of the same client, and treatment options.

Whereas one practitioner might find a certain client to be a suitable candidate for a certain treatment (hormonal, surgery), another might find them completely unsuitable.
This is where the tag of "gatekeeper" originates from. A client in that position would have two options -- evolving themself to meet the expectations of their caregiver, or finding another caregiver that sympathizes with their position.

I know when I moved to OR, I was SHOCKED at how easily prescription hormones were dispensed here. I have also been shocked at some of the people that were chosen to be recommended for surgery by their physician, based on either psychological, or behavioral criteria.

MY own opinion (I stress this is my opinion), is that therapists should only be there as an aid, and should not be involved in the referral process, for the reasons listed above. I further believe that since the medical establishment has made this industry a cash and carry kind of arrangement, that the choice to allow a treatment should be strictly between the client, and that individual practitioner (since it already is by default).
IMO, the so-called standards of care are a facade that don't accomplish anything but help keep the surgeon from being held liable. I personally don't believe that they are there to actually help any of the clients.

I think that if a person has the $$$, and can find a practitioner that agrees to work with them, than they should be able to do whatever they want -- SOC be damned. Caveat Emptor. That would go a long way to ridding us of all of these devisive labels. Such is my two cents worth.
  •  

BeverlyAnn

Quote from: Kate on March 05, 2007, 09:28:41 PM
But now all I see is oneupMANship, everyone rushing to step on everyone else's head just to get to the better label, the prettier diagnosis. I leave here these days hurt and broken, hope leaking from wounds that came from I don't know where.

And I thought it was just the Born Agains twisting things into personal idealogies to bolster their own egos. The religious right have their bible, the True Transsexuals have their diagnostic manuals. Holy Scripture being used to curse the damned, and save the Righteous. Same story, same theme being played out everywhere I look. Hurt the weak, the vulnerable, and climb up their broken bodies into heaven. Damn the unbelievers, dehuminize them into labels and problems, invalidate their motives as being impure and ugly, and maybe we can seem almost pretty in contrast.

Thank you Kate for finding the words I could not.  One of the many reasons I left here a few years ago was much the same thing I find on the board now.  On the Spirituality Board, I'm lumped in by some with the so-called Christians who profess love but actually preach hate and intolerance.  I must be one of them because I'm a Christian.  On other boards, I'm basically told between the lines I'm a second class citizen because I do not have any current plans to transition.  I've always said the Southern Baptist approach to ministry was to tie a bible to an axe handle and beat you over the head with it.  I didn't like it then and I don't like it when it's the SOC tied to the axe handle.  It almost caused me to say goodbye again today but unlike before when I left there is an advantage on the board today that we didn't have.  The ignore button. 

As Kristie said
Quote
However we try to avoid it, labels will be listed in an order, which will become a hierarchy, and some of us will become more equal than others.

Yes, Orwell would be quite proud.

Bev
  •  

ChefAnnagirl

My most humble apologies to anyone on this board that i have ever directed or that has felt any such percieved inappropriately competitive, belittling, or otherwise insulting behaviors, thoughts, or feelings from me.... 

This was immediately humbling to me, and i realized (or was reminded in a compelling way), that i could, still can, and definitely must, do better all the way round'...

Thanks.
Lovingly always,


Annagirl

Level the playing field
  •  

katia

i'm a type XX ts ;)

i do believe it takes your own consent for anybody to be able to make you feel inferior.  i know i'd like it to just be as simple as [a decision].  it isn't so, there are standards to follow, prerequisites to meet, criteria for diagnosis, evaluation, and acceptance.

if you think you aren't a transexual, then you aren't one.  don't blame the standards of care or the dsm for what you are or aren't.

Ps and by the way, when i use the pronoun [you], i'm referring to an impersonal you. ;)
  •  

Brianna

Quote from: Katia on March 06, 2007, 12:12:55 AM
i'm a type XX ts ;)

i do believe it takes your own consent for anybody to be able to make you feel inferior.  i know i'd like it to just be as simple as [a decision].

if you think you aren't a transexual, then you aren't one.  don't blame the standards of care or the dsm for what you are or aren't.

Oh Katia. I think you are just the greatest! Well said.

That's such a good point. I think if you feel inferior, that must be because of your own issues. When I transitioned, it was the end of caring what people thought of me. It became my armor.

Bri
  •  

Nikki_W

Quote from: Kate on March 05, 2007, 09:28:41 PM
But something's changed lately. Heck, maybe *I changed, I don't know. But now all I see is oneupMANship, everyone rushing to step on everyone else's head just to get to the better label, the prettier diagnosis. Oh sure, "being a true transsexual isn't better." Right, tell that to the False Transsexuals you wantonly stepped on in your climb to be Better Than. I leave here these days hurt and broken, hope leaking from wounds that came from I don't know where.

And I thought it was just the Born Agains twisting things into personal idealogies to bolster their own egos. The religious right have their bible, the True Transsexuals have their diagnostic manuals. Holy Scripture being used to curse the damned, and save the Righteous. Same story, same theme being played out everywhere I look. Hurt the weak, the vulnerable, and climb up their broken bodies into heaven. Damn the unbelievers, dehuminize them into labels and problems, invalidate their motives as being impure and ugly, and maybe we can seem almost pretty in contrast.

Well said. The SOC is nothing but guidelines used by other people to help us. They don't define us they don't say what we are or aren't. They exist not for us but for the medical staff that treats us.
  •  

Omika

...  WTF.

Good heavens.  Relax.  I'm with Anomie.  This thread makes my brainmeats hurt.  Thank you for the positive response, though, Anna.

My dears, let us not turn this into a bonfire of debate and let it be a testament to our mutual desire to simply be ourselves.  Some of these responses do little to alleviate my concern...

...  Honestly, I wonder if anyone is listening so much as reacting to what I say.

~ Blair
  •  

katia

is anyone fighting?  ???  i'm very relaxed, drinking a cup of turkish coffee and enjoying the voice or maria callas.  i don't argue, i just respond and give my personal opinions just like i'm doing now. ;)
  •  

Omika

Quote from: Katia on March 06, 2007, 02:09:17 AM
is anyone fighting?  ???  i'm very relaxed, drinking a cup of turkish coffee and enjoying the voice or maria callas.  i don't argue, i just respond and give my personal opinions just like i'm doing now. ;)

I'm not sure I even know.  I just get this feeling that most completely missed my point.

~ Blair
  •  

Suzy

#19
Quote from: Nikki_W on March 06, 2007, 01:07:23 AM
Well said. The SOC is nothing but guidelines used by other people to help us. They don't define us they don't say what we are or aren't. They exist not for us but for the medical staff that treats us.

I agree, Nikki.  That is how it should be.  But that's not the way it feels sometimes.  If I understood her correctly, Bri suggests that if we feel bad, tough.  We just have our own issues.  (If I misunderstood, please help me understand what you meant.)  That is ludicrous.  Would anybody be on this board if they didn't have issues?  So now some issues are more acceptable than others.  That sure gives me warm fuzzies.  What have we come to?  Why can't we just declare a moratorium on this label thing for a while, and talk to each others as caring humans again?  Why not just leave the labels to the medical staff.  If it helps them to avoid being sued, and allows them to continue treating us, so be it. 

Kristi
  •