How common is ->-bleeped-<-?

[Lyric]

Ah, if things really occurred in such absolute terms, it might (theoretically) be possible to gauge such a thing. One thing I've learned about ->-bleeped-<- is that it's not really an either/or situation, but more of a range. Even among people on this board who call themselves "transsexuals", there are variations. There are people who are certain by age 5 that they are the wrong gender. I would put these persons in a different category from those who decide this at puberty. Then there are those who decide this far into adulthood. I don't think a single category fits. We could probably use more terms.  There are genetic males whose bodies perform a sort of natural GRS in the womb before birth: the AIS women (estimated 1 in 5K to 10K, but nobody knows for sure). Then there are those of us (including me) who realize they are transgendered, but never desire a complete transition. There are those who like living as both man and woman. Then there are androgynes (which probably includes another range).

As far as males who wish to present themselves (or at least dress as) females, the number must be quite large. Clothing and wig dealers have come to realize this is very significant segment of their patronage. A marketer could probably give a better estimate on that segment of the population than a scientific researcher.

Lyric

[Arch]

One thing I've learned about ->-bleeped-<- is that it's not really an either/or situation, but more of a range. Even among people on this board who call themselves "transsexuals", there are variations.

This was sort of my point; the OP asks about ->-bleeped-<-, but the statistics people trotted out were for transsexuals, supposedly the smallest subcategory of TG.

[Alexmakenoise]

Look at the numbers for homosexuality.  The usual number used is 10% (or 1 in 10).  I've seen some studies that suggest it could be more like 6 or 7%, but most people have settled on 10% as a nice round ballpark number.

- Kate

I think the 10% comes from Kinsey's original study on homosexual behavior.  He found that 10% of respondents said they had had at least one sexual experience with someone of the same sex.  People often interpret that to mean that 10% of the population is either homosexual or bisexual.  In fact, it only indicates that 10% of Kinsey's subjects had at least been bi-curious at some point.  A lot of heterosexual people have had a same-sex experience at some point.  6 - 7% sounds more accurate, but does that include bisexual people or not?  Sexual orientation can be hard to define - do you categorize people by their experiences or the way they define themselves?

This was sort of my point; the OP asks about ->-bleeped-<-, but the statistics people trotted out were for transsexuals, supposedly the smallest subcategory of TG.

Not even transexuals, but bottom surgery specifically.  It seems like most of the TS statistics are based on the number of GRS surgeries performed.  This obviously leads to inaccurate results, with MTFs seeming to far out-number FTMs.  I wonder why someone doesn't do a study on the rates of GID diagnosis, or prescriptions for HRT, or legal gender changes.  The rates of any of those would probably represent our numbers better than bottom surgery rates.

[Squirrel698]

These statistics are very interesting.  It seems that we don't have a definite number yet.  So many are so called 'unreported' or per-hormones if they report that I don't see how anyone could really know.  Unless there was another huge survey like Kinsey did and a statistical analyse taken.     

I just wanted to say since it was brought up that I really don't know how some teenagers transition.  I never would have been able to do it.  When I came out I lost all of my family really.  There are a few family members that feel God needs them to be in my life.  So it is their duty to come over and pray for me.  Not really a good relationship to have.  I also lost some friends.  I don't know how a teen would go from having a family or not.  I'm an independent adult so I managed even though it hurt me very badly.  I know it's not always that extreme but sometimes it really could be.  Don't assume transitioning young is the answer to everything.  It's all very individual to each person. 

Also if I hadn't waited to transition until my thirties then I never would have had my kids and I wouldn't have my partner who is a huge support to me.  He told me at the place where he was in his early twenties when we meant he never would have dated me if I had been transitioning / transitioned.  Now however nearly 10 years of marriage later he takes me as I am for the most part as me and I'm glad he is in my life.  Yeah it was bumpy for a while there but now things have settled down and we basically accept each other.  Sometimes however I do wish I had gone earlier for the reasons I put in the other post I wrote today.   Still it is what it is and I work with what I am given.           

[Alexmakenoise]

Squirrel - It's good to hear your perspective on transitioning.  There has been a lot of talk on here lately about how transitioning younger is better.  But I think there is no ideal time to transition, that there are probably good things and bad things about transitioning at any age.  It is very individual, like you said.

[Bird]

Alex, that is something I agree with, strongly.

For each person there is a different ideal moment, since there are many issues related to transition that must be solved. Transitioning younger would not be so good for me I think, for psychological reasons. But for looks sure.

[rite_of_inversion]

If there is an EU country that covers GRS in their health plans, I would suspect they'd have the best stats-less stigma plus government help in any body changes you want to make would go a long way towards making GRS or hormones more measurable in a population.
My wife won't talk about her past to people-she wouldn't admit she was trans to some surveyor, oh no!