Using Labels To Control People

[tinkerbell]

I certainly understand your feelings and respect them, Kate.  I am sure that there are a lot of people out there who, like you said, try to shoehorn themselves into a label so they can let the category define what they want, what they should do, rather than just feeling out their own heart, their very own individual wishes and needs. 

However, this is what I was talking about when I said that people need to understand exactly what they are, what they want,  before defining themselves or coming out.  If after looking deeply and honestly into their feelings, a person "falls" into an especific category, then it is safe to say that that person is what they say they are, but if that same person "wants" to label herself/himself merely to benefit from being labelled, from casting themselves into the prettiest of the boxes, then that type of behavior only creates more chaos among those who don't understand us and disarrangement in that particular group of people.

I honestly think that this is the main reason of so much confusion that exists of what it really means to be transsexual.  Everyone wants to belong to an especific category without actually belonging to it. 

Like you said, and like I have read here many times, some transsexuals decide not to transition, some have only an orchi, some debate the meaning of what it means to be full time, some think that there is this "in-between" phase between transvestism and transsexualism, some believe that there is such a person as a non-op transsexual, some have had erotic fantasies when dressed in women's clothes, some only cross-dress and call this "crossdressing" transition.

True! there are many types of people who share the above feelings and behaviors, and IMO they are gender dysphoric....yes!  but not transsexual.

There is this exercise which everyone who is transsexual should do.  Grab your heart (metaphorically.. ), put it on your right hand, look into the mirror and say "I am a woman or a man (for FTM's)"...if you truly believe that and are willing to transition without any excuses whatsoever...and by transition...I mean the works, hormones, hair removal, name change, RLE, SRS....unless you have a life-threatening medical condition that prevents you from doing so......then you are REALLY transsexual.

tinkerbell

[ChildOfTheLight]

I totally disagree with this post.

I think, sadly, transsexualism and denying reality often go together like Mel Gibson and making splattermovie snuff films.

I see people talking about voice and passing as if they as some pie in the sky abstract concept. I see people justifying self-centered decisions with wives and family members with no discernable connection to reality.

I don't understand the appeal of denying all labels, but I live with two TSs that do. They are both M2Fs in a relationship. If you try to point out that they are lesbians, they will deny this all day long. They want to feel as though they are so special that they eshew clasification.

News flash - transsexualism is pretty predictable. As is transvestism. And those of us with it are highly classifiable. Passes, doesn't pass, straight, gay, op, non-op - this is not complicated.

Bri

And as Sting says, "You'll still know nothing 'bout me."

Labels are like any other model -- useful within certain limits, but misleading at best when we take them outside those limits, or apply them without understanding those limits.

And of course, as Tinkerbell has said, like any other model, labels must be well-defined to be useful.

While I have always hated the Class separation applied to Post or Pre-op transsexuals the labels in themselves only define a point in transition attained by the person. It is our selves that apply levels of social value to them. As a pre-op and now a post op I refuse to join a group that holds one of more value than another.

There's a general point in here.  It also matters what one uses labels for.  Using labels for understanding, for compressing a lot of life experience into a few well-known words, allows you to explain yourself to others, and brings people together.  Using labels for exclusion, like saying that only people with these arbitrary characteristics, which of course include whoever's doing the labeling, are real men, or real women, or real transsexuals, or real whatever, tends only to divide.

But in fact, sometimes it's not clear which is happening.

Back to this specific topic..."transsexual" is a term which needs a clear definition.  Tinkerbell is arguing for a definition like this (please correct me if I'm wrong): "someone who identifies with the gender opposite to their sex, and wants to go through the complete medical, psychological, and social transition to become the sex corresponding to their gender, at any cost."  Others, it seems, are arguing for a definition like this: "someone who identifies with the gender opposite to their sex, and wants to undergo at least some medical procedures to modify their sexual characteristics."  (As long as I'm still talking about models, notice that I'm using a binary model of gender here.  I don't think that model is adequate for really talking about gender, but here it's a good enough approximation: most people who call themselves transsexual want to transition from one of male or female to the other.)

OK...good.  Now I think I understand what the argument is about.  Let's call the set of transsexuals under the more general definition T, and the set under Tinkerbell's definition T'.  T', of course, is a subset of T.  The question is, are the members of T' somehow fundamentally different from the rest of T (let's call this T*), so that they should have a separate term to define them?

The next question to ask is: in what ways could they be different?  I don't know enough, and I'm not sure anyone alive knows enough, about the relevant psychology and biology to make a clear distinction there.  T' and T* probably have different medical needs.  I would think T' and T* have different social goals -- T* people would probably be more likely to be interested in "breaking the system" and questioning what this whole gender business is about, and holding themselves up as counterexamples to assumptions, while T' people would tend to just want to be accepted as members of the gender they consider themselves to be.

Ultimately, for most people, the most important thing is finding the right way for themselves.  Labels help in this insofar as they serve as a guide to other people whose right way is like theirs.  Labels are bad for this when they are ill-defined, or when people don't understand themselves before using them.  Labels are not a substitute for personal understanding; they are, properly, concise explanations of it.  (Tinkerbell said some of this.)

[Stormy Weather]

I don't feel controlled. To me 'post-op' is not something about labels; for me, it carries with it an understanding that those of us who are post-op have particular concerns ranging from specific health matters to legal affairs.

I introduced myself on this board as post-op because to those of you who are reading this, it means something; it says something about my position towards and my approach to my own GID. In my workplace, it's not relevant. Labels are like jargon; impotent and meaningless outside their areas of discussion.

I'm with Brianna on this. It's simple and to be honest, this thread, while containing many words, clarifies nothing. The only labels that count are the ones you take on for yourselves.

This endless agonising about levels of hierarchy and precise points of definition within the T community is something that bores me rigid and seems only of interest to those who are still seeking to define themselves, hence this obsession with tests and markers.

I don't mean that as a slur to anyone, but the whole idea of it has been hashed out for decades and yet remains as static as ever.

Personally, I'm more interested in other labels like: witty, kind, compassionate, self-aware etc. I'm also more inclined to take note of other's practical approaches and the seriousness of their intent towards resolving their own GID, instead of just talking about it.

[swindon lady]

i agree with you stormy weather i am post-op and have not long recived my new birth cerificat saying i was born a female ps i live in the uk .i just feel very lucky that i am me and do not bother with labels i am very happy being myself and just glad to be alive and take no notice of any bigots who i sometimes meet and this could be over anything including race; religeon;etc