Transgender Definition - True Or False

[kyril]

I'm all for simplifying definitions, but if transgender is going to be an umbrella term to include everyone who experiences trans* discrimination, then the definition needs to be a lot broader. Save the specificity for "transsexual" and other subcategories.

And in developing the specific definition of "transsexual," you still have to be somewhat careful. Your definition is close...but many of us, myself included, will reject being classified as 'a female' or 'a male.' I am not my genitals; I am male and identify as a man. I have female genitals and reproductive organs.

[JessicaR]

FALSE

  Keeping in mind that there are some in the spectrum that fit this description, it is in no way an accurate definition.

[JessicaR]

How can we expect anyone to respect us or ever be accepting of TG/TS's when many of us can't even accept ourselves. We force ourselves to fit into a binary gender role that we then claim at the same time doesn't exist? If gender is so fluid, why do some of us try so hard to fit at the polar ends of it?

I was born this way and am proud of it. I'm a unique person that has a life perspective few people have. I find it sad so many people in this community can't also accept themselves for what they are.

  The binary exists and some of us fit there..... Don't assume that all trans folks identify their gender as fluid and don't assume that everyone should feel comfortable in your box.

[babykittenful]

I'm all for simplifying definitions, but if transgender is going to be an umbrella term to include everyone who experiences trans* discrimination, then the definition needs to be a lot broader. Save the specificity for "transsexual" and other subcategories.

And in developing the specific definition of "transsexual," you still have to be somewhat careful. Your definition is close...but many of us, myself included, will reject being classified as 'a female' or 'a male.' I am not my genitals; I am male and identify as a man. I have female genitals and reproductive organs.

Well, I don't intend to be rude or offensive, but when you were born, there was no other way to gender you other then your genitals. Since personality and gender "realization" really comes later in life (it does come very late for some), for at least a moment in your life, you were of a gender that is different then the one you identify with. Since gender isn't something that is very specific (like, let's say, your DNA), it is impossible to say that a transsexual person has *always* been of the gender he or she prefers to be.

While you can argue that you knew very early in your life that you were born in the wrong gender, this only goes the prove that you were initially in that wrong gender, hence why you had to transcend it to become who you are today. If I were to give my word on what I think "transgender" means, I'd say that the broad definition would be anyone who transcend gender. It doesn't really matter if you see it as binary or as a spectrum, as long as your moving from one position in the gender "scale" to another, you earn the title of being transgendered. That definition includes genderqueer, androgynous and gender fluid people, drag queens and drag kings, intersexed people and of course, transsexuals.

I don't think we have to fear the label. Instead, we should choose to be proud of who we are and what we stand for. There is nothing wrong with being transgendered, and being in deny or feeling offended about it won't change the reality. While I agree some people don't want to be associated with people who don't share the same stories and obstacles, I suggest that they remember something. All of us around are part of a group called humans. Within this groups, there are people who do great things and people who do very bad things, there are people of every social class, every religion and every political views. Does being human makes you less unique as an individual? Certainly not! Of course you share many things with the other people from that group, otherwise it wouldn't be a group. Being human is just a label, but it doesn't have to be one to be ashamed of. The same goes with being transgendered. Being part of that group doesn't take away anything from you... you just are.

Instead of fighting to prove we are not "one of them", why don't we just let the label be and focus on showing the world how unique we are?

P.S. To Kyril, After reading the initial definition that Juliet, I think I understand a bit more what you meant to say. Transgendered aren't necessarily still of their original gender (male or female). So it would be inaccurate to say that someone who is transgendered is a male who identify as female or vice-versa, since after transition, the new gender can be seen as the correct gender. To answer the original question, I'd say that the affirmation is false, because it fails to be broad enough.

[JessicaR]

While you can argue that you knew very early in your life that you were born in the wrong gender, this only goes the prove that you were initially in that wrong gender, hence why you had to transcend it to become who you are today. If I were to give my word on what I think "transgender" means, I'd say that the broad definition would be anyone who transcend gender. It doesn't really matter if you see it as binary or as a spectrum, as long as your moving from one position in the gender "scale" to another, you earn the title of being transgendered. That definition includes genderqueer, androgynous and gender fluid people, drag queens and drag kings, intersexed people and of course, transsexuals.

  I respectfully disagree. It would be more accurate to suggest that we all transcend biological sex. (XX, XY)

  I really don't see any of us as moving from place to place on a spectrum; most of us place ourselves on a very specific place on that spectrum or assert the ability to move throughout.

  "Transgender" is not a title, nor is the attribute earned. To suggest so is to suggest a hierarchy. Categories exist but no transgender person should consider her/himself more valid than anyone else.

  Drag queens identify as male; drag kings identify as female. There's nothing truly transgender going on there and these folks generally don't see themselves as part of the transgender community. Their performance identities are defined by their sexual preference, not by their gender identities. 

  Lots to learn there, babykittenful.

[kate durcal]

False, transgender is far broader than that. Have a look in the Wiki section. As it has been largely written by Susan's people it is very good.

Also I think a lot us really don't like labels they tend to be inaccurate and even hurtful. I'm not trans anything. I'm a woman with a birth defect that is being medically corrected.

Cindy

Ditto!!!

Kate

[kate durcal]

No you have it completely backwards. Gender is Binary. Sexuality is a spectrum.

Beg to disagree. Gender is an spectrum from very female to half female half male, to very male, to no gender at all.

Kate

[Laurry]

Neither option is correct. 

Just as there is no true binary in sex or gender, there is no true binary with true and false.  There is ALWAYS a middle.  (And even though us light-switch enthusiasts and computer wienies may argue differently, as every good spouse and/or politician knows, one should never let the facts get in the way of a good argument.)

     Spoon boy: Do not try and bend the spoon. That's impossible. Instead... only try to realize the truth.
     Neo: What truth?
     Spoon boy: There is no spoon.
     Neo: There is no spoon?
     Spoon boy: Then you'll see, that it is not the spoon that bends, it is only yourself.

Maybe I should just say it this way...there is no true or false, only your own bent self....err...twisted beliefs...I mean...oh shut up!

As discussed earlier in this thread, at one point everybody KNEW the earth was flat.  Who is to say it actually wasn't?  We weren't there...well, most of us weren't, but some of you old heifers may have been.  Isn't it true that one's perception defines one's reality?  Do we have so little faith in the power of our true natures that we can be 100% sure the entire universe didn't shift at a fundamental level to follow Copernicus' belief of the way things are?  I know I do.

Now, if somebody could just tell me what I said, and then point me to the door, I'd be truly (or falsely?) grateful

....Laurry
   

[Sarah B]

Hi Laurry

You said:

Now, if somebody could just tell me what I said, and then point me to the door, I'd be truly (or falsely?) grateful

....Laurry

I'm sorry but you cannot be truly or falsely grateful, you can only be, "you maybe grateful" 

Warm regards
Sarah B

[babykittenful]

  I respectfully disagree. It would be more accurate to suggest that we all transcend biological sex. (XX, XY)

  I really don't see any of us as moving from place to place on a spectrum; most of us place ourselves on a very specific place on that spectrum or assert the ability to move throughout.

  "Transgender" is not a title, nor is the attribute earned. To suggest so is to suggest a hierarchy. Categories exist but no transgender person should consider her/himself more valid than anyone else.

  Drag queens identify as male; drag kings identify as female. There's nothing truly transgender going on there and these folks generally don't see themselves as part of the transgender community. Their performance identities are defined by their sexual preference, not by their gender identities. 

  Lots to learn there, babykittenful.

Considering how there are so few people who are actually aware of their genome, I'd say the "XY-XX" would be pretty hard to put as discriminating factor on what transgendered means.

I think we can think gender in about three sides. There is the gender you feel you are, the "inner" gender. That is the gender we, as transsexuals, have to fight to get recognized as the most important gender, the "real" one. There is also the gender you present yourself as. That means, for a closeted transsexual, that while you may feel female, but you still dress and "act" like a male. We could call this one the "projected" gender. And finally, there is the gender that is perceived by everyone around you. This one can be tricky, since every single person you mean will gender you, no matter what gender you try to project, hence the importance of "passing" for transsexual people.

At its root, "trans" opposes "cis". "Cis" means on the same side, while trans means on both sides. Something that is transparent allows you see something from the other side. Something that transcend the limits means that you can go from one side of the limit to the other, where it is no longer a limit, but a stepping floor to go higher. When I think about the word transgendered, I think it is meant to mean that the different sides of genders (inner, projected and perceived), are no longer in accordance (on the same side, or "cis").

I think a drag queen is transgendered because, even for a moment, the projected gender is changed. The flaw here could be that any comedian who ever impersonate a female character would be "stuck" with the transgender label, but I think there is a way out of it. A comedian who has impersonated a female character wouldn't define himself with that trait. Drag queens who choose the title choose to be defined by it, and therefore also fall under the umbrella of "transgendered". So does the genderqueer or the androgynous who doesn't necessarily feel like they are part of a different gender nor try to project one, but get read by other people in a confused manner. In that situation too, it's not the inner gender, but the projected and the perceived gender that allows them to come under the label. Again, one of the flaw here could be that once a transsexual person has undergone full transition and is perceived by everyone around has the gender they project, they are no longer transgendered. I'd be curious to know what other people think about this...

I know that this definition seems to contradict the one I have previously given. If I were given enough time, I'd probably be able to put up something that could encompass the two, but then again, I'm curious to see how this particular definition gets accepted compared with the other. I like how this tread allows to throw ideas like that and try to make sense out of stuff.

I don't think that setting a definition of what it means to be transgendered creates any hierarchy. This in not a title of honor nor is it a title of shame. It is just a way of describing one aspect of any given person. That person can be cisgendered or that person can be transgendered. That doesn't tell anything about this person's worth or personality, it simply tells us that this person has a gender setting that is different then that of most people.

[babykittenful]

I understand I'm being argumentative here, but why does someone elses reality have to be mine? It's kind of a turn off, that my reality has to match theirs (speaking generally here). To say someones reality is incorrect is another way of saying they are delusional.

I used to be caught up in labels much more in the past. Now, its not much of a big deal to me. I do get annoyed when others try to tell me who or what I am. I have my life and am happy with it. I'm secure in who I am. It's that stupid past that seems to bite me at times  .

Unless you don't want to be understood by the people around you, it is a good thing when everyone's reality is aligned, preferably in a logical way. If I want to start calling a cat "dog" and a bird "horse", this might become my reality. However, when I talk with other people, it's to be expected that people won't understand what I'm talking about, since our reality doesn't match. Feeling bad about a label and denying it won't keep people from posing it on you. Therefore, it could be a good thing that you have a feel for what it really means, in case you had to educate some ignorant people on the signification of it. (Like the fact that being transgendered doesn't mean anything beside its strict definition)

What if your done moving and are post-transitioned? Are you still transgendered, according to this definition?

If a person's body had a transsexual history, was corrected, and they are living in the gender they identify with, with physical bodies to match ...what are they?

I think that this is one aspect of the transsexuals under the transgendered umbrella that could seriously be debated. I'd be tempted to say that the mere fact that you had a gender switch in you life is enough to say that your life possess the attribute of being transgendered. I still have some work to do to make that part of my argumentation stronger, however, I'll see if I can come back with something that can make that intuition more valid than just the intuition I have. Until then, I have to give it to you for this part. I could very well be wrong.

It is a little complicated, I admit. So maybe it can be a good thing cut out some of the labels in our lives. While there are many labels that could apply to a person, qualifying them with the use of a qualifier is a form of denying that person their identity. While I am many things, I am a woman first. It isnt necessary to add a qualifier every time to describe myself. Its also somewhat offensive to have labels thrust on them by others.

Say for example ...a one legged runner. You can picture that one legged runner racing down the course doing their best ...and the announcers qualifying that runner every time they update the audience with ...and the one legged runner is doing so and so... Are they really calling that person a runner, equal to other runners. Or by qualifying it with the prefix one legged, are they being condescending and in truth denying that athletes identity and equal status?

-Valerie

The label itself is not condescending, its how people interpret this label. If I tell you that I have seen a black haired woman, this is a very objective statement. In no way is it diminutive, I'm just describing the person I have seen physically. If I meet a dark skinned woman, I could still make the same kind of objective statement. However, it could be seen as less objective because of how people will interpret that statement. Am I implying that the fact that this woman has dark skin gives her any undesirable trait? I have said nothing about such traits, I just gave an objective description of the person I've met, its the people who are listening and interpreting what I said who are actually putting the diminutive attributes.

The same goes with transgendered. It is nothing more then a piece of information about that person, and it doesn't tell us anything about that person's worth or unique qualities. We should not fear the label. Instead, we should keep fighting until it becomes just as objective as being "black haired" or "red haired". There is nothing wrong with being transgendered, so why should we be ashamed of being called by that name?

[babykittenful]

It would be racist and objectionable, if an additive description was not also used for people of other color.

The same would be true using the label transgendered woman. If you use it to describe that woman, then dont use other additives in the same conversation to describe other ladies, then that is qualifying that person and applying a judgment, in my opinion.

I understand what you mean, and I agree with you. However, even if it can be seen as rude to consistently repeat an information that shouldn't matter when making a judgement, that doesn't mean that the simple act of stating it is objectionable. While referring constantly to someone has "that transgendered person" would certainly become rude, because being transgendered is far from accurately describing what that person really is like and might even give a false impression that we should "guess" other characteristics from this single one, the fact remains that this person is not less transgendered. It's not the fact that you say it that is rude, but the fact that you say it in a manner that implies that we should judge that person based on it. I think these are two different things.

[Catherine]

I understand what you mean, and I agree with you. However, even if it can be seen as rude to consistently repeat an information that shouldn't matter when making a judgement, that doesn't mean that the simple act of stating it is objectionable. While referring constantly to someone has "that transgendered person" would certainly become rude, because being transgendered is far from accurately describing what that person really is like and might even give a false impression that we should "guess" other characteristics from this single one, the fact remains that this person is not less transgendered. It's not the fact that you say it that is rude, but the fact that you say it in a manner that implies that we should judge that person based on it. I think these are two different things.

Referring to a person as 'that transgendered person' is not rude it is discriminatory and as such should be stamped on. The Discrimination Law of 2010 in the UK stops this sort of thing for all groups of diversity and anyone associated with a diverse group.

People should be left to get on with their lives as they see fit. For me that means being the woman I have always known myself to be

[Catherine]

Sure

I am not 'trans-ing' or moving to another physical sex. I am not in transition. I am legally, medically and socially female. if someone misrepresents who I am and disregards how to relate with me, then there is no potential for relationship, be it friend, acquaintance or stranger.

I have no desire for a legal or public status other than female. If political groups (trans or otherwise) move in this direction, they will surely have a big fight on their hands.

I so agree with you on this.

I did a talk to a government department in the UK... and the main question they wanted to be answered was how to treat trans people. I told them we just want the trans bit to be ignored and treat us as we are. For me that is as just a woman nothing else.

And that is what they do

[Juliet]

Referring to a person as 'that transgendered person' is not rude it is discriminatory and as such should be stamped on. The Discrimination Law of 2010 in the UK stops this sort of thing for all groups of diversity and anyone associated with a diverse group.

People should be left to get on with their lives as they see fit. For me that means being the woman I have always known myself to be

Are you saying its discriminatory because the speaker is saying "person" instead of man or woman, or because the speaker is putting the word transgender before the word person?

[Stephe]

It just sucks that we are going to have a very hard time gaining acceptance when our definitions are all wishywashy.  People dislike what they don't understand.  If the public can't get a grasp on what being transgender means, in a simple straight-forward fashion, they will not understand it and will not take it seriously.  We need to put our egos aside and settle on a damn definition of the word, even if it means having the definition not reflect 100% of everyone's individual feelings perfectly to a tee.

I think one of the main problems with -us- being accepted is the vast majority of trans people haven't accepted themselves.

I am always blown away by how many trans people get insulted if someone includes them as being TG. Sorry but if you were born with a body that doesn't match your gender id, you are transgendered. End of story, it's that simple.  Doesn't matter if you stay in the closet forever or have every surgery possible and no one on the planet knows you did. Being TG also does -not- mean you aren't a woman or female or whatever other label you cherish. You don't have to proclaim your TG status or wear it like a badge of courage, it's just a fact about what you are and where you came from. It's not a negative thing, I am lost as to why people feel insulted and feel they need to hide this from everyone?

And back to my earlier post, no one is born a woman. Unless you consider a 4 year old girl a woman and are using a different definition of the word. Female <> Woman. If that was the case no MTF could ever be a woman.  People become women just as people become men. Obviously most girls want to become women but some boys do which is what being TG is. Some girls want to be men which is also TG.

It's really not that complex if trans people would accept themselves and not be ashamed of how they were born. Life threw us a curve ball, get over it and get on with enjoying life. Being ashamed of yourself and spending your life hiding from this isn't healthy.

[Stephe]

I don't think we have to fear the label. Instead, we should choose to be proud of who we are and what we stand for. There is nothing wrong with being transgendered, and being in deny or feeling offended about it won't change the reality. While I agree some people don't want to be associated with people who don't share the same stories and obstacles, I suggest that they remember something. All of us around are part of a group called humans. Within this groups, there are people who do great things and people who do very bad things, there are people of every social class, every religion and every political views. Does being human makes you less unique as an individual? Certainly not! Of course you share many things with the other people from that group, otherwise it wouldn't be a group. Being human is just a label, but it doesn't have to be one to be ashamed of. The same goes with being transgendered. Being part of that group doesn't take away anything from you... you just are.

Instead of fighting to prove we are not "one of them", why don't we just let the label be and focus on showing the world how unique we are?

Very well said.

[Stephe]

I understand I'm being argumentative here, but why does someone elses reality have to be mine? It's kind of a turn off, that my reality has to match theirs (speaking generally here). To say someones reality is incorrect is another way of saying they are delusional.

I used to be caught up in labels much more in the past. Now, its not much of a big deal to me. I do get annoyed when others try to tell me who or what I am. I have my life and am happy with it. I'm secure in who I am. It's that stupid past that seems to bite me at times  .


What if your done moving and are post-transitioned? Are you still transgendered, according to this definition?

If a person's body had a transsexual history, was corrected, and they are living in the gender they identify with, with physical bodies to match ...what are they?

Does being transgendered and having had surgeries etc diminish your womanhood?

Yes we all have "That stupid past". Either we can learn to embrace it as part of who we are or try to run and hide from it for the rest of our lives trying to pretend it doesn't exist. We didn't create that past. It was what we were dealt. Why should we be ashamed of it? I am not saying you need to add a modifier to your title "woman" or even go around telling people you are if you don't want to. But I don't think it should be something you would be uncomfortable if people knew either.

Take a breast cancer survivor. They don't go around with a tatoo on their forehead but they shouldn't be ashamed of it and try to pretend it never happened either. They will always be a cancer survivor, just something in their past that likely has an affect on who they now are and what their perspective is like.

As TG's, we also have a unique perspective of the world cis people would never be able to grasp. I think it's a good thing and makes us tough YMMV of course..

[Catherine]

Are you saying its discriminatory because the speaker is saying "person" instead of man or woman, or because the speaker is putting the word transgender before the word person?

It is discriminatory because of the 'transgendered' part. but also the tone of it with 'that'... I am a person, I may be transgendered but that is my business no one else's.

We should be free to be who we are without others labelling us in s derogatory manner.

[Catherine]

I think one of the main problems with -us- being accepted is the vast majority of trans people haven't accepted themselves.

I am always blown away by how many trans people get insulted if someone includes them as being TG. Sorry but if you were born with a body that doesn't match your gender id, you are transgendered. End of story, it's that simple.  Doesn't matter if you stay in the closet forever or have every surgery possible and no one on the planet knows you did. Being TG also does -not- mean you aren't a woman or female or whatever other label you cherish. You don't have to proclaim your TG status or wear it like a badge of courage, it's just a fact about what you are and where you came from. It's not a negative thing, I am lost as to why people feel insulted and feel they need to hide this from everyone?

And back to my earlier post, no one is born a woman. Unless you consider a 4 year old girl a woman and are using a different definition of the word. Female <> Woman. If that was the case no MTF could ever be a woman.  People become women just as people become men. Obviously most girls want to become women but some boys do which is what being TG is. Some girls want to be men which is also TG.

It's really not that complex if trans people would accept themselves and not be ashamed of how they were born. Life threw us a curve ball, get over it and get on with enjoying life. Being ashamed of yourself and spending your life hiding from this isn't healthy.

The problem with labels is that it gives people an excuse to discriminate. I know I am transgendered, I would suspect everyone who is transgendered knows this unless they are deluded. I just dont want to be known as being transgendered. It is private information to me.

The problem is do I particularly want everyone else knowing this or do I just want to be seen as what I am ?? Personally I want to just fit in and live my life. I don't want people knowing what I was or the fact that I have changed my body.

I understand that people are different and have differing views to me. But as I have said I just want to get on with my life now I have fixed it.