Susan's Place Transgender Resources

Right now transgender persons are considered to have a mental disorder because they are TG.  Right now we are pushing to have ENDA passed including the T.

In the recent ruling on Prop 8 in California, Judge Walker cited a number of reasons why same-sex marriage should be allowed.  On page 76, item 47e it reads:

e. Tr 2027:19-2028:2 (Herek: Homosexuality is not considered a mental disorder. The American Psychiatric Association, the American Psychological Association and other major professional mental health associations have all gone on record affirming that homosexuality is a normal expression of sexuality and that it is not in any way a form of pathology.);

Imagine what the proponents of Prop 8 would have been able to say if homosexuality was still recognized as a mental disorder.  "We are allowing mentally disordered people to marry!"  That alone would have made it an uphill battle. 

Our battle for equality, our battle to end discrimination, are tough enough.  Having TG listed as a mental disorder will only make it that much tougher.

*Nodding*

Thanks for the 'pause for thought', Julie Marie. I've always believed that anything approaching mental disorder was the natural result of emotions brought on by gender dysphoria - basically, quite well removed. But I'd not considered the legal and societal implications of it.. until now, of course!

My first psych appointment is on Monday, to get the letter for my surgeon. It leaves a bitter taste in my mouth the necessity of it. Someone needs to develop a new assessment for suitability for surgery that does not involve classification as a mental illness.

Quote from: Nicky on August 06, 2010, 05:12:37 PM
My first psych appointment is on Monday, to get the letter for my surgeon. It leaves a bitter taste in my mouth the necessity of it. Someone needs to develop a new assessment for suitability for surgery that does not involve classification as a mental illness.

I thought such appointments were always there to rule out mental illness, as I'd have thought a deeper problem would not leave you in a mind sound enough to consider undergoing life-changing procedures. I've already been screened for my own safety, to make sure I'm not at risk of really potent depression, and presumably any chance that my issues about something else have simply been misplaced as gender dysphoria. As far as that sort of check-up is concerned.. I'm kind of glad mental health checks are involved, as it confirms that what I have is not some form of illness.

Unfortunately, I think that you have a misperception of what a "mental disorder" is.  From the WIKI, "A mental disorder or mental illness is a psychological or behavioral pattern associated with distress or disability that occurs in an individual and is not a part of normal development or culture".  Certainly, most of us have had distress from being trans and we are most certainly not part of normal development or culture.  I have a number of others; Social anxiety disorder, general anxiety disorder, clinical depression.  Maybe a third of all humans experience a "mental disorder" at some point in their life.  So says the Wiki.  It just isn't a big deal.  YOU feel perfectly fine about it, but they don't.  Maybe some day in my lifetime it will be perfectly accepted.  Hopefully in yours.  But as it is now, an opinion poll asking if transsexuals are "perfectly normal", would, I think, generate a huge no in response.  Saying it shouldn't be is not the same as convincing others that it isn't so.  The perception must be changed first, then there will come a day when everyone looks back and says, "damn, we had some stupid ideas back then"!   It wasn't that long ago that a black and white straight couple walking down the street in any city, north or south, would have been fearing for their safety.  I am old enough to remember those days.  I remember the first black/white kiss on tv, the first black/white relationship presented as just two people.  Look at it now.  It will happen for us. 

Quote from: Cindy Stephens on August 06, 2010, 06:30:22 PM
Unfortunately, I think that you have a misperception of what a "mental disorder" is.  From the WIKI, "A mental disorder or mental illness is a psychological or behavioral pattern associated with distress or disability that occurs in an individual and is not a part of normal development or culture".
Maybe a third of all humans experience a "mental disorder" at some point in their life.  So says the Wiki.  It just isn't a big deal.  YOU feel perfectly fine about it, but they don't. 
The perception must be changed first,

I mostly agree with the poster above me.
it doesn't bother me at all. Is homosexuality a mental disorder? no, but being gay and being a transsexual are a lot different.  and I guess I feel like gender identity disorder belongs in the DSM for diagnostic purposes. there's nothing abnormal, per say, about having a mental disorder, but it's a problem, that when severe enough requires some sort of treatment to prevent harm. in this case the treatment is transitioning. it would certainly be nice if the perception changed, and people viewed the disorder the way they might depression or bipolar or borderline personality disorder, but that doesn't mean it shouldn't remain in the DSM

I don't want to fall out with anyone but I so disagree with those who want to separate gender ID and sexuality completely. Yes they are different, but they both form part of my core identity, my mind. They are both triggered by the grey matter of the brain and not the body. Neither allows my biology to function as intended.

Ergo I am 100% convinced beyond any possibility of debate that IF gender ID is to be classed a mental disorder then so is having an inverted sexual orientation. Sorry but the medical logic involved here is simply indisputable and the only reason why one condition is so designated and the other isn't is because more people suffer from alternate sexual orientation than do alternate gender Identity.

Simply put it would appear to me to be pure prejudice to say otherwise, and I firmly believe it should be called out for what it is. Oh - and before anyone starts, there are plenty of examples of people who are prejudiced against their own kind, so just because someone is trans themselves doesn't mean that they can't exhibit prejudiced thinking towards themselves and others like them. It's quite logical really. If you see yourself as in some way defective then you will tend to also project that perceived defect as a "defect" onto others that have the same attribute.

Well for the record I do not see having a trans past as a defect or something to be ashamed of. It's not a flaw, it's a gift, and actually something I am quite proud of, even if I don't choose to advertise it to everyone I meet.

Calling gender ID a mental disorder whilst maintaining that sexual orientation is not seems simply unacceptably illogical. I will accept either that BOTH are, or than neither is, but not some arbitrary pick and choose where one unusual aspect to the functioning of my brain is regarded as simply a valid lifestyle choice whilst the other is labeled as disordered thinking.

For goodness sake. Just as I am free to choose to mate with someone with whom I will never be able to procreate, so I should also be free to choose what shape and form my body will adopt. It's as simple as that really.

Or it is for me.

The defination of a mental illness that I used, when working in that area, was any reaction to a given situation that caused a problem.

Homosexuality is not a mental illness. But being undualy distressed over it, for any reason, is.

The problem with mental illness is its association with a loss of reason. This loss of reason tends to create fear of loss of liberty.

There was a short horror story which was shown when I was still studying. A man was labeled as mentally ill. His protests were taken as evidence of his lack of insight. His distress was taken as evidence of depression and confusion. His anger was taken as evidence of his agitation and behavioural problems and so on. A number of associates were interviewed and encouraged to express their negative feelings toward this man. Just stop and think very carefully about everything you have done in the last few weeks, every person you've met. It's surprisingly easy to build a pretty convincing and self fulfilling case.

Mental illness is used frequently by politically motivated people. One of the most common is the label paranoia. In the West of Scotland and N Ireland, complaining about the Masons, for example, is generally labeled as paranois. The Masons there have a preverse influence that corrupts so much of society, but complaining about it, at least up to the early 90s was unadvisable.

In western societies, there is a generall acceptance of individualism. Expressing yourself as the opposite sex from your birth is, gradually becoming more accepted. Especially if, in the case of genetic men, you look fairly female. Genetic females, generally have more scope.

Moreover, western society is in a state of flux. Previous certainties, the church, have been dismissed. The last 400 years has seen various attempts to define new certaintities. 17th century, Protestantism, 18th century, capitalism, 19th century, imperialsm, 20th century (up to the 60s), cultural certainties. This has allowed each of us to define our own destinies. Within certain limits, we are able to express ourselves as we choose.

Gradually, mental ilness is being replaced as a means of social control by the notion of intelegence. Disagrement and dispute is said to be an example if limited intelegence. We, as a society must accept even preposterus notions, because these have been determined by experts. If we don't understand, it's because we lack the intelegence. If we openly disagree, it's because we have less intelegence than those who simply lack.

But, if we try to point anything out, that is conspiracy which means paranoia, which is mental illness.

So, there would appear to be some life in the mental illness industry yet.

Oh Woopee!

to rejennyrated.
I respect your right to your beliefs, but am having a great deal of trouble following the logic.  I think that the idea of two gay males having sex was, at one time, seen the same way as transsexualism.  It took a while to change that.  One success was having the shear numbers of gays.  People have gay friends.  Most people don't know a transsexual, and never will.  They know what they read, or see on Jerry Springer or Dr. Phil.  It also involves extensive surgery. I believe that that is a big hurdle in peoples minds.  I certainly hope that at some point empathy, compassion and just human kindness will overrule concerning us.  It hasn't yet.  Again I really see the effort at gaining this understanding FIRST, then any mental disorder association will simply fall away and people will be asking themselves how civilized people could ever have thought that.

I contend that if one is okay with TG being a mental disorder they must be prepared for prejudice and discrimination. Society has its prejudices against those it considers mentally disordered.  It's just a fact of life.

The last time I checked on the progress of the new DSM the suggestion is to rename those who are transgender but have not transitioned.  They will remain in the DSM and they will be considered by the "experts" as having a mental disorder. I doubt mainstream society will disagree with them.

Those who HAPPILY transition will no longer be considered mentally disordered but that represents only a small percentage of TG persons.

When it comes to the fight for civil rights, the courts will consider the mental stability of those fighting for their rights.  As long as there is a book that is supported by professionals in the mental health field that says someone has a mental disorder, obtaining those rights will become more difficult if not impossible.

In the Prop8 trial it was important to note that gays and lesbians were not mentally disordered and therefore their desire to wed was the result of sound thinking.  Expert witnesses that are called to testify are usually those who have a degree or some other sort of certification that shows they are well studied in the area they are being called to testify about.  If TG rights were on trial and the experts said "yes, this is a mental disorder" one can only imagine where the opponents of TG rights would take that.  And there are a lot of people out there who don't want to grant TGs ANY rights.

The AMA recognizes medical intervention as a necessary part of the TS condition and has encouraged insurance companies to cover the that.  The new DSM will, it seems, have an "out clause" for happily transitioned TS persons.  It seems the general direction is for the removal of TS from the DSM and to provide medical insurance coverage for at least GRS and HRT.

However, I have not seen any indication that any professional group is changing their stance on the pre-transitional TS, the non-transitional TG or the crossdresser.  They will continue to be mentally disordered.

ENDA was originally going to be presented to Congress without the T in it.  I suspect that was in part because of the mentally disordered status TG has.  TG has a negative stigma and I would think being listed in the DSM plays a big part in that stigma.  And so it goes.

When you look at the L, the G, the B and the T, which one ranks at the top of the list as experiencing the most discrimination?  T wins by a landslide.  In one part of the Prop8 ruling the proponent's witness was asked for evidence to support their contention that "responsible procreation is really at the heart of society's interest in regulating marriage."  Their answer was "you don't have to have evidence of this point."  In other words, it's so obvious to us we don't need evidence.  "Why do you think it's acceptable to fire someone for being transgender?"  Answer: "I think that's obvious!"  And that's the attitude we have to deal with. 

I think the Prop8 ruling is huge if for no other reason than it points out that no majority can vote away the rights of any minority.  That alone is a cause for celebration.  But if that minority is considered by the experts to be mentally disordered, you may want to hold off on celebrating just now.

BTW: I recently loaded Windows 7 on my computer and all the words I saved in the spell check dictionary were erased.  Now, when I type in crossdresser, transgender or any variation of those words, the spell checker doesn't recognize them.  What does that tell you?

Quote from: Cindy Stephens on August 07, 2010, 09:05:44 AM
It also involves extensive surgery. I believe that that is a big hurdle in peoples minds. 

It seems to me that you have actually followed the logic quite well - and indeed one of the points you make is kind of a clincher really.

Do you think that someone who does not have surgery but instead chooses to suffer the pain is any less trans? Because I don't. Yes I have had surgery. They just haven't acted on the feeling whether through lack of opportunity or whatever, but in all other respects they are as valid as I am.

In the same way someone who is sexually attracted to members of the same sex is gay in orientation, irrespective of whether they choose to act upon it.

In the case of people who do no act upon these desires they remain a hidden attribute of the inner person, ie a part of the mind.

So it is picking and choosing if you say that one disposition represents a disorder, whilst the other does not. Neither is exactly biologically helpful to the individual. Having sex with your own gender will cause you to fail to reproduce - which is after all the biological point of sex - so in that regard it COULD and I emphasise the word COULD be regarded as a disorder.

Similarly having your bits messed about with by a surgeon will similarly prevent successful procreation and hence that too COULD again emphasise the word COULD be regarded as a disorder.

Point is, as you say, people have grown to realise that in the case of someone gay, this simple biological reasoning is flawed. To call it a disorder is insulting to the intelligence and free will of the person involved.

My logic is merely that what works for one condition also applies equally to the other, since in their purest form both are merely mental dispositions.

I must therefore respectfully submit that it remains my considered opinion that the logic is inescapable. NEiTHER condition is a disorder. Both of them are just valid alternative forms of human identity.

As best I can tell, my therapist is way less inclined than am I to pathologize any aspect of the trans part of my life.

At this point, I don't think she has even jotted down a trans-related diagnosis of any kind. She & the rest of the team down there don't even phrase things the same way I do.

For example, quoted from my "carry letter":

QuoteAlthough born with male anatomy, this patient has consistently demonstrated that her life would be better lived as a woman.  (....) it is essential for her to wear female attire and live life for all intents and purposes as a female, including the use of female-specific facilities such as restrooms in locations where such facilities are gender-specific.  We have several patients in our practice that are making such a transition and it has been quite rewarding to find them happier and more fulfilled with their new gender.

We'll be hashing out some bit of cobweb in my head, and she'll challenge me: "What makes you think that's trans-related? I'm about your age, and I feel the same thing. It's just how you keep from strangling people who desperately need it." (Not a word-for-word quote. heh)

Quote from: rejennyrated on August 07, 2010, 09:31:47 AMI must therefore respectfully submit that it remains my considered opinion that the logic is inescapable. NEiTHER condition is a disorder. Both of them are just valid alternative forms of human identity.

And as your opinion, in a court of law, it would likely be considered inferior to the opinion of anyone who is degreed, certified or otherwise considered an expert by the courts.  In other words, you can have all the opinions you want but they would matter very little, if you were in court fighting for your civil rights, compared to your opponent(s) expert witnesses' testimony.

Quote from: Julie Marie on August 07, 2010, 09:17:55 AM


Those who HAPPILY transition will no longer be considered mentally disordered but that represents only a small percentage of TG persons.

The utter arrogance and preposterus stupidity of this clearly politically motivated approach is becoming funny.

A perfectly well balanced person, not depressed or anxious, holds down a job ect. not transisioned, is hereby, a loony.

A heed case if you will. Nutty as a fruit cake. Bonkers. Off their rocker.

Why? because it says so in the book and the book was written by experts.

(Anyone know what these guys are expert at??).

Sorry for the cynicism. I'm sure that, as scientists, these people have more right to grace this planet than I do. I am eternallly grateful to them for allowing me to breath.

Quote from: Julie Marie on August 07, 2010, 10:49:59 AM
And as your opinion, in a court of law, it would likely be considered inferior to the opinion of anyone who is degreed, certified or otherwise considered an expert by the courts.  In other words, you can have all the opinions you want but they would matter very little, if you were in court fighting for your civil rights, compared to your opponent(s) expert witnesses' testimony.

Quite so, but of course we are on the same side here Julie. I posted my argument in support of your original post, not against it... at least that was my intention, although it may perhaps not have been as clear as it should have been. I have signed all the petitions and written letters to various people. I totally agree that it should be removed from DSM.

Quote from: rejennyrated on August 07, 2010, 11:13:07 AM
Quite so, but of course we are on the same side here Julie. I posted my argument in support of your original post, not against it... at least that was my intention, although it may perhaps not have been as clear as it should have been. I have signed all the petitions and written letters to various people. I totally agree that it should be removed from DSM.

I understand and I wasn't debating you. I was just using your post to remind everyone that it really doesn't matter what we think when presenting our case in a court of law.  The expert's testimony will always be given more weight.  So it is to the advantage of all for TG to be removed from the DSM.

I realize many TGs think if it is they won't be covered by insurance for their therapy but that simply isn't true.  There are many legitimate reasons for seeing a therapist that insurance will cover.  The "why" you are feeling depressed, anxious, unhappy, etc doesn't matter.

The sooner it is removed from the DSM, the sooner we can begin to advance medical intervention as the acceptable form of treatment.  In time that could mean not only would GRS and HRT be covered but also, in some cases, BA & even FFS.  The intent would be for medical procedures and treatments to result in a happier person and hopefully end the psychological distress.

Of course, if society was as accepting as they are towards people with red hair, most of us wouldn't suffer the effects of prejudice and discrimination.  Though I doubt I'll see that in my lifetime.

I have to be the one to go against the grain here. From a medical standpoint, my body is perfectly fine. It all works...it just doesn't match my mental state. The mind cannot be "fixed" ... so instead you "fix" the body. In that sense, I think it's logical to have it in the DSM. There's nothing wrong with my body in a biological sense and the need to transition comes from the mind.

If not classed as a mental disorder, what would it be classed as? It's not an illness like diabetes or something else physical so there's nowhere else to put it. We require medical help (the ones who choose to transition anyway) so it needs a medical label.

Comparing TG's to homosexuals doesn't work at all, homosexuals don't need treatment of any kind, body...mind, it's all fine the way it is.

There are many different kinds of mental disorder, all perfectly valid and treatable. This disorders treatment is transition. The fact that their are many TG's who cope perfectly fine with their dysphoria and live happy lives in their birth gender proves their are different levels of severity, just like with any other mental disorder.

I have a problem with it being considered a mental illness. We all know it is not just in the mind. It is not just in our thoughts, but is wired deeper than that, into our very neurology.

I don't want people to say "you are not a woman, you just think you are, you have a mental illness". It just robs my validity as a woman.

Why not call it a physical disorder? I'm a woman, it is not my mind that is wrong but my body. Ok, medically my body is sound, but it is wrong, I was born without a vagina, a vulva, uterus, and ovaries. That is a real physical problem right there. Ar the intersexed considered to have a mental illness? Not at all. Our 'condition' is very much like an intersexed one.

Perhaps it is the stigma of having a mental illness that I don't like. But then I can't escape that anyway considering I suffer from clinical depression.

Wait a moment,

you still have homosexuality (and bisexuality and asexuality or - theoretically - even heterosexuality or God knows what) in the DSM-IV and the ICD-10.

To be more precise, it's called "ego-dystonic sexual orientation" (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ego-dystonic_sexual_orientation (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ego-dystonic_sexual_orientation)).

Being gay or bi or whatever is not the issue here, but if you suffer like hell from what you are into and desperately want to have a different orientation. And I think this is okay as a diagnosis, as it may pay your visits to a therapist to get along better with yourself and find out what works best for your life - having gay partnerships or staying abstinent or whatever. I rather want this to stay in the ICD-10 and have people get help than seeing them shoot themselves as they cannot stand being straight  ;).

So I don't see that much of a problem having TG in the DSM-IV as long as it limits itself to the suffering, not the fact that people are transgendered.

Here in the US, with our arcane health care laws, it could at some point become a financial blessing to have it in the DSMV.  A girl in Boston was able to get a deduction for her surgery after a lengthy fight.  I believe that a large part of her argument was that it wasn't simply a "cosmetic" procedure which under American tax law is not deductible, but rather a cure for a medical diagnosis.  I wouldn't want to argue for inclusion based just on this fact, but it is helpful to those who may be in the higher income levels-$20,000 at the 28% tax rate is a tax savings of $5,600.  Once SOCIAL norms include us, It may even make it easier to have it included as part of medical insurance policies. But that isn't what I am arguing. 
    My argument to leave it the way it is at the moment is that it is the one clear, logical, argument against the right wing wacko's-it isn't SIN, it is a birth defect that causes a harmless divergence from the social norm that often produces social "distress" because of the right wing wacko's insistence that Christian "witch-doctoring" can "cure" it. People can understand that, and I think that that is the politically expedient way to social acceptance.  Taking it out of the dsmv does nothing for acceptance.  People, at least in America, will consider you mentally disordered whether it is in there or not.  Then, when people go looking for an explanation of what you are, the wacko priests can fall back on "they are sinners who hate God", kind of a thingy.  If you have a diagnoses of "mental disorder" people have at least some empathy.  "Gee, they can't help it." Empathy begets compassion, and compassion breeds allies.  Don't forget, there are many transsexuals on this board, but in real life we are few and far apart.  We need allies in this fight.  I live in Florida, and for every brave >-bleeped-< willing to speak up, there are a hundred christian priests pointing fingers and yelling, "kill the witch!" I kind of like the idea of a medical professional standing next to me saying,"don' be silly it is just a harmless divergence from the statistical norm, and we have ways of treating it and producing a happy, productive citizen  Now, won't you help us?"  Seems like a more productive way to fight then the "tilting at windmills" some seem to suggest.  I'm just saying.

We don't have nearly that many right-wing Christians from funky denominations here in Germany as you have in the USA, only very few and they have not much to say in society. Here, it's more important to have something written down in the DSM-IV so that we can get the transtitian paid by health insurance.

Some mental illness is treatable.  I have major depression, but there is treatment for it.  I think that transsexuals also experience a degree of mental distress until they receive treatment, but the condition is treatable.  The cause is biological but the result is gender dysphoria, which is treatable.

The first thing we need to do is to stop putting our selves on the same plane as Gays, Lesbians and Bi-Sexuals.  While there are members of the TG world who sexually identify as belonging to one of those groups, our issue is one of Gender Identity; not the same thing.

The second issue is for us to get over the fact that being TS is considered a mental disorder.  We are certainly not normal.  Growing up I was utterly confused about the way I felt, why I thought that I should be a woman, I have a penis, shouldn't it be a vagina? People treated me like a man, they raised me to be a man, which was really confusing as I was obviously a woman - Yep pretty disordered if you ask me.  So what the fark is wrong with that?  I sought help, and I received it, and received the recommended treatment, which just happened to be the treatment I wanted, and resulted in the outcome I wanted.

Take it off the books and what do we have?

-={LR}=-

I have to agree with you on both points ladyrider.

Though I wouldn't be seen dead using an iMac.

Quote from: Fencesitter on August 07, 2010, 03:28:18 PM
Wait a moment, you still have homosexuality (and bisexuality and asexuality or - theoretically - even heterosexuality or God knows what) in the DSM-IV and the ICD-10.

No, homosexuality was removed from the DSM some time ago.  And that's the point I'm making here.  The fact it was removed from the DSM gave the plaintiffs the ability to say. "This is not a mental disorder and the experts have said so."  TGs cannot say that.

Quote from: Ladyrider on August 08, 2010, 01:05:26 AM
The first thing we need to do is to stop putting our selves on the same plane as Gays, Lesbians and Bi-Sexuals.  While there are members of the TG world who sexually identify as belonging to one of those groups, our issue is one of Gender Identity; not the same thing.

The second issue is for us to get over the fact that being TS is considered a mental disorder.  We are certainly not normal.  Growing up I was utterly confused about the way I felt, why I thought that I should be a woman, I have a penis, shouldn't it be a vagina? People treated me like a man, they raised me to be a man, which was really confusing as I was obviously a woman - Yep pretty disordered if you ask me.  So what the fark is wrong with that?  I sought help, and I received it, and received the recommended treatment, which just happened to be the treatment I wanted, and resulted in the outcome I wanted.

Take it off the books and what do we have?

-={LR}=-

To your first point, transgender is the one commonality LGBT people have.  There are effeminate gays and masculine lesbians and it is the crossing of the gender lines in presentation that causes most people to think someone is gay or lesbian.  And that often leads to discrimination and prejudice.  So we do have a link.  The reason I have cited the Prop 8 ruling here is because it covers a lot of the issues we face when fighting for our rights.

To your second issue, what is normal?  Do we define normal according to man's law or according to nature's law?  In nature, normal is unique.  No two things are identical.  So, according to nature's law, we are very normal.  Remember: it's not nice to fool with Mother Nature!  As far as your opinion that you were disordered because society refused to accept you for who you are, that doesn't wash with me. They screwed up simply by the fact that we are who we are because of what's between our ears, not what's between our legs.

If TG is removed from the DSM what do we have?  We have a medical condition that is already recognized by the American Medical Association.  And they have urged insurance companies to cover our medical costs.  The IRS now allows for unreimbursed medical expenses for GRS and HRT to be deducted on your taxes.  This is because both recognize the TS condition as a medical condition and not a mental condition.  If it were strictly mental the focus would be trying to make us believe we are happy with the gender we were born.  Frankly, I've had enough brainwashing.

Quote from: Cindy Stephens on August 07, 2010, 06:39:45 PM
Here in the US, with our arcane health care laws, it could at some point become a financial blessing to have it in the DSMV.  A girl in Boston was able to get a deduction for her surgery after a lengthy fight.  I believe that a large part of her argument was that it wasn't simply a "cosmetic" procedure which under American tax law is not deductible, but rather a cure for a medical diagnosis.

Yes, it was allowed because it was medical, not mental.  The DSM had nothing to do with it.  Maybe it was WPATH she used to make her case.

This really doesn't affect me much any more.  But I am concerned with those who are taking or going to take the path to transition and especially those who have, are or will experience discrimination because they are TG.  Once mental health professionals declare this condition is not mental but instead medical (and the flow is going in that direction) we can face our opponents who feel it's right to discriminate against us because we're mentally disordered and say, "Prove it!" and they won't be able to.

We need to distance ourselves from the antiquated belief we are messed up because society has punished us, repressed us, discriminated against us and shunned us.  If they did to people with red hair what they've done to us, the people with red hair would be pretty unhappy too.  It's not us, it's society.  History tells of many similar situations.  This is no different.

Gays and lesbians have seen a marked improvement in social acceptance since the removal of homosexuality from the DSM.  I think we will see the same.

Transgender doesn't need to be in any manual. If transgender, a treatable congental limp or a birth mark are causing severe anxiety then the treatment should be a matter of medical necessity.

It is the consequences that need to be treated.

As long as, for example, transgender, is taken as the problem, it will be transgender that is treated, not the consequences. That leaves up open to some quack coming up with an alternative treatment. ECT for example.

I don't think you've thought this through. I'm afraid I disagree with everyone in this thread.

If it's not confirmed to be a physical birth defect identifiable at birth and it's not a mental illness the NHS has no obligation to treat it as begin a transsexual is then apparently nothing more than a lifestyle choice.

Gender Identity Disorder is a mental disorder with biological roots as much as any other disorder of the brain untreated this condition spawned alot of co-morbid factors in me and others why else do you think depression and attempted suicide is so common within those who are untreated?

It's a mental illness and I disapprove of your stigma against mental illness in general Yeah it's a mental illness and it deserves to be treated as much as any other. I don't give a >-bleeped-< what trans-phobic conservatives say or what there gross misconceptions about it begin. Bucking to those ideas really just propagates there lies "Just begin in your head and you can be talked out of it."

My transsexuallity is in my head. It's in my brain current study seems to show the gross anatomy of it is incongruent with the gross anatomy of my body but I can't fix my brain otherwise I would have.

A congenital limp or birthmark wouldn't be funded under most insurance plans or the NHS because that's cosmetic regardless of the anxiety (Well a limp might be depending on it's cause.), Of course what we need to do is much deeper than just cosmetics.

With great respect Pebbles, I'm not really sure that is correct. Birthmarks and others are treated on the NHS. The priority being given to those whose lives are most disrupted by them.

(Quick edit to remove the link. It is to a medical site giving information about treating birthmarks in the UK. I apologise for putting this in. It is against the posting rules).

But in any case, the point I'm attempting to make is that we, as a community, really need to be thinking very carefully about how we allow ourselves to be pigeon holed.

Many of us remember when problems such as ours would have been regarded as a source of shame. Now, we are to be classed as mentally ill.

I accept that, since I have managed to come to terms with myself so well that my priority is and should be lower than for someone who has not, especially a younger person.

The problem will always be getting our gps to refer us for the treatment we need. But that will exist in any case.

To: Julie Marie,

I do taxes so I went back and looked at the GLAD page describing the tax deduct-ability of of GRS surgery.  They actually pled the case and supplied the lawyers.  In their extended description they CLEARLY indicated that the fundamental argument made was based on a diagnosis of GID, a psychiatric evaluation.  Perhaps you were confused because shrinks, being medical doctors, give "medical opinions".  They are all part and parcel of the American Medical Association. This association, in turn, gives "authority" to psychiatrists in this area.  Non-psychiatrists step in for surgery, hormones etc.  It may not "effect you much anymore" but it does me.  I could use extra cash in my pocket, rather than give it to Mr. IRS.   
     I would also like to point out that airline pilots being treated for clinical depression can still fly if using the new Non-drowsy Psychiatric drugs.  They don't let "crazy" people (knowingly) fly 757's.  Clinical depression is a Psychiatric disorder exactly like GID.  People with it are not crazy, they just have a mild (psychiatric), treatable medical problem.  They allow the fates of hundreds of people to fly off in their hands.

Quote from: Julie Marie on August 08, 2010, 01:44:47 PM
No, homosexuality was removed from the DSM some time ago.  And that's the point I'm making here.  The fact it was removed from the DSM gave the plaintiffs the ability to say. "This is not a mental disorder and the experts have said so."  TGs cannot say that.

Look at my posting again, I made the point that it's not homosexuality per se which is in the DSM or ICD, but if you suffer like hell from it. If I remember well, just having an "ugly" nose is not in the ICD or DSM either, but if you suffer from a lot of complexes because of that, you get a diagnosis.

There seems to be a general consensus here that you don't need a GID diagnosis to be covered for DIG related emotional distress.  If that's the case, then you don't need GID to be in the DSM to get insurance coverage for emotional problems arising from being TG.

My insurance carrier refused to cover every physical treatment, right down to hormones, because they said this is a mental disorder according to the DSM.  They will cover all the therapy I want to pay half for for as long as I live.  Because this is seen as a mental disorder, I have paid for every penny of my transition, continue to pay for blood tests and hormones completely out of pocket.  Most of the people I know who have health care coverage are in the same boat.

By that line of reasoning it serves no beneficial purpose to keep TG in the DSM but rather hurts us.  Every bit of emotional distress we feel can be considered post traumatic stress disorder.  That's a lot more accurate than gender identity disorder.

Once you have transitioned and are living full time you will most likely encounter some prejudice and some discrimination and that's because most people think TGs are messed up IN THE HEAD!  Anyone who wants to agree with them, go right ahead.  Just don't drag the rest of us down with you, please.

Quote from: Julie Marie on August 09, 2010, 11:22:07 AMOnce you have transitioned and are living full time you will most likely encounter some prejudice and some discrimination and that's because most people think TGs are messed up IN THE HEAD!  Anyone who wants to agree with them, go right ahead.  Just don't drag the rest of us down with you, please. [/color][/font]

The point i'm getting at is it's not right to discriminate or persecute people because prejudice people you think your "insane" and your attitude seems to be that you think it is alright.

You raise some very valid points Julie...

Quote from: Julie Marie on August 08, 2010, 01:44:47 PM
:-*[ /color]

To your second issue, what is normal?  Do we define normal according to man's law or according to nature's law?  In nature, normal is unique.  No two things are identical.  So, according to nature's law, we are very normal.  Remember: it's not nice to fool with Mother Nature!  As far as your opinion that you were disordered because society refused to accept you for who you are, that doesn't wash with me. They screwed up simply by the fact that we are who we are because of what's between our ears, not what's between our legs.

While nature may create each of us according to mother natures laws, and takes us away, we, as unique human beings, have to live our lives according to mans law and unfortunately mans law sees being TS abnormal, and the medical community supports this for the time being.  It's pretty hard to argue that we are normal when our minds tell us that we are in the wrong body and we seek to have our genitals modified/removed as part of treatment for our condition (I have intentionally simplified here). If it is taken off the books, how will MD's diagnose a person is TS.  Would the doctor be able to perform a series of tests to determine this?  Would he refer the patient to a pshrink and if so where would the pshrink go for a guide to diagnosis.  This whole issue is not as simple as getting us delisted and personally I believe that the condition be modified as outlined in the draft DSM5 if adopted it will go a long way towards improving the lives of TS.

As far as the DSM being used against us, US citizens use their constitution against fellow citizens, and the same happens with the DSM, as long as there are humans there will be discrimination.  I know, I know, it doesn't make it right, it's just a fact of life.

-={LR}=-

but i think if it's not considered a mental disorder, other people may be more discriminant. if people understand that we didn't choose this, and that we are doing it for our own good, i think there would be less discrimination, but if people look at it as there being nothing "wrong" with us, they may just dismiss us with labels. that's just my thoughts on it.

---

Post Merge: August 09, 2010, 04:30:08 PM

---

Quote from: pebbles on August 08, 2010, 02:03:30 PM
I don't think you've thought this through. I'm afraid I disagree with everyone in this thread.

If it's not confirmed to be a physical birth defect identifiable at birth and it's not a mental illness the NHS has no obligation to treat it as begin a transsexual is then apparently nothing more than a lifestyle choice.

Gender Identity Disorder is a mental disorder with biological roots as much as any other disorder of the brain untreated this condition spawned alot of co-morbid factors in me and others why else do you think depression and attempted suicide is so common within those who are untreated?

It's a mental illness and I disapprove of your stigma against mental illness in general Yeah it's a mental illness and it deserves to be treated as much as any other. I don't give a >-bleeped-< what trans-phobic conservatives say or what there gross misconceptions about it begin. Bucking to those ideas really just propagates there lies "Just begin in your head and you can be talked out of it."

My transsexuallity is in my head. It's in my brain current study seems to show the gross anatomy of it is incongruent with the gross anatomy of my body but I can't fix my brain otherwise I would have.

A congenital limp or birthmark wouldn't be funded under most insurance plans or the NHS because that's cosmetic regardless of the anxiety (Well a limp might be depending on it's cause.), Of course what we need to do is much deeper than just cosmetics.

i agree. i look at it from a similar perspective.

Quote from: pebbles on August 08, 2010, 02:03:30 PM
I don't think you've thought this through. I'm afraid I disagree with everyone in this thread.

If it's not confirmed to be a physical birth defect identifiable at birth and it's not a mental illness the NHS has no obligation to treat it as begin a transsexual is then apparently nothing more than a lifestyle choice.

Gender Identity Disorder is a mental disorder with biological roots as much as any other disorder of the brain untreated this condition spawned alot of co-morbid factors in me and others why else do you think depression and attempted suicide is so common within those who are untreated?

It's a mental illness and I disapprove of your stigma against mental illness in general Yeah it's a mental illness and it deserves to be treated as much as any other. I don't give a >-bleeped-< what trans-phobic conservatives say or what there gross misconceptions about it begin. Bucking to those ideas really just propagates there lies "Just begin in your head and you can be talked out of it."

My transsexuallity is in my head. It's in my brain current study seems to show the gross anatomy of it is incongruent with the gross anatomy of my body but I can't fix my brain otherwise I would have.

A congenital limp or birthmark wouldn't be funded under most insurance plans or the NHS because that's cosmetic regardless of the anxiety (Well a limp might be depending on it's cause.), Of course what we need to do is much deeper than just cosmetics.

This is the point I was trying to make but I think you managed to verbalise it much better.

People with mental disorders are still perfectly "normal" people. They just happen to have a chemical screw-up somewhere in the brain which requires treatment if it hinders their quality of life. Sounds identical to GID if you ask me.

I don't think removing it would improve the social stigma at all. If somebody points or makes a crack at a transwoman for being a "man in a dress" - would waving a certificate in front of their face saying they have a medical problem and aren't crazy really make the idiot making the comments change? I'm pretty sure dwarfism has always been a medical problem yet I can't go out in public with my dwarf sister without seeing her getting yelled at and talked about. Idiots will always be idiots, no matter what the label.

I am surprised however at the amount of american health insurance policys that don't cover the cost of hormones. The NHS will pay for therapy, hormones, hair removal and GRS. I agree with the fact that they will not fund BA or FFS, seeing as their are tons of bio-women born flat/small chested or with masculine facial features who wouldn't be funded. (although in rare cases if said small chest brings about severe emotional distress then BA would be funded)

I can understand there will be some difference of opinion between those of use who are old and wearing out and the younger ones who can still climb the stairs without hearing their knees crack.

In my time, working in psychiatry, one of the saddest things I saw was a lot of old women, in their 60s 70s and 80s, shuffeling around in carpet slippers, clutching their hand bags, stairing into space and often muttering to themselves.

A quick check of their case notes showed many had been admitted with social deviency. In other words, as young women, they had become pregnant. In those days, the only way to get an abortion was to be admitted into a mental hospital.

I don't trust psychiatrists, people who work in psychaitry, psychiatric social workers and especially charlitans who call themseves therapists. I am very disturbed at the idea of accepting a mental health disgnosis simply to get free, or partly free treatment.

I really think you are playing with fire here.

You may find insurance companies are prepared to pay $100k a pop for SRS. Equally, you may find that some preferr the cheaper option of a dose of ECT and a pocket full of chloropromazine.

Many of you have experiences hostility from family, especially parents. How long will it be before some well connected parent has their GID off spring admitted to a mental hospital as a rather more respectable alternative to admitting to the neighbours that their precious can't cut it with the opposite sex?

American mental hospitals are very backward compared to most of the world. Their insistance of using diagnostic lables rather than symptoms as criteria is dark ages stuff.  Some of their practices were abandoned here in Europe and many other parts of the world 50 or 60 years ago.

If there were a single cause of GID, such as brain development or indeed anything else, then there may be some case. But the reality is that there is no single cause. GID is not a condition that can be described in terms of a single category. GID is a syndrome. Identified by symptoms. More importantly, its treatment is dependant upon the needs and wishes of the individual.

I apologise for being rather blunt here. But these are the real issues.


Edit, I've just re-read this post and realised that, by forgetting an important figure, the post doesn't make a lot of sense.

The line: was a lot of old women, in their 60s 70s and 80s, Should read was a lot of old women, in their 60s 70s and 80s, admitted 40, 50 years earlier......

How about we work on removing the stigma against mental illness instead?

I'm sick of hearing, "we're not crazy like those other people" as a justification for this. That's buying into EXACTLY what created this problem in the first place-- the idea that mental disorders make people freaks to be looked down upon. It's appalling. Bedlam is long gone, so why is this still so pervasive?

There's a reason people refer to these things as "disorders" instead of "illnesses" nowadays. A disorder is exactly what it sounds like-- a harmful disruption to your well-being, which would benefit from treatment. The label is there so that you can get the most appropriate treatment (how accurate these labels are is something that obviously needs to change in the next DSM... No more "NOS" BS!  spacial is spot on about using categorical labels rather than symptoms for diagnosis.). It also acknowledges that you SHOULD be able to get help, so that's something that should in theory (and sometimes in practice) force insurance companies to do their jobs and help you get what you need.

It doesn't mean you're flawed or should be looked down upon, no more than needing an antibiotic for a cut means you are.

...And that doesn't mean reducing mental disorders to "pop a pill and everything is solved". Sigh.

Throughout the history of mankind (here I go again, I'm a glutton for punishment) society has always selected certain people or groups of people and labeled them in such a way as to make it socially acceptable to discriminate against them, make them social outcasts, make them criminals, punish them, torture them and even kill them.

The list includes:
Christians
heretics
witches
blasphemers
handicapped
Jews
women
blacks
gays
transgender

And many more, but the point is all were stigmatized at some point in history, all were dehumanized by a society and all suffered without any real benefit to society.  But along the way society softened their views and much, if not all of the prejudice eventually died.  And that is what has to happen with us.  It takes time and it takes progress.  Allowing TG to remain in the DSM isn't progress.

Gays & lesbians fought for its removal for a reason - to advance their cause which is equal rights.  And look where they are today.  This isn't a matter of de-stigmatizing mental disorders, it's a matter of ending the belief that trans people are mentally deranged and as such cannot be trusted to make good decisions for themselves or others.  The idea isn't 'it's okay not to be normal', the idea is we have sound minds and therefore should enjoy all the same rights as everyone with sound minds.

Nothing on that list requires medical help apart from Trans and handicapped, and being handicapped is quite obviously a physical problem.

Quote from: Julie Marie on August 10, 2010, 10:25:11 AMit's a matter of ending the belief that trans people are mentally deranged and as such cannot be trusted to make good decisions for themselves or others.  The idea isn't 'it's okay not to be normal', the idea is we have sound minds and therefore should enjoy all the same rights as everyone with sound minds.[/color][/font]

Mentally disordered people still have rights and are capable of making decisions for themselves like everyone else (except in EXTREME cases)

When gays and lesbians are allowed to get married and have all of the legal rights and benefits that heterosexual couples do it won't matter what sex or gender they classify a transgender person as because the marriage of a transgender will be either a heterosexual marriage, a lesbian marriage, or a gay marriage and it won't matter if a person is classified as male or female as far as marriage is concerned.   Then we will have to deal with dress codes on and off the job.

---

Post Merge: August 10, 2010, 04:45:46 PM

---

The other big problem that heterosexuals have with transgenders is what we feel we need to do to our physical bodies to have them reflect our genders.    They feel that we must have a disorder to make those changes.

Quote from: michelle on August 10, 2010, 04:38:49 PM
The other big problem that heterosexuals have with transgenders is what we feel we need to do to our physical bodies to have them reflect our genders.    They feel that we must have a disorder to make those changes.

I know this is likely just a mistake, but btw, a lot of us identify as heterosexual.

Quote from: Ashley4214 on August 10, 2010, 08:55:54 PM
...., but btw, a lot of us identify as heterosexual.

Me too, me too.

-={LR}=-

Oh no! they are taking over!!!   :o
Me and my wife use to joke a lot about our kids coming up to us one day and saying "mum, mommie, I have something to tell you, I am straight"

and we would be all like "omg! how did this happen? what did we do wrong?"  lol

Heterophobia, wonder if anyone has ever used that term? I mean opposite sex relations just seems so unnatural to me.

Sorry, off topic here.

Let me see if I have this straight;
TG is or could very well be classified as a mental disorder, and the cure is a regimen of both surgical, and chemical procedures intended to bring the person suffering from this disorder into physical (body) and intellectual (mind) balance. The medical profession is indeed a wonderful creature with the rare gift of speaking simultaneously out of both sides of its mouth. In fact while speaking in this fashion it is also capable of speaking out of its ass as well. A rare creature indeed!!!

Quote from: gail123 on August 10, 2010, 09:55:17 PM
Let me see if I have this straight;
TG is or could very well be classified as a mental disorder, and the cure is a regimen of both surgical, and chemical procedures intended to bring the person suffering from this disorder into physical (body) and intellectual (mind) balance. The medical profession is indeed a wonderful creature with the rare gift of speaking simultaneously out of both sides of its mouth. In fact while speaking in this fashion it is also capable of speaking out of its ass as well. A rare creature indeed!!!

Not quite... No where in the medical community do they mention a "Cure", they do list a recommended course of treatment that can include surgical procedures and a drug regimen.

Refere to the DSM and SOC, etc.

-={LR}=-

Ah!

Thanks I stand corrected.
The medical profession can't offer a cure just "treatment" that may or may not include surgery (hopefully this part of the "treatment" does have an endpoint) and/or drugs ( the ongoing part?). 

Just so I have it straight;
There is no cure cure for this disorder. There is, however, a treatment which consists or may consist of surgery and /or drugs.
This regimen can in no formal way be considered a cure.
I guess the best we can hope for is remission and nice looking breasts!!!!

Quote from: Jeatyn on August 07, 2010, 02:33:52 PM
I have to be the one to go against the grain here. From a medical standpoint, my body is perfectly fine. It all works...it just doesn't match my mental state. The mind cannot be "fixed" ... so instead you "fix" the body. In that sense, I think it's logical to have it in the DSM. There's nothing wrong with my body in a biological sense and the need to transition comes from the mind.

If not classed as a mental disorder, what would it be classed as? It's not an illness like diabetes or something else physical so there's nowhere else to put it. We require medical help (the ones who choose to transition anyway) so it needs a medical label.

Comparing TG's to homosexuals doesn't work at all, homosexuals don't need treatment of any kind, body...mind, it's all fine the way it is.

There are many different kinds of mental disorder, all perfectly valid and treatable. This disorders treatment is transition. The fact that their are many TG's who cope perfectly fine with their dysphoria and live happy lives in their birth gender proves their are different levels of severity, just like with any other mental disorder.

I'm sure everyone' heard enough from me already on this subject, but thank you Jeatyn, I couldn't agree more.  You too Pebbles and Brainiac - I agree with you as well.

Removing it from the DSM would be unethical as it would deny the opportunity for treatment for many just so our group can feel better about our own validity.  Classing it as a medical condition would help alleviate this, but that would be illogical - as there is no doctor that can properly diagnose this condition or has any system of measurement to determine ones candidacy (save a psychological exam, but that throws this back into the psychological department). 

This is a problem of the mind, not the body; we only even remotely consider it to be a body problem because 1) it is more acceptable in society to have a body problem, and 2) the most popular and successful treatment available is a "body fix" as opposed to a "mind fix".

Quote from: Ladyrider on August 10, 2010, 10:17:52 PM
Not quite... No where in the medical community do they mention a "Cure", they do list a recommended course of treatment that can include surgical procedures and a drug regimen.

Refere to the DSM and SOC, etc.

-={LR}=-

The proposed DSM, thus far, states that anyone who happily transitions is no longer considered to have a mental disorder.  So in that sense, you are cured.

The change also makes it possible for individuals who have successfully transitioned to "lose" the diagnosis after satisfactory treatment. This resolves the problem that, in the DSM-IV-TR, there was a lack of an "exit clause," meaning that individuals once diagnosed with GID will always be considered to have the diagnosis, regardless of whether they have transitioned and are psychosocially adjusted in the identified gender role.
See End Note #2, paragraph 2.
http://www.dsm5.org/ProposedRevisions/Pages/proposedrevision.aspx?rid=482# (http://www.dsm5.org/ProposedRevisions/Pages/proposedrevision.aspx?rid=482#)

I'm all for keeping it a "disorder". It's easier to explain.

"I've been diagnosed with a mental disability: Gender Identity Disorder."

:o ??? :o ???

"It really is a mental disorder, look it up."

vs

"I'm transsexual"

"WTF?!?!"

No, the majority of idiots out there wont care. But the people that DO care about you will be more understanding.

That at least makes some sense.

It's only those of us unlucky enough not to have made a full transition that are saddled with a life long mental disorder, or according to some lucky enough to be so classified. 

Thanks for the clarification.

Happy sailing!!!.

Quote from: Julie Marie on August 06, 2010, 04:47:21 PM
Right now transgender persons are considered to have a mental disorder because they are TG.  Right now we are pushing to have ENDA passed including the T.

In the recent ruling on Prop 8 in California, Judge Walker cited a number of reasons why same-sex marriage should be allowed.  On page 76, item 47e it reads:

e. Tr 2027:19-2028:2 (Herek: Homosexuality is not considered a mental disorder. The American Psychiatric Association, the American Psychological Association and other major professional mental health associations have all gone on record affirming that homosexuality is a normal expression of sexuality and that it is not in any way a form of pathology.);

Imagine what the proponents of Prop 8 would have been able to say if homosexuality was still recognized as a mental disorder.  "We are allowing mentally disordered people to marry!"  That alone would have made it an uphill battle. 

Our battle for equality, our battle to end discrimination, are tough enough.  Having TG listed as a mental disorder will only make it that much tougher.

I don't dispute your supposition but to be fair, that one has an easy answer - as soon as the law bars all people with a mental disorder (such as depression) from being wed, then they can get back to us on our "disorder"

My objection to the idea of it being a disorder is simply a matter of perception - the idea that "disorder" naturally infers "harmful." If it were not for that perception, I wouldn't particularly object to itbeing called a "disorder"

That said, more and more it seems to be more accurate to suggest it is a a mental manifestation of a physical "disorder"

(and yes I know, in the sense that our plumbing is backwards, it IS a physical disorder but good luck selling the cis-world on THAT definition)

---

Post Merge: August 11, 2010, 02:22:50 AM

---

just want to add, looking over the thread a bit it seems to me pretty obvious that however we express it, we're all basically concerned about the negative implications of the "diagnosis"

i am sympathetic to the idea that until (unless) there is ever a physical indicator that can be identified, the logical description of this is as a mental condition.

It's what word is used to describe the condition - "disorder" or something else - that carries with it the baggage of perception.

The ideal word would say "this person needs therapeutic treatment to relieve the dysphoria" but NOT say "this person is sick and needs to be 'fixed'"

I'm not sure I'd pick the right word but I think I'd know it if I heard it.

Quote from: Julie Marie on August 11, 2010, 12:11:22 AM
The proposed DSM, thus far, states that anyone who happily transitions is no longer considered to have a mental disorder.  So in that sense, you are cured.

The change also makes it possible for individuals who have successfully transitioned to "lose" the diagnosis after satisfactory treatment. This resolves the problem that, in the DSM-IV-TR, there was a lack of an "exit clause," meaning that individuals once diagnosed with GID will always be considered to have the diagnosis, regardless of whether they have transitioned and are psychosocially adjusted in the identified gender role.
See End Note #2, paragraph 2.
http://www.dsm5.org/ProposedRevisions/Pages/proposedrevision.aspx?rid=482# (http://www.dsm5.org/ProposedRevisions/Pages/proposedrevision.aspx?rid=482#)

Hopefully the proposed DSM will be adopted soon :)

-={LR}=-

Quote from: gail123 on August 10, 2010, 11:35:15 PMI guess the best we can hope for is remission and nice looking breasts!!!!

I get what you mean, but honestly, I don't like to have nice looking breasts or any breasts at all. Not really. ;)

Yes, Tammy, it is a physical condition (rare) that, due to social prejudice, causes in many people emotional distress.  Remove the social prejudice and it's a whole different animal.

If you break it down to the basics, many so-called disorders in the DSM - past, present and proposed - are simply conditions of unhappiness: dysphoria.  The psychiatric community decided that if you are unhappy and it lasts too long you have a mental disorder.  In other words, unhappiness should be a temporary condition.

Many of us could be said to be having a Social Phobia (http://www.dsm5.org/ProposedRevisions/Pages/proposedrevision.aspx?rid=163).  On the other hand we could say people who fear same sex marriage or transgender people have a Specific Phobia (http://www.dsm5.org/ProposedRevisions/Pages/proposedrevision.aspx?rid=162).  An argument can be made for either case.  It seems if you refer to the DSM every time someone is unhappy, fearful, anxious, etc, you can usually find some mental disorder from which they suffer, as long as the suffering exceeds a certain length of time.  In other words, we're all nuts, except for those who are happy all the time and then we say they are delusional!  :D

But walk out on the street and ask a dozen or so people at random what they think of someone who has a mental disorder and, if you could get them to be totally honest... ::) okay, that's a dream, but I think you know what I mean.  Society likes to keep its distance from the mentally disordered.  So it's in our best interest, as far as social acceptance, to get the psychiatric community to agree that it's societal prejudice, not our feelings about ourselves, that cause our emotional distress.

And if you need a valid reason for seeing a therapist and want your insurance to cover it, just open the DSM.  I'm sure you won't have any problem finding one, even if TG was completely removed.  Regarding HRT and GRS, the psychiatric community (most of it) follows the recommendations of WPATH (http://www.wpath.org/).  It's all laid out there.

Quote from: Julie Marie on August 11, 2010, 09:54:56 AM

But walk out on the street and ask a dozen or so people at random what they think of someone who has a mental disorder and, if you could get them to be totally honest... ::) okay, that's a dream, but I think you know what I mean.  Society likes to keep its distance from the mentally disordered.  So it's in our best interest, as far as social acceptance, to get the psychiatric community to agree that it's societal prejudice, not our feelings about ourselves, that cause our emotional distress.

Since when is dysphoria not a cause of emotional distress...?

Am I really the only one who's bothered emotionally by my dysphoria?

I definitely think it should be considered a mental disorder. It is for me, and possibly isn't for some people... But as far as my opinion goes, We were born in the wrong body, it is a "dis order" of the mind that needs to be sorted through with treatment. Gay people just need to be accepted and accept homosexuality in themselves, where as we have to do alot more...  Whether it's treatment through transition or learning coping methods. For myself this is definitely a disorder. A tragedy.. I know it's a terrible attitue and blah blah blah, but i am young and have been absolutely f*ing miserable. I lay in bed everynight with my chest ripped open crying my eyes out. I could accept being gay, but this just isn't normal.

I think gender and sex being at odds is not a disorder in itself, but just human variation.

But the consequences can lead to distress and disorders if you suffer from it.

@Torn1990
I feel sorry for you and hope you will get better soon.

Quote from: brainiac on August 11, 2010, 08:11:28 PM
Since when is dysphoria not a cause of emotional distress...?

Dysphoria is not the cause of distress, it's the result of distress.

The process goes something like this:
You are part of a group of people against whom society has a prejudice.
You are bothered by the fact you will be persecuted if society finds out.
You either fear someone finding out or you wish to be out.
This causes emotional distress.
The distress leads to dysphoria.
The cause of the dysphoria is listed in a book of mental disorders
You now have a mental disorder.

Quote from: Torn1990 on August 12, 2010, 02:53:01 AM
I definitely think it should be considered a mental disorder. It is for me, and possibly isn't for some people...

And that's the problem.  Some people torture themselves over this.  Others are perfectly fine about their gender identity condition and think society is filled with too many misinformed and uneducated people and somehow these people think it's okay to try to force other people to do what they want them to do.

And that takes us back to the Prop 8 trial.  The judge ruled it was unconstitutional for 7,000,000 people to vote away the fundamental right for gays and lesbians to marry.  Effectively agreeing with one of the Principles of Democracy:
Majority rule is a means for organizing government and deciding public issues; it is not another road to oppression. Just as no self-appointed group has the right to oppress others, so no majority, even in a democracy, should take away the basic rights and freedoms of a minority group or individual.

We are who we are.  The majority doesn't like that.  So they pressure us into conforming and attach negative consequences to non-conformance.  We are conflicted between being who we are and suffering the consequences or succumbing to the pressure and conforming.  This leads to a lot of unhappiness.  Is there a human being out there who wouldn't respond this way if being who they are had such consequences?  I doubt it.  So is it the gender identity condition?  Is it our response to social pressure?  Or is it just a misinformed, uneducated society that is unjustly punishing us for non-conformity?  I pick door number 3.

The Prop 8 ruling says no matter how many people want to vote away your fundamental rights, it is unconstitutional to do so.  We have the right to the pursuit of happiness and the majority is trying to deny us those rights by discriminating against us.  Is that any different than denying gays & lesbians the right to marry?  Not in my book!

Quote from: michelle on August 10, 2010, 04:38:49 PM

The other big problem that heterosexuals have with transgenders is what we feel we need to do to our physical bodies to have them reflect our genders.    They feel that we must have a disorder to make those changes.

THIS ^^

Even reading the title of this topic struck a nerve with me...My parents are currently dragging me to a million doctors for psychiatric evaluations, hoping one of them will declare me crazy so they can just give me a pill to "fix" me and be done with it. >-bleeped-< that >-bleeped-<. I know I'm not crazy.

QuoteDysphoria is not the cause of distress, it's the result of distress.

The process goes something like this:
You are part of a group of people against whom society has a prejudice.
You are bothered by the fact you will be persecuted if society finds out.
You either fear someone finding out or you wish to be out.
This causes emotional distress.
The distress leads to dysphoria.
The cause of the dysphoria is listed in a book of mental disorders
You now have a mental disorder.

Obviously I cannot speak for everybody, but for me the gender dysphoria and the social stigma are two separate things.

By gender dysphoria I mean the extreme discomfort that I feel with my body and especially its primary and secondary sexual characteristics. I find having the body that I do very painful at times, and I've spend much of my life desperate to have a female body rather than a male one. The  dissonance that I feel when looking in the mirror is not a social problem, although we clearly also have social problems as well. It's just that for me by far the biggest issue is and always has been the strong sense that my body is not right.

Personally, I have no social stigma. Even if I was alone on a desert island with no people around I would still feel dysphoria. It's my problem, not society's, I couldn't give a crap what society thinks

Quote from: Julie Marie on August 11, 2010, 12:11:22 AM
The proposed DSM, thus far, states that anyone who happily transitions is no longer considered to have a mental disorder.  So in that sense, you are cured.

The change also makes it possible for individuals who have successfully transitioned to "lose" the diagnosis after satisfactory treatment. This resolves the problem that, in the DSM-IV-TR, there was a lack of an "exit clause," meaning that individuals once diagnosed with GID will always be considered to have the diagnosis, regardless of whether they have transitioned and are psychosocially adjusted in the identified gender role.
See End Note #2, paragraph 2.
http://www.dsm5.org/ProposedRevisions/Pages/proposedrevision.aspx?rid=482# (http://www.dsm5.org/ProposedRevisions/Pages/proposedrevision.aspx?rid=482#)

Heh, i am all for this.  I really wont feel GID once i have fully transitioned, i am already feeling better at this point the farther I go, after SRS and FFS, i will really not need anymore therapy or anything else for that matter other then normal hormone supply.

So if they put that in the DSM i would love that.

To treat transsexuality as a mental disorder we have to ask, "What about the mind is wrong that must be fixed?" and when we  respond, "Well, the body is wrong -- that's what's wrong with the mind," to me, this doesn't sound like a solid beginning for treatment that regards transsexuality as a mental disorder.

Yes, we must undergo psych evaluations to make sure we aren't bonkers or making the wrong decision, but so must anyone joining the police force. In both cases, the psych evaluation only verifies the mental health and readiness of individuals who proceed.

There might come a day when we really do treat TG as a mental disorder, when we take a pill for the mind that remaps it to match the sex which our bodies displayed at birth. As it is, the medical community treats us as if our minds are sound and our bodies are the source of the problem. Since this is the most effective treatment currently known, since it incorporates the individual's sense of self which embraces a holistic model of health, I have to agree that we are not mentally disordered.

Quote from: Summerfall on August 12, 2010, 12:29:56 PM
To treat transsexuality as a mental disorder we have to ask, "What about the mind is wrong that must be fixed?" and when we  respond, "Well, the body is wrong -- that's what's wrong with the mind," to me, this doesn't sound like a solid beginning for treatment that regards transsexuality as a mental disorder.

You can see it either way, as the mind does not get along with what the body's like, though the body itself is functional and healthy.

As for the "anti-transsexuality pill", I would not take it, I would not be myself any more after that. Or would only give it a try if you can test it with a pill that works for, say, one week.

As for the mental disorder, there is a lot of stigma attached to it which is sad. A friend of mine is affected with a mental disorder, and she gets stigmatized a lot because it makes her unable to assume any regular work and people think she's just too lazy. But you can talk normally to her etc. because she has medicine which brings it somewhat under control.

It has been argued here that *my body functions normally, so my brain is disordered* 

How do we know the body is functioning normally?   

It is believed that brain gender is determined about a month before physical gender.  Wouldn't that indicate the body failed to conform to brain gender and therefore the body isn't functioning normally?  That's what happened to me and I challenge anyone to try and prove me wrong!

Quote from: Julie Marie on August 12, 2010, 12:54:56 PM
It has been argued here that *my body functions normally, so my brain is disordered* 

How do we know the body is functioning normally?   

It is believed that brain gender is determined about a month before physical gender.  Wouldn't that indicate the body failed to conform to brain gender and therefore the body isn't functioning normally?  That's what happened to me and I challenge anyone to try and prove me wrong!

Okay, I'll try to challenge that:
1. As far as I know, it's not clear if the pre-birth brain chemistry plays a role in the development of TS for each single transsexual.
2. The body functioning normally: you can test this - cardiological exam, handicaps, blood test, reaction test etc. Usually there are no extremely abnormal positive findings among transsexuals. It would be different if we TS were all deaf or paraplegic.
3a. Maybe the body itself functioned normally but got immersed by weird hormones from outside from your mom, then there's nothing wrong with your body, as it would otherwise have developed "normally".
3b. If the development in the womb is completely "normal" with only the exception of the brain gender, I'd rather cling to say that it's the brain that's the problem and not the rest of the body as there's so many factors involved in body development. Like a white wall with a red spot on it, I would not say there's a big white spot around the center of the red wall, but rather a red spot on a white wall.

Quote from: Fencesitter on August 12, 2010, 01:15:49 PM
Okay, I'll try to challenge that:
1. As far as I know, it's not clear if the pre-birth brain chemistry plays a role in the development of TS for each single transsexual.
2. The body functioning normally: you can test this - cardiological exam, handicaps, blood test, reaction test etc. Usually there are no extremely abnormal positive findings among transsexuals. It would be different if we TS were all deaf or paraplegic.
3a. Maybe the body itself functioned normally but got immersed by weird hormones from outside from your mom, then there's nothing wrong with your body, as it would otherwise have developed "normally".
3b. If the development in the womb is completely "normal" with only the exception of the brain gender, I'd rather cling to say that it's the brain that's the problem and not the rest of the body as there's so many factors involved in body development. Like a white wall with a red spot on it, I would not say there's a big white spot around the center of the red wall, but rather a red spot on a white wall.

I think i see where your going here, but the problem is you separate mind and body, your all one organism, neither can exist without the other its a symbiosis of trillions of cells, that ironically started from a single one.  In that respect when we are conceived the genetic makeup that will be our brain and body are set unless outside influences effect it during birth process.  So you were born with TS in your genes, its a defect present in every cell of your body, however some may not be effected as much as others.  A defect which causes in MTF's the inability for brain tissue to properly make use of androgens, and in so it is a problem of the organism as a whole (defect) not a single system since every system has a purpose and is necessary for life.  TS is a birth defect, however, GID, Depression, Anxiety is a symptom of that defect in other words, yeah your mentally ill, your suffering symptoms of mental illness, however, the symptoms are curable with treatment being born with TS however is not at this time unless we develop a method for mapping the brain structures and adjusting cell genetics to match birth sex.  Most people are born without this defect and develop normally, we do not, so yeah its a defect.  The statistics state that 1/20000 is TS, so we must assume that being free of the defect is the norm, or you would see a lot more of us.

What we perceive as our minds is simply a construct we make ourselves to give us a purpose and feel alive, but it also is bound to our physiology, many different diseases effect your emotions, how you perceive things, create mental illnesses as symptoms of them.  You would think your completely normal but your body is not working correctly, but to you everything is great, in reality not the case, you might have one disease or another, or a congenital defect appears during puberty, etc... etc...

So to summarize all this crap, you have a mental illness caused by a physical one, being born with TS.   

You're on Fencesitter...
1. Nothing there to disprove my assertion.
2. The tests you mentioned do not cover the entire physical human body.  What about body chemistry?  What about DNA and if each nucleotide or any of its three components is functioning normally?  You can't test that.  Your evidence is unsubstantiated and incomplete.
3a. Supposition, not fact.  If it were fact, it would seem the "weird hormones" could have altered your physical development.
3b. Opinion, not proof.  But I'll take you on with your argument.  You assume the development of the brain is abnormal yet the body is normal.  Why not the other way around?  Your opinion is prejudiced and therefore has no weight in this case.

Am I getting you to lean a bit on that fence?  ;)

Quote from: Fencesitter on August 12, 2010, 12:39:09 PM
As for the "anti-transsexuality pill", I would not take it, I would not be myself any more after that. Or would only give it a try if you can test it with a pill that works for, say, one week.

I would not take it either. I don't think most people would sign up for gender lobotomy. A person's gender identity is a valid part of their sense of self and integral to their overall health and wellness.

QuoteYou can see it either way, as the mind does not get along with what the body's like, though the body itself is functional and healthy.

Transsexuality is unique in this way, but it's really not that difficult to deal with the issue of whether the mind or the body should be the hub around which treatment orbits.

Assumption -------> Action based on assumption ---------> Result

1) Body is healthy -------------> Adjust mind (anti-transsexuality pill) -------------> Unhealthy, poorly adjusted individual

2) Mind is healthy -------------> Adjust body (HRT, SRS, etc.) -------------> Healthy, well-adjusted individual


This seems to be the direction that the DSM is going, anyway. The fact that they can claim the mind is cured, as cited earlier in this thread, without actually doing anything to the mind shows that perhaps the mind was not the issue to begin with.

QuoteAs for the mental disorder, there is a lot of stigma attached to it which is sad. A friend of mine is affected with a mental disorder, and she gets stigmatized a lot because it makes her unable to assume any regular work and people think she's just too lazy. But you can talk normally to her etc. because she has medicine which brings it somewhat under control.

My partner suffers from some pretty major mental disorders, and I am very aware of the stigma attached to the label. I only say that TG is not a mental disorder because we see the best results when it is not treated as one.

Quote from: Summerfall on August 12, 2010, 01:45:02 PM
I would not take it either. I don't think most people would sign up for gender lobotomy. A person's gender identity is a valid part of their sense of self and integral to their overall health and wellness.

Transsexuality is unique in this way, but it's really not that difficult to deal with the issue of whether the mind or the body should be the hub around which treatment orbits.

Assumption -------> Action based on assumption ---------> Result

1) Body is healthy -------------> Adjust mind (anti-transsexuality pill) -------------> Unhealthy, poorly adjusted individual

2) Mind is healthy -------------> Adjust body (HRT, SRS, etc.) -------------> Healthy, well-adjusted individual


This seems to be the direction that the DSM is going, anyway. The fact that they can claim the mind is cured, as cited earlier in this thread, without actually doing anything to the mind shows that perhaps the mind was not the issue to begin with.
My partner suffers from some pretty major mental disorders, and I am very aware of the stigma attached to the label. I only say that TG is not a mental disorder because we see the best results when it is not treated as one.

Not take it??!!? are you serious.. i mean really, WOW~ If there was a pill that would have allowed me to live as a normal functioning man and feel the same way i do (respectively) living as a woman, I would take that sucker in a heart beat.  You are saying you would WANT to go through HRT and health risks involved, the social stigma, the ridicule, the depression about the uncertainty of the outcome of the treatment, the pain of surgery and recovery, the respective stigma dealing with relationships, not to mention money and other outside influences?!?!? I am sorry, i think that would be crazy...  Its like saying I CHOOSE TO SUFFER PAIN EVEN THOUGH THERE IS A PAINLESS CURE..... huh?!?!

Your reasoning is also flawed in you think the pill would lead to this:
1) Body is healthy -------------> Adjust mind (anti-transsexuality pill) -------------> Unhealthy, poorly adjusted individual   

When it would in fact lead to this:
1) Body is healthy -------------> Adjust mind (anti-transsexuality pill) ------------->Healthy, well-adjusted individual

Either way, whether i am a man or woman, i would rather not feel the symptoms of being TS, that is a cure in my book.

Quote from: Izumi on August 12, 2010, 02:01:34 PM
Not take it??!!? are you serious.. i mean really, WOW~ If there was a pill that would have allowed me to live as a normal functioning man and feel the same way i do (respectively) living as a woman, I would take that sucker in a heart beat.  You are saying you would WANT to go through HRT and health risks involved, the social stigma, the ridicule, the depression about the uncertainty of the outcome of the treatment, the pain of surgery and recovery, the respective stigma dealing with relationships, not to mention money and other outside influences?!?!? I am sorry, i think that would be crazy...  Its like saying I CHOOSE TO SUFFER PAIN EVEN THOUGH THERE IS A PAINLESS CURE..... huh?!?!

Your reasoning is also flawed in you think the pill would lead to this:
1) Body is healthy -------------> Adjust mind (anti-transsexuality pill) -------------> Unhealthy, poorly adjusted individual   

When it would in fact lead to this:
1) Body is healthy -------------> Adjust mind (anti-transsexuality pill) ------------->Healthy, well-adjusted individual

Either way, whether i am a man or woman, i would rather not feel the symptoms of being TS, that is a cure in my book.

I don't think that a pill would be very effective at consciously and subconsciously reconciling years of mentally falling into one gender category and then suddenly falling into another, no matter how much it made the new gender match the old body. To get those kind of results, it would require something closer to a total system overhaul of the mind, and to me that would not be treatment resulting in health. My gender identity is very much part of my personal identity at this point (although like many of us, I tried to pretend that wasn't the case, spending quite some time in denial), and replacing it would not be something I could cope with.

I suspect that anyone who took such a pill would feel a new kind of incongruity, but rather than between the mind and body which is treatable, it would be between the mind and itself which could be much more sinister.

Quote from: Summerfall on August 12, 2010, 02:15:51 PM
I don't think that a pill would be very effective at consciously and subconsciously reconciling years of mentally falling into one gender category and then suddenly falling into another, no matter how much it made the new gender match the old body. To get those kind of results, it would require something closer to a total system overhaul of the mind, and to me that would not be treatment resulting in health. My gender identity is very much part of my personal identity at this point (although like many of us, I tried to pretend that wasn't the case, spending quite some time in denial), and replacing it would not be something I could cope with.

I suspect that anyone who took such a pill would feel a new kind of incongruity, but rather than between the mind and body which is treatable, it would be between the mind and itself which could be much more sinister.

Its kind of funny but HRT, SRS, FFS give you the same peace of mind, and you ASSUME that the pill wont do it.  If a pill was as effective as the process we have to take now, would you take it? Thats right, you would be a fully functioning guy, not feel any symptom of GID, be able to understand guys and compete on their level with no stress or anxiety, it would be like you have always been born male, you wouldnt take that over the alternative? 

Think of the reason you are transitioning at all, to be yourself, if you could be that way without transition would you?  Thats the PILL you speak of, you question effectiveness i am saying its 100% just as effective as transitioning? do you take it now?

It would be pretty much an unethical thing to give said pill to adults and teens. I could see giving a 2 or 3 year old said pill but after a certain point we have to take into acount a person has a set personality. Also the incongruence caused to someone who already had an established gender self identity would be rather vicious I would wager.

Personaly I am of the opinion that TS is a trait that the organism known as humanity developed many eons ago. We had been the shaman and priest class of so many societies. In societies that do not have such rigid gender rules our peers in these places handle this condition much better than we in the west do. Anyways.... we are natural shaman, counsilers of our peers and confidants.
There is pain in being TS but there is also an insight and wisdom gained that our cisgender peers do not have. It is a blessing wraped inside a curse. I wouldn't wish this on an enemy but I wouldn't give it up either. So I would not take that pill.

@Julie Marie
@Summerfall

Congrats, you have convinced me. I just never thought much about whether it was a disorder or not as quite a number of my friends etc. when I was in my early 20ies happened to be transgendered or genderqueer. So I thought it was about as common and "normal" as, say, being left-handed. And later in my life, I did not think about whether it is a mental disorder or not. Your arguments make more sense than mine.

Now back to the pill. A pill which would change my gender for 1 week, I would take it immediately. But then, I would also take a pill which changes me into a toad for a week just to see what it's like to be a toad.

I would wager that you would be mad as a hatter during that week.

I think we're losing the point here and drifting off into fantasy.

There is no pill and never will be.

The causes are many. Even if some causes can be pinned down, that will exclude many others with similar symptoms. We should remember, from the writings on these pages, that many people experience their gender Dysphora is different ways.

By allowing ourselves to remain in the hands of the mental illness industry, we subject ourselves to their judgements and diagnosis. People can go on till the cows come home about how mental illness doesn't carry a stigma.

Mental illness means crazy person. It means we will be subject to enforced incarceration in mental hospitals. Those of you in the US should be particularly worried about this since yours are about 50 or 60 years behind everyone else.'

mental hospitals mean ECT and drugs. It mean a lifetime, being labeled as unstable.

Don't allow yourselves to be under any illusions. The nature of gender dysphoria will qualify you for ECT.

ECT is just an electrical lobotomy. Forget the nonsense you may have read or heard. ECT burns off brain cells.

ECT works well for many depressive conditions. People with depressive conditions which involved rumination or obsessive thoughts respond very well to ECT.

ECT for some with Gender Dysphoria may eliminate their condition. It is unlikely to be suitable for all though.

Some types of psychology, delivered by some types of psychologist can create a resolution. Though I have never sought nor been given any sort of treatment for gender dysphoria, the approach I use would be the sort recommended.

Some drugs may be tried. Male hormones. Some types of anti-depressents. Several anti-psychotic drugs might work.

Then there is the more expensve, completely irreversable and socially drastic option of surgery.

That is the issue here.

Quote from: cynthialee on August 12, 2010, 03:02:24 PM
It would be pretty much an unethical thing to give said pill to adults and teens. I could see giving a 2 or 3 year old said pill but after a certain point we have to take into acount a person has a set personality. Also the incongruence caused to someone who already had an established gender self identity would be rather vicious I would wager.

Personaly I am of the opinion that TS is a trait that the organism known as humanity developed many eons ago. We had been the shaman and priest class of so many societies. In societies that do not have such rigid gender rules our peers in these places handle this condition much better than we in the west do. Anyways.... we are natural shaman, counsilers of our peers and confidants.
There is pain in being TS but there is also an insight and wisdom gained that our cisgender peers do not have. It is a blessing wraped inside a curse. I wouldn't wish this on an enemy but I wouldn't give it up either. So I would not take that pill.

Wow, really wow, so you wouldn't transition to get better, you would transition for what.... WISDOM?  The pill would cure you, completely and 100% make you like everyone else, its not fake, your still you, your brain just works correctly with your body in gender idenity issues, your GID poof gone, your happy being who you are, just like your happy who you are now? or wait... are you happy? or are you taking pills to make you happy.  The end result is still the same~ take anti-TS pill be a normal happy person, Transition, be a normal happy person.. with those two choice, knowing what transitioning means, can HONESTLY with sound mind and body pick transitioning? if you are you got other problems~ or you just like pain and suffering.

You are who you think you are now because of chemicals triggering neurons in your brain which fire off signals left and right, up and down.  If a pill rearranged those signals and you would still feel like you, then what does it matter?  You would still want to go through the pain? that is seriously beyond me~ We are what our various systems internally say we are.... the only reason you think you even exist is because your brain tells you so... think about it, the real world outside might be completely different and you would never know it.  The color red might be yellow to another person, you would think thats normal, people cured of certain diseases still feel normal even after, but everyone else says their different.  So if a pill could make you normal and not any different from anyone else, why in the hell would you want to go through the pain of transition?  You would still be you either way.

Quote from: spacial on August 12, 2010, 03:11:56 PM
I think we're losing the point here and drifting off into fantasy.

There is no pill and never will be.

The causes are many. Even if some causes can be pinned down, that will exclude many others with similar symptoms. We should remember, from the writings on these pages, that many people experience their gender Dysphora is different ways.

By allowing ourselves to remain in the hands of the mental illness industry, we subject ourselves to their judgements and diagnosis. People can go on till the cows come home about how mental illness doesn't carry a stigma.

Mental illness means crazy person. It means we will be subject to enforced incarceration in mental hospitals. Those of you in the US should be particularly worried about this since yours are about 50 or 60 years behind everyone else.'

mental hospitals mean ECT and drugs. It mean a lifetime, being labeled as unstable.

Don't allow yourselves to be under any illusions. The nature of gender dysphoria will qualify you for ECT.

ECT is just an electrical lobotomy. Forget the nonsense you may have read or heard. ECT burns off brain cells.

ECT works well for many depressive conditions. People with depressive conditions which involved rumination or obsessive thoughts respond very well to ECT.

ECT for some with Gender Dysphoria may eliminate their condition. It is unlikely to be suitable for all though.

Some types of psychology, delivered by some types of psychologist can create a resolution. Though I have never sought nor been given any sort of treatment for gender dysphoria, the approach I use would be the sort recommended.

Some drugs may be tried. Male hormones. Some types of anti-depressents. Several anti-psychotic drugs might work.

Then there is the more expensve, completely irreversable and socially drastic option of surgery.

That is the issue here.

The point is not so much is it a mental illness as much as, is it a physical one.  Is TS a physically created defect which has the symptoms of depression, anxiety, and GID.  If that is the case its no different from treating any other defect or disease.  People who are born not being able to process one thing or another get shots they need to live, if they dont take the shots their symptoms will appear.  For a person suffering from TS the same is true is it not? i would say in most cases.  Being born with TS leads to having its symptoms which are mental in nature and not physical, however, the symptoms can be cured with proper treatment, but the TS cannot.  So a treatable mental illness caused by genetics and the inability to process androgens correctly sounds more of a medical condition then a mental one. 

So the question would not be is it a mental illness, the question is, it a medical (physical) illness, in getting it labeled as such, it opens more doors and you dont get labeled as crazy at the same time.  Hey, i had GID, but now its gone after i got treatment for my TS.  Sounds better doesnt it?

With respect, I think you're missing the issue.

GID is not caused by any single factor. There are no causes which have been found to affect even a majority.

This is a situation which can only really be identified by its symptoms. Even then, there are so many variations in symptoms, severity and so on. Some GID sufferers are sexually attracted to those of their birth sex, others the opposite. Some say their attractions have changed after treatment other not. Some seek full treatement, others partial, others almost none. Some cope with it, some become desperate and very depressed.

Many of us report that our awareness started very young, about 4 years is quite common for those born male, a bit older for those born female. Others report their awareness came much later. Again, there is no consistance in how each of these groups experience their GID or how well they cope.

Sadly, US psychiatry seems to like tidy labels. They like to have a badge which they can pin, even when that badge is clearly preposterus.

If I lived in the US, even though I am in my mid 50s, happily married, reasonably stable and coping well with my GID, I would be subject to enforced incarceration in a mental hospital, being tied up, drugged,  then enforced treatment at the discresion of some psychiatrist.

That is the issue.

Quote from: shoegazer on August 12, 2010, 10:59:26 AM
Obviously I cannot speak for everybody, but for me the gender dysphoria and the social stigma are two separate things.

By gender dysphoria I mean the extreme discomfort that I feel with my body and especially its primary and secondary sexual characteristics. I find having the body that I do very painful at times, and I've spend much of my life desperate to have a female body rather than a male one. The  dissonance that I feel when looking in the mirror is not a social problem, although we clearly also have social problems as well. It's just that for me by far the biggest issue is and always has been the strong sense that my body is not right.

Exactly.

Quote from: spacial on August 12, 2010, 03:57:22 PM
With respect, I think you're missing the issue.

GID is not caused by any single factor. There are no causes which have been found to affect even a majority.

This is a situation which can only really be identified by its symptoms. Even then, there are so many variations in symptoms, severity and so on. Some GID sufferers are sexually attracted to those of their birth sex, others the opposite. Some say their attractions have changed after treatment other not. Some seek full treatement, others partial, others almost none. Some cope with it, some become desperate and very depressed.

Many of us report that our awareness started very young, about 4 years is quite common for those born male, a bit older for those born female. Others report their awareness came much later. Again, there is no consistance in how each of these groups experience their GID or how well they cope.

Sadly, US psychiatry seems to like tidy labels. They like to have a badge which they can pin, even when that badge is clearly preposterus.

If I lived in the US, even though I am in my mid 50s, happily married, reasonably stable and coping well with my GID, I would be subject to enforced incarceration in a mental hospital, being tied up, drugged,  then enforced treatment at the discresion of some psychiatrist.

That is the issue.

they would only lock you up if your a danger to yourself or others, that true for anyone though.  Also, the more research is done the more it points to being TS as a genetic defect, kind of a mild form of intersex, and not something triggered externally, it wont matter because its not curable without genetic alteration on the cellular level which is beyond our technology.  You talk about GID as if its the problem, its not the root cause of GID as more and more science proves is the inability of cells to properply process hormones or receive them, androgens that dont bind properly to cells.   This is extremely crucial during child gestation where bases of stem cells create what is your skin internal organs and brain.   Each cell might have varying tolerance to the defect which is why maybe your body came out male but brain cells and tissues stayed female and vice versa for FTMs.  They even had a test to swab the skin and found who was TS and who wasnt with a high degree of accuracy yet not perfect.  So its a physical defect which symptoms come out as mental, however it has nothing to do with chemical imbalances in the brain and instead has more to do with brain structure during the birth process.

Let me give you an example:
Wilson's disease or hepatolenticular degeneration is an autosomal recessive genetic disorder in which copper accumulates in tissues; this manifests as neurological or psychiatric symptoms and liver disease.

so a physical genetic defect is causing psychiatric problems.  It is treatable as well, yet people with Wilson's dont go to the luney bin now do they?  So the treatment for TS also prevents GID and other Psychiatric symptoms, no your not crazy.  I prefer to think of the whole as, living with TS, rather then being TS, people seem to identify saying I am a transexual... never really understood that, I am just a woman suffering for TS~  and I AM suffering from it.

Quote from: Julie Marie on August 12, 2010, 12:54:56 PM
It has been argued here that *my body functions normally, so my brain is disordered* 

How do we know the body is functioning normally?   

It is believed that brain gender is determined about a month before physical gender.  Wouldn't that indicate the body failed to conform to brain gender and therefore the body isn't functioning normally?

No, no no and no! This is a terrible misconception perpetuated by TG's to justify the idea of a broken body rather than a broken brain.  The sperm carries and X or a Y and the egg carries an X.  Depending on what sperm gets to the egg determines one's sex.  The existence of a Y causes definitive changes in the embryo's development turning non-sexed organs into either Wolfian or Mamarian ducts.  Those form testes or ovaries respectively.  Testes then produce testosterone which forms the sexual dimorphic sections of the brain and the body in a testosterone specific way.  Same for the hormones produced by the ovaries - they start to affect sexually dimorphic features of the body and the brain.  Note I am keeping out intersexed out of the discussion as the existence of extra chromosomes can mix things up a bit.

If I am XY and have no weird chromosomes messing with my sexual development and my body develops in a male body and it functions correctly and consistently with my XY, I can be about damned sure that my body is male, was meant to be male and functions appropriately.  Now the brain, more complex... some stuff can happen to it both environmental and biological that can mess up its perception.

Essentially, having a fully healthy male body and no inconsistent chromosomes, I can be sure I was intended to be male, but my brain didn't get the message - not the other way around.  If we want to go into more detail, I'll reach into my textbooks and other research materials to give more specific genetic detail.  In the end, I can transition to fix my issues - which is fine, but I won't think for a moment my body is the problem - it is just the best available treatment.

Gotta agree with interalia on this one.

 I'm getting the feeling we're arguing in circles here. My own posts on this thread, in particular, are simply repeating the same point.

In that, I am contributing very little.

I wasn't going to add any more, until a few posts ago, some started talking about a magic pill. Yuck!  :D

Thank you for being so patient with me.  :)

I think speculation of a pill to cure the disorder so to speak is entirely in order.
Some day it may very well be possible for a treatment that "cures" the brain instead of the body could be available. Although I doubt such a cure would actually be a cure for someone who has an established gender identity.

Quote from: interalia on August 12, 2010, 06:33:06 PM
No, no no and no! This is a terrible misconception perpetuated by TG's to justify the idea of a broken body rather than a broken brain.  The sperm carries and X or a Y and the egg carries an X.  Depending on what sperm gets to the egg determines one's sex.  The existence of a Y causes definitive changes in the embryo's development turning non-sexed organs into either Wolfian or Mamarian ducts.  Those form testes or ovaries respectively.  Testes then produce testosterone which forms the sexual dimorphic sections of the brain and the body in a testosterone specific way.  Same for the hormones produced by the ovaries - they start to affect sexually dimorphic features of the body and the brain.  Note I am keeping out intersexed out of the discussion as the existence of extra chromosomes can mix things up a bit.

If I am XY and have no weird chromosomes messing with my sexual development and my body develops in a male body and it functions correctly and consistently with my XY, I can be about damned sure that my body is male, was meant to be male and functions appropriately.  Now the brain, more complex... some stuff can happen to it both environmental and biological that can mess up its perception.

Essentially, having a fully healthy male body and no inconsistent chromosomes, I can be sure I was intended to be male, but my brain didn't get the message - not the other way around.  If we want to go into more detail, I'll reach into my textbooks and other research materials to give more specific genetic detail.  In the end, I can transition to fix my issues - which is fine, but I won't think for a moment my body is the problem - it is just the best available treatment.

Very well explained interalia.  We use our brains to make decisions and when we are making these decisions we believe our brains to be normal.  So if I think my brain is normal and see my perfectly formed and functioning male body as not conforming then obviously somethings a miss.  My body developed as it was supposed to so why does my brain see it differently, after all I think my brain is normal.  Obviously there's something a miss here.  Hmmm maybe, just maybe my brain is not so normal. <Shrug> :icon_confused:

Steph

Quote from: interalia on August 12, 2010, 06:33:06 PM
No, no no and no! This is a terrible misconception perpetuated by TG's to justify the idea of a broken body rather than a broken brain.  The sperm carries and X or a Y and the egg carries an X.  Depending on what sperm gets to the egg determines one's sex.  The existence of a Y causes definitive changes in the embryo's development turning non-sexed organs into either Wolfian or Mamarian ducts.  Those form testes or ovaries respectively.  Testes then produce testosterone which forms the sexual dimorphic sections of the brain and the body in a testosterone specific way.  Same for the hormones produced by the ovaries - they start to affect sexually dimorphic features of the body and the brain.  Note I am keeping out intersexed out of the discussion as the existence of extra chromosomes can mix things up a bit.

If I am XY and have no weird chromosomes messing with my sexual development and my body develops in a male body and it functions correctly and consistently with my XY, I can be about damned sure that my body is male, was meant to be male and functions appropriately.  Now the brain, more complex... some stuff can happen to it both environmental and biological that can mess up its perception.

Essentially, having a fully healthy male body and no inconsistent chromosomes, I can be sure I was intended to be male, but my brain didn't get the message - not the other way around.  If we want to go into more detail, I'll reach into my textbooks and other research materials to give more specific genetic detail.  In the end, I can transition to fix my issues - which is fine, but I won't think for a moment my body is the problem - it is just the best available treatment.

I think this is too simplistic, i've been thinking about it a bit since my last post. The body and brain are too plastic. It could very well be that trans people are perfectly natural variations regardless of xy or xx chromosomes. I have gene pathways built into me that when fuled by a different mix of hormones activate and cause me to feminise. I don't think you can say I was supposed to have a male body, as I contain the patterns for both male and female bodies. I don't think me wanting a female body is inconsistant with my chromosomes as the information is there to create a female body.

We talk about the seperation of mind and body, but really it is all part of one biological system.  They are part of the same machine. I think it is silly to say just one part is disfunctional when really the whole system is. My mind is great, my body is great, they just don't go together so well in the current format.

So I don't think this can be seen as a purely mental issue, or a purely physical issue. I don't think we can say it is purely psychological when some of the psychological issues that arise seem to be caused by our physiology and neurology. Similalry I don't think we can say it is just a physical issue, as it obviously impacts on our mental health.

Lots of mental illnesses can have physical causes - like clinical depression.  They don't usually arise from thought alone, though sometimes they do but in those cases it ends up affecting your internal chemistry. My treatment for depression consists of drugs that changes my physical chemistry and also purely mental thought activity. So from that perspective I guess it is ok to call the dysfunctional feelings we have as trans people a mental illness like depression. We have to remember that 'standard' treatment is not just a body change but we really need to change our mental state too. We have to adjust mentally.

There is a conversation going on between our concious and uncious minds and physical selves. They need to be taught the same language.  I'm for more holistic thinking on this.

This is getting interesting :)

The thing is all these conclusions, suppositions, speculations, theories, arguments, points of view, feelings, beliefs, conversation (I think you get my point :) ) is rooted in the brain, and all this is based on information that is received and processed by the brain.  It's a brain thing.

Are we still on topic :D

Steph

How about this... If you are TG and believe GID belongs in the DSM then you are mentally disordered.  If you are TG and believe GID does not belong in the DSM then you are not mentally disordered.  If you fall into the former category, you cannot tell any other TG they are mentally disordered if they fall into the latter category, nor can you consider yourself an authority about anyone who falls into the latter category, nor can you speak for them.

Honestly, when I started this thread I thought most, if not all, would realize the damage that can be done when society believes you are mentally disordered but some here hold on to that diagnosis like a security blanket.  And that's fine, just don't lump me or anyone who wants to shed the stigma in with you.  I believe removing homosexuality from the DSM was critical in advancing gays and lesbians as normal people.  Judge Walker must have thought so too because he mentioned it in his ruling on Prop 8 and now gays and lesbians have been given the right to marry in California, just like all the other normal people.  I think TGs should be considered normal too so things like passing ENDA will happen.

Enjoying the same rights as everyone else isn't about biology, it's about social perception.  I plan on moving back into the world I was cast out of when the world found out I was TG and I plan on doing that by shedding any and all stigmas that caused me to be thrown out in the first place.  Anyone who wishes to join me, you are free to do so.

Quote from: Julie Marie on August 12, 2010, 09:49:43 PM
... nor can you speak for them.

... I thought most, if not all, would realize the damage that can be done when society believes you are mentally disordered but some here hold on to that diagnosis like a security blanket.  And that's fine, just don't lump me or anyone who wants to shed the stigma in with you.  I believe removing homosexuality from the DSM was critical in advancing gays and lesbians as normal people.  Judge Walker must have thought so too because he mentioned it in his ruling on Prop 8 and now gays and lesbians have been given the right to marry in California, just like all the other normal people.  I think TGs should be considered normal too so things like passing ENDA will happen.

Enjoying the same rights as everyone else isn't about biology, it's about social perception.  I plan on moving back into the world I was cast out of when the world found out I was TG and I plan on doing that by shedding any and all stigmas that caused me to be thrown out in the first place.  Anyone who wishes to join me, you are free to do so.

With all due respect Julie this seems to be a regional problem, a problem which many of us fortunately don't have to endure. and I don't agree that removing something that is obviously benefiting many to appease those few whose civil rights are being denied.  Civil Code is the thing that needs to be changed where you are, and your constitutional rights changed or enforced.  It was right to remove homosexuality from the DSM as any modern thinker knows that it is a lifestyle preference not a medical condition.

QuoteFrom Wikipedia

Homosexuality is romantic or sexual attraction or behavior among members of the same sex/gender. As a sexual orientation, homosexuality refers to "an enduring pattern of or disposition to experience sexual, affectional, or romantic attractions primarily to" people of the same sex; "it also refers to an individual's sense of personal and social identity based on those attractions, behaviors expressing them, and membership in a community of others who share them."

Nothing medical there.


I never left the world, I was never cast out of it, and I live and work in it, and will soon be married in it and happily so.

Steph

I don't know, I used to think growing up "if only I felt like all the other guys, why do I feel like this? Why am I a girl inside and they have these dude things going on? I just want to be normal and not like this!!!" I don't remember feeling like I was born in the wrong body, I remember feeling like my brain was what was wrong. I have never really felt like I was born in the wrong body. The problem was that society didn't perceive me the way that I perceived myself. So, I took steps to correct that. Maybe some people would call me insane and throw me in a psych ward. Others would kill me for it. Some would high five me. I do know that I'm happy now and don't think too much about whether it's my brain or my body. I do feel very normal now that I am moving through the world being seen for who I have always known I was. That's pretty cool to me. Oh, and that's why I'm always smiling too :) (PS, Steph, it's so good to see you again, I didn't know you were back! Look, it's me! Everything's good here! (Sorry for hijacking the post JulieMarie, you know I love you :)  )) Meghan

QuoteI think TGs should be considered normal too so things like passing ENDA will happen.

As I pointed out back on page one, even if one were to concede the point of being mentally disorder, having a mental disorder is NOT a bar to marriage, or housing, or employment, or anything else by definition.

the only time it comes into play is if the disorder makes one dangerous in some way. (actual danger, like injury or destruction of property, not just someone gets butthurt)

We don't have to be "normal" (in terms of the presence of a mental disorder or not) for ENDA to be a logical and valid law. That's not to say someone won't make an irrational argument against it on those grounds, but there will ALWAYS be irrational arguments against us.

We may be disordered, we may not - but IF we are, whether or not we are still doesn't make us second class citizens. those who suffer from depression or whatever are not second class, why would we be?

There are surely troubling aspects to being classed as "mentally disordered" - and there are troubling implications of being removed and classified as "normal" (clearly, we are NOT normal pre-transition, though I tend to agree we can become "normal" if we have the resources to fully transition)

I don't agree with the logic that we must obtain the LABEL "normal" in order to manipulate society.

(And i should pause here and say that obviously there is no real "normal" but there is such a thing as a statistical norm and deviation from that norm)

We are NOT normal, and forcing people to call us normal doesn't make it so.

In fact, I'd argue that we are a more sympathetic demographic if people understand that we are NOT normal, but are suffering from a condition not of our own making. the danger in being considered normal is being accused of making a choice to, basically, "mutilate ourselves" for no good reason (as our harshest critics suggest).

The false perception we most need to defeat is that this is a "chosen lifestyle" and we could easily choose not to transition if we wanted to. That is far more damaging, IMO, than the perception that we have a mental disorder. i would go so far as to argue that if a cisgender person concedes that we suffer from a mental disorder and STILL wants to oppress us, that the person who feels that way is unwinnable to our position - and thus of no concern in terms of altering public opinion.

Ultimately then, whether or not it is described as a mental disorder comes down to what is the most scientifically precise way to describe our abnormal condition. If that is "mental disorder" - so be it. if it is otherwise, it needs to be changed.

I think that this is all way too "gray area" and it's only recently that more scientific research has been happening on this type of subject. I've seen some fascinating stuff about things that can happen in utero to actually change the brain of an individual in regards to gender ... extra hormones in the mother's body, certain chemicals ... lots of things. I would place a monetary bet that if my brain was scanned and then studied against that of a "normal" female, there would be some anomalies. For over a decade I've been heavily involved with alternative medicine and other modalities besides just regular medical doctors. I've baffled every acupuncturist I've been to because, as they say, I have the energy pattern of a male. Chinese medicine is all about the energy, meridians in the body, that sort of thing. The first time it happened my acupuncturist came right out and told me he'd never seen anything like it in all the years he'd been working. My most recent acupuncturist told me I was "flipped" lol. Is this "scientific" evidence, no, but all I'm saying is there's more than meets the eye going on  in some cases and so my opinions today have been formed through observation and experience.

Also, think about the era that the first psychological diagnosis of transsexual came out ... we're talking turn of the century era here (actually I think it was a German guy in around 1910 but I could be off on that). Many societies of the world have clear roles defined for males and females ... and it's been that way for thousands of years. I can totally see how a society set up like that can then call ANY deviation from what appears to be normal, a disorder ... or a disease.

Personally, I reject diagnosis like that just as I reject labels but I've come to that decision over many years of living life and living in my body. So no, I personally do not say that people who feel they are not the gender of the body they were born into have a mental disorder. But I'm not the one handing out the diagnosis either (that would be the psychologists and doctors).

As a side note, I've also been given these disorders over time (which I also rejected):
Social Anxiety Disorder
Panic Disorder
Attention Deficit Disorder
Gender Identity Disorder

Probably a few more too, but eh, screw it. If I really believed in all that garbage THAT would put me in a padded cell, not how I view myself or what I like to do in the bedroom with consenting adults.

And for all of them the psychologist or doctor was right there with a pen and a prescription pad. Disorders are big business, folks and the more there are and the more people have them the more medical costs and prescriptions can happen too.

If you look at other medical cases it becomes clear that GID is a symptom of a much bigger genetic disorder.  I give you the example of an XY female, yeah thats right, a XY but due to a genetic defect in the dna she has total immunity to testosterone, only estrogen effects cells.  She develops into a female appearance inside and out, except for reproductive which is typically varies, but mainly internally.   She suffers no effects from GID even though she is genetically male, because her brain and outside appearance are both female.

Being TS the same as the intersex disorder mentioned above instead of all cells rejecting or limiting androgen binding, only various ones do, it seems the brain is a one area mostly effected.  So, the GID is caused by a defect in the DNA.   To say TG is a mental illness is incorrect, its a genetic defect which cause psychiatric symptoms rather then physical ones, which a lot of genetic defects do, for example wilson's.   

Are we insane, no, the GID is treatable and in many cases curable.  Are we different, yes, we are not normal, we were born with a gene variant that only 1/20000 in the population have.  I think the addition of the exit clause is the perfect solution, while we cannot cure TS (which is a genetic defect), we can treat the symptoms of it and cure GID, therefore removing us as mental patients of any kind.

You might not like the term mental illness, but if you have GID, yeah you are mentally ill.  The reason for that being that 19999 other people dont have GID, having developed relatively normally and being comfortable in their bodies. 

While it might be important to some to not have it in the DSM, typically these people have lots of money and can afford treatment, others need it in there to help in subsidized payments, if its removed from there then unless its re-classified as medical you will not be given any money to help with your GID, and thats very elitist in its thinking, hurting other people so you can feel good about yourself not being mentally ill.  We can win our rights anyway on the simple argument of medical fact, if anyone really bothered to try, however the gay issue clouds what could be an open and shut case for TS people. 

Also, may i point out, if its not an illness and there is nothing wrong with you why the hell are you taking medication in the from of HRT and getting surgeries? Normally well people dont opt to take drugs that can possible lead to blood clots and kill them..... think about that one... 

Quote from: insideontheoutside on August 13, 2010, 12:06:27 AMAlso, think about the era that the first psychological diagnosis of transsexual came out ... we're talking turn of the century era here (actually I think it was a German guy in around 1910 but I could be off on that).

I think you mean Magnus Hirschfeld, he then talked about "transvestites" but used that term as an umbrella term such as "transgender" is used today and he also described transsexuality as such.

Interisting to read your alternative medicine experience with the "male energy"

I'm more inclined to think that in the USA's lack of coverage by insurance companies is due to the draconian nature of the USA health system rather than anything associated with the TS condition itself. Hell they deny child diabetics there insulin.
Even if GID had an innate physical cause that could be seen painted on our bodies from birth they would deny treatment.

I'm able to accept that it is my brain that's technically in the wrong not my body but that's irrelevant if the conflict between the two isn't resolved both would have died. No sense in begin "right" and dead.

Okay, so it seems if you are unhappy with your body that's a condition of the mind, not the body. Therefore it's a mental disorder. Right?

The 98 pound weakling who starts working out with weights, takes (legal) supplements, changes his diet and grows to a 200 pound mountain of muscles and is now happy with his looks.

The flat chested woman who has BA and is now happy with her looks.

The "ugly duckling" who has facial plastic surgery, laminates on the teeth, hair transplants and now looks beautiful is now happy.

Are these people mentally disordered too?

Quote from: cynthialee on August 12, 2010, 06:51:52 PM
I think speculation of a pill to cure the disorder so to speak is entirely in order.
Some day it may very well be possible for a treatment that "cures" the brain instead of the body could be available. Although I doubt such a cure would actually be a cure for someone who has an established gender identity.

With respect cynthia, this is a lot of hogwash.

It belongs with those NASA sicientists who talk about 'When they brealk the light speed barrier', or the Cambridge scientists who think they can eventually travel in time.

In the 60s, I recall a slick advert on TV asking for donations to some cancer research. I remember because I used my pocket money to buy a 6d postal order. Almost identical adverts are being broadcast now, suggesting that a cure for cancer is almost here. More money has been donated to cancer research since 1948 than all other charitable cause put together. There is no cure.

But what is so utterly astonishing is the way so called scientists allow these stupid predictions to continue unchallenged. They belong with those who predict the return of some prophet or other and the end of the world.

That ordinary people, who have been brainwashed into thinking scientists are some sort of higher life form, swallow this nonsense is just sad.

Quote from: Izumi on August 13, 2010, 01:53:46 AM
If you look at other medical cases it becomes clear that GID is a symptom of a much bigger genetic disorder.  I give you the example of an XY female, yeah thats right, a XY but due to a genetic defect in the dna she has total immunity to testosterone, only estrogen effects cells.  She develops into a female appearance inside and out, except for reproductive which is typically varies, but mainly internally.   She suffers no effects from GID even though she is genetically male, because her brain and outside appearance are both female.

You're referring to Androgen Insensitivity Syndrome (AIS).  It can only happen in XY persons.  There's varying degrees of it.  In cases of complete AIS (CAIS) the body cannot absorb any testosterone.  The body takes unabsorbed T and changes it to E.  CAIS people are sometimes referred to as super women, full lips, large breasts, wide hips and no body hair.  Jamie Lee Curtis is said to be CAIS.

Quote from: Izumi on August 13, 2010, 01:53:46 AMWhile it might be important to some to not have it in the DSM, typically these people have lots of money and can afford treatment, 

Since GID is and always has been in the DSM, it seems like you are saying that "these people" chose not to use their insurance because they have a lot of money.  The truth is "these people" don't have insurance coverage for GRS or HRT, let alone BA or FFS.  I know the reason I don't have that coverage is the people deciding what will be covered and what won't "know" GID is a mental illness and not a physical one so why offer to pay for physical treatment when it's a problem of the mind?

I paid everything out of pocket.  I'm now legally female.  But my insurance still won't even pay for HRT or the twice yearly needed blood tests.  They cover GGs who's doctors prescribed HRT but won't pay for my doctor prescribed HRT.  Why?  Because I'm mentally ill and I did something to my body they don't believe was a medical necessity so therefore they don't have to cover my HRT.  And an awful lot of people I know are in the same boat.  So tell me again how having GID in the DSM helps pay for your medical treatment.

Pebbles, I agree with you completely there.

And juliekins, it is a misleading understatement to imply that we are simply "unhappy" with our bodies. The whole point of calling something a disorder is that it's limited to things that cause a real disruption to your life. I think it does injustice to all the suffering we go through to compare it to someone who just wants to lose some weight or wants bigger breasts.

I'm seeing a disturbing trend in here of suggestions that it's okay to throw people with mental disorders under the bus-- either dismissing "mental" problems as less valid or serious health problems than "physical" ones, or taking on an attitude that implies that it's OKAY for mental illnesses to have the stigma they do as long as it doesn't affect us.

I agree with that, spacial. There will ALWAYS be speculation about pills that can magically cure complicated disorders. That speculation is not coming from people who appreciate how incredibly complex the brain is and how little we know about it. It's not coming from people who are doing real science. It's coming from scientists who want media attention, and therefore funding, or from the media's warped version of what psychological and neuroscientific research actually is about.

I really don't want to get into this issue again, but here I am. And I'm echoing a few other people.

I have always felt that if a particular syndrome is a mental disorder, then it can be most effectively cured, controlled, or managed through psychotherapy, psychotropic treatments (specifically, psychiatric medications, not "recreational" drugs or self-medication like booze or acts like self-harm)--or a combination of the two.

This is not the case with us. I won't speak to the umbrella of TG, but (almost by definition) a transsexual is someone whose conviction cannot be "cured" through talk therapy; and, as a few people have pointed out, we don't really have any drugs specifically for TS. One might argue that TS can be managed with psychotherapy, but that tends not to be the case for long. In fact, I think it's safe to say that more often than not, therapy reveals or clarifies TS. It doesn't make TS go away.

We CAN run into problems when we consider the mind and the body as separate, but I think the border is actually fairly clear here. And it's true that we don't know all that much about TS and the brain. But as it stands, I don't see much support for the "mental disorder" diagnosis, and I see plenty of support for a physical diagnosis or some sort of combination diagnosis that does not code the mental part as disordered.

In and of itself, an atypical gender identification does not have to be coded as a disorder. A certain degree of dysphoria should not be classified as disordered, any more than a desire to lose weight, restyle one's hair, or get a nose job should be seen as disordered. Do we say that people are disordered when they say, "I'm not happy with my haircut" and then take a matter-of-fact approach to finding a better option? No, not unless that happiness starts to significantly interfere with the person's function. And if the person becomes acutely depressed over the haircut (or nose or extra pounds or whatever), do we really need a specific classification of "depression due to bad hair day/week/month" or "depression due to large body mass" or "depression due to bump on nose"?

I also feel that one element of the argument is completely irrelevant to the taxonomy question. I feel that when deciding whether transsexuality (or GID) is a disorder, we should go on the available medical evidence and make a medical (or psychological) classification instead of focusing on what the treatment arc will be if we take the syndrome out of the DSM/keep it in the DSM. That's a separate issue.

My two bits' worth (adjusted for inflation).

Quote from: Julie Marie on August 13, 2010, 10:36:31 AM
You're referring to Androgen Insensitivity Syndrome (AIS).  It can only happen in XY persons.  There's varying degrees of it.  In cases of complete AIS (CAIS) the body cannot absorb any testosterone.  The body takes unabsorbed T and changes it to E.  CAIS people are sometimes referred to as super women, full lips, large breasts, wide hips and no body hair.  Jamie Lee Curtis is said to be CAIS.

Since GID is and always has been in the DSM, it seems like you are saying that "these people" chose not to use their insurance because they have a lot of money.  The truth is "these people" don't have insurance coverage for GRS or HRT, let alone BA or FFS.  I know the reason I don't have that coverage is the people deciding what will be covered and what won't "know" GID is a mental illness and not a physical one so why offer to pay for physical treatment when it's a problem of the mind?

I paid everything out of pocket.  I'm now legally female.  But my insurance still won't even pay for HRT or the twice yearly needed blood tests.  They cover GGs who's doctors prescribed HRT but won't pay for my doctor prescribed HRT.  Why?  Because I'm mentally ill and I did something to my body they don't believe was a medical necessity so therefore they don't have to cover my HRT.  And an awful lot of people I know are in the same boat.  So tell me again how having GID in the DSM helps pay for your medical treatment.

No, people who have money can use insurance or not, people that dont, dont have a choice is my point, and with society the way it is now, removing the diagnosis puts those people on their own, UNLESS the diagnosis is changed from a mental one to a medical one.  Oh, your child was born with TS, here is the treatment.... Psychotherapy + HRT, to prevent symptoms.  See what i mean. 

If your statement is remove the term GID from the DSM but add it at the same time as an insured medical problem, then I am all with you there, however GID is currently serving as both a benefit and hindrance as some insurance policies do cover it some do not, the only reason being, its in the DSM.  When the subject of rights is brought up, i think the only reason we havent been able to gain our rights is because we have become fused with LGB.  Grant us rights means granting them rights, when for us, we have issues with gender identity caused by our genetics not so much sexuality, if anyone brought the case of an XY female to the judge on the supreme court it would be easy to say women with TS are women(mtf) and men with TS are men(ftm) because there in front of the judge is a perfect example of a woman, yet shes XY.  Would he force her to live as a man?  CASE closed.  However since we are mixed with LGB, allowing us to marry is the same as allowing everyone... which i believe is the root of the difficulty, not as much the DSM.  If bipolar people can marry so can you... the dsm doesnt block that....

Quote from: juliekins on August 13, 2010, 09:54:41 AM
Okay, so it seems if you are unhappy with your body that's a condition of the mind, not the body. Therefore it's a mental disorder. Right?

The 98 pound weakling who starts working out with weights, takes (legal) supplements, changes his diet and grows to a 200 pound mountain of muscles and is now happy with his looks.

The flat chested woman who has BA and is now happy with her looks.

The "ugly duckling" who has facial plastic surgery, laminates on the teeth, hair transplants and now looks beautiful is now happy.

Are these people mentally disordered too?

In many cases yes.  Anarexia, bulimia, and there is now concern with in plastic surgery circles where patients become addicted to surgery.  We can do this all day... How about a person who's hair is curly and wants it to be straight.

What is the big deal about being disordered.  Yes some in society sigmatize it so it's society that has to change not us.  Why should we change just to satisfy some miss guided notion.  It's not only our condition but all the others that are listed.  If we are going to take out GID, why not take out the other disorders, as I can I'm imagine that those suffers often think that they are normal too.  Maybe it's just me but I simply can't understand how I could have looked at my body realized that it wasn't the way it was supposed to be and and sought to get it changed to the body I thought it should be, and start living a life I a woman, how could that be normal? Is everyone doing that? Can everyone just simply call up a surgeon and ask if the can get their genitals removed? 

As I said before this seems to be regional issue and an individual issue and ya can't please everyone.  Rather than jeopardizing our medical care, we or those that think they need to, should look at getting society educated.

Steph 

Quote from: Steph on August 13, 2010, 12:28:22 PM
What is the big deal about being disordered. 
Steph

For me, personally, the big deal about being disordered is that it lead ME to believe in my mind there was something wrong with me. Especially when some of these whack diagnosis were coming down to me at a very impressionable time in my life (early teens). Being told there's something wrong with you does something to your mind. For some, it may be a sign of relief in some way that they know WHY they've always felt or acted some way. But for others it's more of a fate-sealer that there IS something wrong and that's a problem.

I'm going to throw out another comparison on how medical diagnosis can damage a person further. I have known way too many people, both old and young who have gotten a diagnosis of cancer. Only one of those people is still alive. When someone is told by a "medical professional" that they have a deadly disease it really messes with their head. Never mind that the so-called "treatment" could also kill you. All but one of the people I knew, when they got that diagnosis and heard some statistic about a survival rate, had pretty much felt like their life was over. They went through the motions of treatment but they sought no alternatives at all, they just believed their doctor 100% and in so doing, I truly believe lowered their chances of survival. My one friend that bucked the system, said f-you to the medical doctors and is still alive and cancer free. She went to a clinic that uses alternative medicine and is very supportive and positive about CURING the disease.

So, this is why I personally think what I do. Everyone else is entitled to their own opinions on it too (isn't that great!!). The only other thing I'll say is that there isn't just one path to a better life. If people truly believe that the only way they will "get better" is through HRT and surgery, well one person like me coming along with my opinion is not going to sway that. Although I actually AM an example that it's possible.

Very, very true Insideontheoutside.  Being told, or discovering that you have been diagnosed with this or diagnosed with that can have a huge impact on ones life, and I dare say that there have been some who have ended their lives rather than face the ordeal of dealing with or living with the diagnosis/treatment.  Then on the other hand there are those who take the bull by the horns, adjust and live their lives and get on with it.

The same would hold true for a person having the feeling that something was different about them, did research on the web and started to consider that they had GID, sought therapy and was in fact diagnosed with GID.  Some would treat that with joy and happily start transition while others wouldn't.

Medical practitioners can't hold back the truth, it would be unethical, and probably illegal.

Steph 

It IS very important to consider the effects of labeling/pathologization in psychiatry. For some people, like insideontheoutside, being diagnosed can feel like a burden, like there's something wrong with them that they're potentially stuck with their entire life. For other people, being diagnosed can be a relief: it helps them realize that they didn't choose to have the disorder, that they aren't just a loser or a failure or weak. I know that being diagnosed with Major Depression (and later, Generalized Anxiety Disorder) helped me get out of the hole I'd dug-- I knew there was something that needed fixing, and that things could change. Medication and therapy were just tools to help me. I also know that my sister, who has ADHD, felt the opposite way, like she was a freak and that needing medication made her weak.

I'm not sure where I am with this. On the one side, this is clearly (to us) a physical disorder. And while gays and lesbians were removed from the DSM, they don't really require any treatment like we do. As most (I think, don't kill me lol) of us don't have physical evidence of our condition, it does seem to be a mental thing. Until the brain discrepancy is proven, it's a 'head' thing. But as we require treatment unlike gays and lesbians, what happens to us if it is taken out?

An iuuse has occured, that I don't recall being raised so far, on this thread.

There is reference made to the irreversability of gender reassignment surgery.

I take this as a crock. No-doubt, there are some who may regret it, of those reported, it would seem that these have been mentally molested by psuedo religious types, instilled with guilt.

But for the vast majority, there are no regrets. If I could have surgery tomorrow, my only regret would be that I didn't do it when I was so much younger.

This whole attitude is patronising in the extreme. That we don't know our own minds. That we are just silly people, looking to experiment.

I wonder how, classifying gender dysphoria as a mental illness will affect our right to control and manage our own bodies?

The really funny thing is that even if EVERY TG in the world decides that it isn't a "mental disorder", but rather a "physical problem" or fill in the blank, it wouldn't matter!  We don't get to make the determination.  I suspect that in the DSM they would just insert a couple of lines to the effect that,"HSB Syndrome is often accompanied by the delusion that it is not a mental disorder."   We simply don't get to make the determination.  It's not a vote kind of a thingy, just a question of semantics. 

Quote from: interalia on August 12, 2010, 06:33:06 PM
No, no no and no! This is a terrible misconception perpetuated by TG's to justify the idea of a broken body rather than a broken brain.  The sperm carries and X or a Y and the egg carries an X.  Depending on what sperm gets to the egg determines one's sex.  The existence of a Y causes definitive changes in the embryo's development turning non-sexed organs into either Wolfian or Mamarian ducts.  Those form testes or ovaries respectively.  Testes then produce testosterone which forms the sexual dimorphic sections of the brain and the body in a testosterone specific way.  Same for the hormones produced by the ovaries - they start to affect sexually dimorphic features of the body and the brain.  Note I am keeping out intersexed out of the discussion as the existence of extra chromosomes can mix things up a bit.

If I am XY and have no weird chromosomes messing with my sexual development and my body develops in a male body and it functions correctly and consistently with my XY, I can be about damned sure that my body is male, was meant to be male and functions appropriately.  Now the brain, more complex... some stuff can happen to it both environmental and biological that can mess up its perception.

Essentially, having a fully healthy male body and no inconsistent chromosomes, I can be sure I was intended to be male, but my brain didn't get the message - not the other way around.  If we want to go into more detail, I'll reach into my textbooks and other research materials to give more specific genetic detail.  In the end, I can transition to fix my issues - which is fine, but I won't think for a moment my body is the problem - it is just the best available treatment.

My mind and my body developed (mostly) independently of one another and both are correct when considered independent of one another.  Arguing the semantics of which actually developed incorrectly serves no real purpose.  Your argument makes complete sense and I agree with it, but in the end there is still a discrepancy between the mind and the body that needs to be fixed.

Most people see the brain as the defining organ for their personality.  If the brain is broken and could be fixed, it's completely valid to question whether we would have the same personalities afterward.  If there existed a treatment that could correct my mind without changing the rest of my personality (with a > 99% chance of success), I would have taken it.  If there was a reasonable chance I would not be the same person afterward, I absolutely would not.  Transition is really expensive both interpersonally and financially and it would be fantastic to spare my family the pain, but I'm not willing to sacrifice who I am.  Pie in the sky aside, there currently is no such treatment and the choices are to find ways to cope or to transition as far as needed.  Even if the current option is technically the wrong option based on medical understanding, it is still the best option we have for fixing those of us who can no longer cope.

My opinion is that it doesn't matter if GID is in the DSM or not as long as we can get insurance companies to legitimize the current best treatment and pay for it.  Kind of hard to say at this point whether taking GID out of the book will actually do anything, but I'm leaning towards "no."

I'm a female and I have always been a female.  Nearly 22 years ago I started taking hormones and nearly 20 years ago I had surgery to fix a medical condition that I had.  Yes my body and please note that my mind have always been healthy and more than likely environmental or biological conditions affected by brain.  In other words I was born the way I was or as so many say, but some may still not get it.  I did not have a Choice in the matter.

Humans have been changing for thousands and thousands of years and will continue to do so and these changes will be through genetic mutation, environmental and societal conditions, modern technology and of course what us humans have been doing since recorded history began, "I want to change this or that about my self".

So I accept unconditionally that this is the way things are and given current technology, I will not be able to fix my genes, nor will I will be able to procreate, because I do not have the appropriate body for it.  What I want or do is not up to others in society to decide for me, unless of course the result of my actions hurts, maims or kills other members of society, then of course consequences will be applied to me as society rules and I will accept those rules.

However I will not accept other peoples conditions being placed upon me due to some preconceived notion that what I do or become is wrong and I should live my life just like theirs.  People should accept me for who I am and if the way I live my life goes against their sensibilities, religion, prejudices, ignorance or misconceptions then, it is their problem and not mine.

I find it extremely offensive, that I could be labeled with a mental disorder, because I live my life how I want to and not how someone else says I should. I have lived my life, just like any other person has to, day in day out. 

There are many clinicians, doctors, psychologist, psychiatrists, doctors and governments are saying it is not a mental disorder[1][2][3], in addition scientists and researchers are finding that it is biological in nature.[4][5][6] and no doubt there are more papers per se.

Yes, one still needs to have a diagnosis of 'GID', but as a medical condition and not as a mental disorder or mental illness, so that those who do suffer, can access the necessary treatment that is appropriate for them and allow them to be who they want to be in society.

Kind regards
Sarah B

[1] Because our identities are not disordered (http://www.transgender.org/gidr/advocate.html)
[2] Government Policy concerning Transsexual People (http://www.dca.gov.uk/constitution/transsex/policy.htm)
[3] In France, Transsexuals Celebrate a Small Victory (http://www.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,1968767,00.html)
[4] Sexual orientation and its basis in brain structure and function (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2492513/)
[5] Sexual differentiation of the human brain in relation to gender identity and sexual orientation (http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_7542/is_200901/ai_n32334584/)
[6] Male-to-Female Transsexuals Have Female Neuron Numbers in a Limbic Nucleu (http://jcem.endojournals.org/cgi/content/full/85/5/2034)

I have one last question I'd like to ask.  First you have to put yourself in this environment:

Imagine you live in a world where those born with the mind and body being of different genders are revered, seen as a blessing to society.  You are believed to be gifted because you have a dual view into the genders and can relate to both in a way non TGs can.  People come to you for help.  They respect you and appreciate the insight you bring to their lives.  You are, in effect, placed in a higher position in society because you are TG.

Given that as your reality, how would you respond to someone who came to you and told you that you were mentally disordered?

Quote from: Julie Marie on August 15, 2010, 08:22:46 AM
I have one last question I'd like to ask.  First you have to put yourself in this environment:

Imagine you live in a world where those born with the mind and body being of different genders are revered, seen as a blessing to society.  You are believed to be gifted because you have a dual view into the genders and can relate to both in a way non TGs can.  People come to you for help.  They respect you and appreciate the insight you bring to their lives.  You are, in effect, placed in a higher position in society because you are TG.

Given that as your reality, how would you respond to someone who came to you and told you that you were mentally disordered?

That depends.  Does this sagely TS person's condition cause him/her significant distress?  Is it pervasive or of a significant duration (say... longer than 2 years - used an arbitrary number for this point)?  Can it not be explained as normal variant of his/her culture?  If the answers are yes to those three questions, our wonderful sage has a mental disorder.  If you don't like the definition of mental disorder, perhaps we should arguing to change the definition/criteria of how we generally determine mental disorders. 

Mental disorder is a word meant as a descriptor, it is people who give the word value.  You don't like the value attached to the word 'mental disorder' by society (and by extension your own value you place on the word), but it doesn't change that it describes our condition.

If you don't like the connotation of the color descriptor 'blue', it doesn't change the color of the sky so long as the word blue still describes it.

I think perhaps the problem is in the implication of "dis-"

One who is "disabled" is unable to do...whatever.

"disorder" then might be read as "out of order" or "out of normal alignment"

it's just my own way of working it out, but to me, having a "disorder" simply means being "differently ordered" - aligned in some way that is at variance from the statistical norm.

it does not necessarily imply that the "different order" is better or worse than the statistical norm, just that it is an aberration, a deviation, an anomaly such as might appear in any demographic group of sufficient size.

I do not accept the premise that "disorder" means "worse than" or "flawed" in relationship to the norm.

I acknowledge that that is the most common colloquial understanding of the word, but I'm not bound by the common understanding.

Come up with some word which means "divergently ordered" or some such (like someone came up with the "cis-" prefix) and I'll buy in. Until then, letting someone's use of a word distress me is no different, IMO, than letting their displeasure with the way I dress distress me.

I do not concede them the right or the power to do so.

Quote from: Tammy Hope on August 15, 2010, 04:23:13 PM
"disorder" then might be read as "out of order" or "out of normal alignment"

it's just my own way of working it out, but to me, having a "disorder" simply means being "differently ordered" - aligned in some way that is at variance from the statistical norm.

Well if I look at the mess on my desk here it's definitely disordered, but I was always like that. And I always used the "differently ordered" excuse when my mom yelled at me to tidy my room. But as long as I find what I'm looking for and have no mice running around here, I don't care if in other peoples' opinion I have a messy desk . It needs to work for me, thats all... You get the analogy?

Honestly, I thought about the disorder discussion here today again. And I found out that I don't care a sh*t if what I have qualifies as a disorder or not. I had a very hard time growing up trans but good times as well, got unique experiences that I value a lot, and I was unhappy with how I felt about my gender stuff, then got part of what I needed to be okay, a few things still will have to change (name...), it's not illegal, they don't throw me into a madhouse for being trans, family and friends are on my side, I have work and nice leisure activities, and that's all what counts for me. Even if I were crazy as a hatmaker but felt okay with it, had an okay life and did not hurt anyone, it would be okay for me.

Quote from: interalia on August 15, 2010, 01:10:57 PM
That depends.  Does this sagely TS person's condition cause him/her significant distress?  Is it pervasive or of a significant duration (say... longer than 2 years - used an arbitrary number for this point)?  Can it not be explained as normal variant of his/her culture?  If the answers are yes to those three questions, our wonderful sage has a mental disorder.  If you don't like the definition of mental disorder, perhaps we should arguing to change the definition/criteria of how we generally determine mental disorders.

To your first question, if it did it would most likely be related to not being able to handle the expectations society might place on them, not a dysphoria due to mind and body gender conflict.

To your last sentence - I, for one, would like that very much.  But if they made one of the changes I'd like to see, either practically everyone would have a mental disorder or the people who wrote the book would be discredited in the public eye.

Quote from: Fencesitter on August 15, 2010, 05:06:15 PM
Well if I look at the mess on my desk here it's definitely disordered, but I was always like that. And I always used the "differently ordered" excuse when my mom yelled at me to tidy my room. But as long as I find what I'm looking for and have no mice running around here, I don't care if in other peoples' opinion I have a messy desk .

Honestly, I thought about the disorder discussion here today again. And I found out that I don't care a sh*t if what I have qualifies as a disorder or not. I had a very hard time growing up trans but good times as well, got unique experiences that I value a lot, and I was unhappy with how I felt about my gender stuff, then got part of what I needed to be okay, a few things still will have to change (name...), it's not illegal, they don't throw me into a madhouse for being trans, family and friends are on my side, I have work and nice leisure activities, and that's all what counts for me. Even if I were crazy as a hatmaker but felt okay with it, had an okay life and did not hurt anyone, it would be okay for me.

And if you were okay with the mice running around on your desk, that would be fine too.

Kudos to you for taking the position you are.  None of us should allow anyone to control the way we live, force us into being something we're not or accept prejudice and discrimination as a part of our life just because society is ignorant.  The consequences family, friends and society attach to being who we are is nothing short of attempted brainwashing. 

Be strong!  Stand up to the Conformist Cult!  Let them know this is your life and you're going to live it as you!  ;D

I don't see a problem with being in the DSM, but it might be good to re-word the entry to stress that the identification is not the problem, the stress and suffering that the mismatch between mind and body causes is the problem and that the treatments are intended to reduce the stress and suffering, not the identification.

Would that be acceptable?

Quote from: Miniar on August 17, 2010, 12:01:45 PM
I don't see a problem with being in the DSM, but it might be good to re-word the entry to stress that the identification is not the problem, the stress and suffering that the mismatch between mind and body causes is the problem and that the treatments are intended to reduce the stress and suffering, not the identification.

Would that be acceptable?

I'd certainly approve of that.

Quote from: Miniar on August 17, 2010, 12:01:45 PM
I don't see a problem with being in the DSM, but it might be good to re-word the entry to stress that the identification is not the problem, the stress and suffering that the mismatch between mind and body causes is the problem and that the treatments are intended to reduce the stress and suffering, not the identification.

Would that be acceptable?

The "mental disorder" is anxiety (listed) or depression (listed) or any other number of disorders, all already listed.  The original belief was one could be cured of GID and therefore all the associated disorders would vanish (same as it was for homosexuality).  So the focus was to cure the GID.  But that has been a dismal failure.  So, when we seek therapy it is usually for one or more of many already listed disorders.  And if we say the source matters, we'll have to start with an ignorant and unaccepting society that applies consequences, some severe, for being who we are.

Maybe we should get Prejudiced Ignorant Society Disorder (PISD) listed. 

Our dysphoria usually comes from the prejudice and discrimination we face.  Somewhere in the DSM I once read that if a disorder is considered normal (common reaction) then it isn't a disorder.  Anyone subjected to the prejudice and discrimination we face as out TGs would react in much the same way as we.  But, like I've said before, you don't need GID in the DSM to get therapy.  Check out the list of codes (http://www.psychnet-uk.com/dsm_iv/_misc/complete_tables.htm) and you'll find all kinds of disorders, including the ones we suffer from due to the reaction of an ignorant society.  Which, BTW, suffers from an anxiety disorder called phobia, the result of their reaction to imagining a world where gays, lesbians and TGs have the same rights as them and are considered equals.  :o

Going back to my earlier question, phrased differently, would we experience any of these stressful emotions if we were completely accepted in society and not discriminated against?  If the society I live in had the same attitude toward TGs as the Native Americans did toward the Two Spirit, my life would have been dramatically less stressful.  It would have been a breeze!

I Don't live in fear.
I don't feel "unaccepted" by society.

I have dysphoria.

My dysphoria is Primarily caused by the mind-body mismatch.
This is why I'm correcting that mismatch.

If I didn't feel Miserable about the body being wrong, I wouldn't have the drive to correct it with all the pain and misery involved with that slow process.

I'd NEVER let someone cut me open and remove internal tissue if my issue wasn't with that tissue.
I'd NEVER let someone slice into my chest if my issue wasn't with the chest.

I don't care what strangers think of me and those who know me, almost all, accept me as a bloke, and those that don't can shove off for all I care. I'm not changing my body to accommodate Anyone other than ME, and I'm doing it because I need to, for MY sake.

My dysphoria has Nothing to do with other people, and everything to do with me being a transsexual man.

I don't think "depression" and "anxiety", even combined, are synonymous with dysphoria.

I agree Miniar.  If you treat the depression as the mental disorder and the depression is caused my by dysphoria, then you don't treat the cause just a symptoms.  Thinking about it along the same vein, if you treat the depression and it goes away, does it follow you don't need to be treated for the dysphoria since the symptoms (ie depression) are controlled?

We cannot have it both ways.  If depression is the only symptom of the disorder, treat the depression and you no longer have the dysphora - which means a nice mix of anti-depressants would be all we need.  If the dysphoria has other symptoms, if you treat the depression, you don't really stop the dysphoria, just mask it.  So the underlying problem is the dysphoria - another disorder apart from depression - something worthy of being in the DSM of its own right.

*Homosexuality is not a mental illness. But being unduly distressed over it, for any reason, is*....

I would agree.....

But let's look at this statement in a slightly new way shall we?

*Heterosexuality is not a mental illness. But being unduly distressed over it, for any reason, is*....

So why should being diagnosed with GID continue to be classed immediately as a mental illness...and in any different way to two previous statements?

And let's not forget... not long ago (in the UK) you could be locked up in Prison for being a practising homosexual.... at that point a criminal act.

UK law has changed btw....I have a female birth certificate now which enables me to marry a man with full legal blessing and all the spousal rights any GG woman would enjoy...

Quote from: Cruelladeville on August 20, 2010, 01:14:02 AM
*Homosexuality is not a mental illness. But being unduly distressed over it, for any reason, is*....

I would agree.....

But let's look at this statement in a slightly new way shall we?

*Heterosexuality is not a mental illness. But being unduly distressed over it, for any reason, is*...

Indeed, the DSM IV has a diagnosis which includes both cases, it's described as being unduly stressed about one's sexual orientation. So straight people who suffer from being stressed can get their therapy paid.

Quote from: Fencesitter on August 20, 2010, 04:29:01 AM
Indeed, the DSM IV has a diagnosis which includes both cases, it's described as being unduly stressed about one's sexual orientation. So straight people who suffer from being stressed can get their therapy paid.

Yes, but you don't see heterosexuality listed as a mental disorder, nor was it ever.  Stress, regardless of the cause, is listed.  The disorder is stress, not homo- or hetero- sexuality.  It's about how a person reacts to it, not the "it" itself.  Which is what I've been saying about TG.

According to MHA (http://www.nmha.org/go/state-ranking), Utah is the most depressed state in the US.  Over 70% of the Utah population is Mormon.  Mormons are known to be very repressed.  Would you say Mormonism is a mental disorder?  Or is being a Utah resident the disorder?

Astutely put Julie Marie...

Let's get a 21st century take on the condition, (please) not a quasi-luddite one based on outmoded 18th century blinkered thinking...

Nice helm....btw....(sailing is one of my ongoing passions) stand by for the tack ...sheet in.... okay.... ready about .... lee ho.....

Does heterosexuality or homosexuality involve surgically removing/reordering your sex organs in a major operation?  I suspect that if homosexuality did, then it would still be in the book.  I'm not a Luddite about it, just practical.  A surgery that could possible cause death, (they all can), failure of goal leaving sexless, etc.  People (as in powers that be) see this as serious stuff.  It probably will be for quite a while.     

Quote from: Cindy Stephens on August 20, 2010, 06:32:12 PM
Does heterosexuality or homosexuality involve surgically removing/reordering your sex organs in a major operation?  I suspect that if homosexuality did, then it would still be in the book.  I'm not a Luddite about it, just practical.  A surgery that could possible cause death, (they all can), failure of goal leaving sexless, etc.  People (as in powers that be) see this as serious stuff.  It probably will be for quite a while.   

True, but on the other end of the spectrum, few people question the mental stability of a person who wants corrective surgery for, say, a cleft palate.

*Does heterosexuality or homosexuality involve surgically removing/reordering your sex organs in a major operation?*

Millions of 'heterosexual' women electively go for breast augmentations, labiaplasty's and many other sexual signalling body enhancements with absolutely no mental stigma attached or anyone questioning there overall sanity at all?

Or them needing letters from two psychiatrists to do so.....

Or any gate-keeper medic deciding for them whether this would be a good idea or not?

Quote from: Cruelladeville on August 21, 2010, 01:52:57 AM
*Does heterosexuality or homosexuality involve surgically removing/reordering your sex organs in a major operation?*

Millions of 'heterosexual' women electively go for breast augmentations, labiaplasty's and many other sexual signalling body enhancements with absolutely no mental stigma attached or anyone questioning there overall sanity at all?

Or them needing letters from two psychiatrists to do so.....

Or any gate-keeper medic deciding for them whether this would be a good idea or not?

Are you therefore putting a TS's NEED for surgery on the same level as others' WANT for surgery?  Are you saying TS's are just wanting simple cosmetic surgery for none other than vanity?!  You do many of the people you are trying to defend a great disservice.  I'd rather be thought of to have a mental disorder than be considered just someone who has no real troubles and is only vain.

It is exactly our strong need for surgery and bodily change that separates us from others who desire cosmetic surgery.  If someone desired cosmetic surgery so badly to fix an otherwise unmarred body, but to satisfy some deep penetrating psychological need of wholeness that they otherwise are pervasively distressed over, they would be also be candidates for having a probable mental disorder as well.

     While I hate to use him as an example, Dr. Phil has spoken about his part time work examining patients for high-end Plastic surgeons who want to ensure that the people they work on are NOT psychologically damaged > not going to be satisfied with work> will sue, ruining reputation.   Certainly, the mass market plastic surgeons only care that the check cashes.  Do you really want "Bobs' Pretty Good Surgery, no pesky psychology tests necessary" to be advertising GRS at a discount price on the back page of your local alternative paper?  Oh, Bob was a pretty good dermatologist before getting into this.  His medical license allows him to do it.
      An interesting perspective comes from sufferers of BIID or body integrity identity disorder.  They have a condition where they feel that their bodies are "wrong" and try to have limbs either cut off or paralyzed.  The condition hasn't been in the dsmv, which makes it very difficult to treat, because there are no standards at all-talk therapy and pills don't work.  They have been trying desperately to have it INCLUDED.  Before you say it, Google it and read up.  They feel that it is part of their "core" experience and cannot understand why surgeons won't do it, and people don't accept it.  I'm sure that most of us would have an immediate response that we (transsexuals) are different, more pure, more something-anything that makes us better than them.   Not that it would ever make a difference in how I feel, it still adds to the perspective.  I suspect that after reading a few articles about them, you will have the same attitude toward them that many people have toward us.  I'm sorry, but my personal, visceral reaction is "Damn, they're nuts!"   Sorry, It is hard not to feel this way, not experiencing nor really being able to empathize with their feelings.  I just can't do it.  Just as many non-transgendered can't with us.  I don't pretend to know how they should be treated, except that it should be with extreme kindness and consideration.   
     Finally, I think that everyone has gone through enough self doubt in Jr high school that we can commiserate and support someone's decision to fix a cleft palate, maybe even a truly unfortunate nose, without second thoughts.  I think that there is a split decision on breast implants.  Woman of my age say,"those are fake you know!"  Men my age say, "I don't care!"

This one will run and run I feel. I doubt we will ever all entirely agree on this. The thing is I start from the other perspective. I look at myself and I think "Darn it a lot of my thoughts are pretty weird, but I'm still not willing to admit that I am crazy - just odd." So then I look at many of these other groups and I find myself thinking well if I'm not crazy, then perhaps they aren't either... unless they want to be.

I suppose my point is that if you don't represent any threat to anyone else and are happy with the way your thoughts run then that should be enough to place you in a kind of sub category where it is basically up to you whether or not to call yourself disordered. I personally choose not to do so, and yes I am happy to admit that my change of genital arrangements was a matter of vanity. Before I had the surgery I could live my life as a woman just as well as I can now. The surgery was, for me, largely a cosmetic change which enabled me to feel better about my bodily appearance.

I personally do not accept the definition of this as a mental disorder, because for me it is something I would have chosen to experience, such has been the richness of emotional experience and insight that I have gained. I understand that for some people it is a cause of unmitigated suffering, and I am not unsympathetic to that, nor do I wish to deny them the opportunity to call themselves disordered if they wish to do so. At the same time, as my aunt used to say, "please include me out" on that one. For me it has not been a cause of much suffering. In fact the vast majority of my experiences in life in relation to being trans have been positive. That is why I personally can never relate to the disorder label.

Now I am truly sorry that my experience is different. I would love to be able to wave a wand and enable others to have the same positive outcomes, but sadly I can't. But I hope it is at least comprehensible why for me personally it has never been a disorder, more a vocation.  Further I feel that as society becomes more tolerant, there will be more people with my type of experience and the balance of opinion on this will undoubtedly shift. :)

As I came to know other TGs, I saw an awful lot of them claimed they are different or weird or a little messed up in the head.  I always saw this as nothing more than parroting social concepts about the transgender condition.  Growing up I never thought I was weird or strange or screwed up.  I always understood it was society that had a screwed up idea of the transgender condition because I wasn't anything like those people who society used as an example to justify their feelings.

The idea that a mental disorder is determined by popular vote is seriously flawed.  How can something be a mental disorder in one culture but not in another?  History shows us that there have been cultures who are not only accepting but revering of TGs.  I doubt any TG back then felt they were mentally disordered.  Now, if you were a christian and about to be fed to the lions, I imagine you'd be questioning your sanity about your religious beliefs.  Would christianity back then be listed as a mental disorder? 

I'm sure many African-American slaves wished they could change their skin color to escape slavery.  And if that was possible I'm sure some would have done it.  I doubt anyone would have called them mentally disordered for wanting to change their skin color to escape persecution.  On the contrary, wanting to remain enslaved, whipped, beaten and persecuted would certainly raise the question of one's sanity.

On the subject of wanting major surgery to make mind and body more in-sync, what if it was simply the push of a button and you emerge the gender you wish?  Would you still be mentally disordered for wanting your physical gender changed?

Hi
I have several comments about being in the DSM.
Julie Marie, a slave wanting to escape slavery was considered to be a psychiatric diagnosis in the 1800's. People in power oppressing and exploiting others want to feel justified and blame the victim for not being happy to be exploited.
Unfortunately, the DSM has been used as a tool of social control since its beginning. It has other uses such as making research possible, and of course controlling insurance payouts. But it is limited and I believe fatally flawed in understanding human behaviors and situations. For one there is a built in assumption of something "wrong." There is the arrogant assumption that an external "authority" can tell you what you need without your full participation and informed consent. There is the built in assumption that anything that varies from the "norm" is wrong and bad and must be labeled and fixed. I think I am saying this badly. But there are other ways of understanding peoples' situations that do not make them wrong, but still guide them towards functioning and coping more successfully.

I agree we would be better off not in the DSM, but there still needs to be frameworks for understanding our variations and helping us cope with them. The idea of medical diagnosis for medical treatment makes sense. But I agree no one answer will do for us all.

An additional point: diagnosis is sometimes misused to put people in a box. She's a "borderline." He's a "sociopath." It is better to think of people as whole and complex beings with conditions: She has "borderline traits." I know that sounds very "PC" but it helps remind one that a person is not defined by their DSM label. Their diagnosed condition is, and usually labeled incompletely and over-simply. I do not know how to label myself, but I do not think I have a "disorder." I am not wrong or damaged. I am different and confused and not at all what I was raised to be. But I am not a "transgender." I am a person with hidden depths coming out.

It is easier to get out of the DSM than it is to change society to think about diagnosis and intervention wholistically and flexibly. I think we need to do both. I do not just want to get us out of the DSM, I want to get the DSM out of practice totally. I am a psychotherapist, and I find it extremely problematic for almost all of the people I deal with, and no help to me in helping them.

As a last comment; I would like to say that the "brain" is part of the body. The "mind" is something different - it is many things, but at least it is how we experience the body/brain we inhabit. I believe it is useful to keep brain and mind separate conceptually.

Kendall

PS. I enjoyed everyone's comments - this is an interesting issue with no clear resolution.

Hi Julie Marie

What you say below is absolutely brilliant, amen, it also resonates with me more than I can put into words.

Quote from: Julie Marie on August 21, 2010, 12:18:46 PM
As I came to know other TGs, I saw an awful lot of them claimed they are different or weird or a little messed up in the head.  I always saw this as nothing more than parroting social concepts about the transgender condition.  Growing up I never thought I was weird or strange or screwed up.  I always understood it was society that had a screwed up idea of the transgender condition because I wasn't anything like those people who society used as an example to justify their feelings.

The idea that a mental disorder is determined by popular vote is seriously flawed.  How can something be a mental disorder in one culture but not in another?  History shows us that there have been cultures who are not only accepting but revering of TGs.  I doubt any TG back then felt they were mentally disordered.  Now, if you were a christian and about to be fed to the lions, I imagine you'd be questioning your sanity about your religious beliefs.  Would christianity back then be listed as a mental disorder? 

and of course Rejennyrated's comments

Quote from: rejennyrated on August 21, 2010, 11:15:02 AM
I personally do not accept the definition of this as a mental disorder, because for me it is something I would have chosen to experience, such has been the richness of emotional experience and insight that I have gained. I understand that for some people it is a cause of unmitigated suffering, and I am not unsympathetic to that, nor do I wish to deny them the opportunity to call themselves disordered if they wish to do so. At the same time, as my aunt used to say, "please include me out" on that one. For me it has not been a cause of much suffering. In fact the vast majority of my experiences in life in relation to being trans female have been positive. That is why I personally can never relate to the disorder label.

Now I am truly sorry that my experience is different. I would love to be able to wave a wand and enable others to have the same positive outcomes, but sadly I can't. But I hope it is at least comprehensible why for me personally it has never been a disorder

One of the many reasons while I never say anything to anybody about me, I knew instinctively that family, friends and society could 'condemn me' and hence make my life a misery and as much as they can call me all the names under the sun, I will not respond in anyway, but, deep inside it will hurt me to some extent,  yes society is changing and there are a lot of people out there that are totally accepting and do not bat an eye, when they are told about someone's condition.  Yes, there are times, even when I'm tempted to say something.

I grew up knowing something was different and I wanted to be a girl and these thoughts and feelings would occur often over the years.  The reason why I was not able to put things together and realise that I was a female was from a lack of knowledge and understanding.  The question one needs to ask and this will help me answer one of the questions I have always asked of myself, after reading all the posts of other girls and how they suffered.  Is, why did other girls suffer extensively from dysphoria and I did not? 

First one of the things was, I never wanted to be like other people, that is I did not want to be one of the 'sheep' so I always tried to do things that were different from others.  Secondly, I never let anybody get to me in terms of people calling me names or putting me down. Finally, society was not able to put any expectations on me, because I would not perform to those expectations and I kept my personal life to myself.

Because I did not have the expectations on me to perform, I never got the anxiety or the depression and hence I never got dysphoric to the extent that other girls got it.  Yes, I did feel unease at times before I left, in fact this unease was getting stronger and stronger and was one of the reasons, why I finally left my friends and family, the other reasons being, I realised I was in love with a young guy at the time and I could not doing anything about it, I wanted to go to university and my knowledge at that time of 'Transgendered' people made me finally realise that I was a female and I had always been so and nothing short of having surgery was ever going resolve my issues.

So it is societies expectations, conditions and interference in our lives that make people anxious and depressed and hence dysphoric.  Yes there is that unease within ourselves and how strong it is within us, but this unease virtually goes away when one has the knowledge, understanding and the options on what you can do about it.  So that you can live a happy full filled life.  So being 'Transgendered' is not a mental illness or disorder, it is societies interference, lack of knowledge and understanding which will make you dysphoric and mentally ill.

Kind Regards
Sarah B

Quote from: Arch on August 20, 2010, 06:54:29 PM
True, but on the other end of the spectrum, few people question the mental stability of a person who wants corrective surgery for, say, a cleft palate.

indeed.

Or a BA.

or a nose job.

surgical modification of appearance is NOT considered proof of a disorder by itself - in most other regards.

Whether or not this is a disorder, the election of surgical modification would be a damned flimsy reed to prop the idea up with.

Quote from: interalia on August 21, 2010, 08:53:51 AM
Are you therefore putting a TS's NEED for surgery on the same level as others' WANT for surgery?  Are you saying TS's are just wanting simple cosmetic surgery for none other than vanity?!  You do many of the people you are trying to defend a great disservice.  I'd rather be thought of to have a mental disorder than be considered just someone who has no real troubles and is only vain.

It is exactly our strong need for surgery and bodily change that separates us from others who desire cosmetic surgery.  If someone desired cosmetic surgery so badly to fix an otherwise unmarred body, but to satisfy some deep penetrating psychological need of wholeness that they otherwise are pervasively distressed over, they would be also be candidates for having a probable mental disorder as well.

Before you reply - let me just say that my above reply is not meant to be in conflict with your "need v. want" thesis.

But it is true that to the disapproving, our surgery is a "want" too.

It seems to me there ought to be room in the mental health field to have a rubric for identifying a condition - i.e. a "state of being" - which is divergent from the "norm" (mentally) but is not in and if itself a "disorder" of the sort which causes harm to the person or others....as apart from other disorders (severe depression for instance) which are precipitated by the condition.

but the bottom line is, until they get everything right, I'm worried about alterations that make our situation more easy to dismiss as frivolous.

Quote from: Tammy Hope on August 22, 2010, 02:55:36 PM
It seems to me there ought to be room in the mental health field to have a rubric for identifying a condition - i.e. a "state of being" - which is divergent from the "norm" (mentally) but is not in and if itself a "disorder" of the sort which causes harm to the person or others....as apart from other disorders (severe depression for instance) which are precipitated by the condition.

but the bottom line is, until they get everything right, I'm worried about alterations that make our situation more easy to dismiss as frivolous.

I agree.

Quote from: Tammy Hope on August 22, 2010, 02:55:36 PMIt seems to me there ought to be room in the mental health field to have a rubric for identifying a condition - i.e. a "state of being" - which is divergent from the "norm" (mentally) but is not in and if itself a "disorder" of the sort which causes harm to the person or others....as apart from other disorders (severe depression for instance) which are precipitated by the condition.

but the bottom line is, until they get everything right, I'm worried about alterations that make our situation more easy to dismiss as frivolous.

Hm, when I look up the DSM IV, 302.85 Gender Identity Disorder, it stresses a lot the fact that you suffer a lot from it otherwise no diagnosis. Three of the criteria are:

" Persistent discomfort with his or her sex or sense of inappropriateness in the gender role of that sex"
"The disturbance causes clinically significant distress or impairment in social, occupational, or other important areas of functioning."
"There is strong discomfort with the patient's own sex or a feeling that the gender role of that sex is inappropriate for the patient"
" These symptoms cause clinically important distress or impair work, social or personal functioning."

I mean, they could not have stressed that any better, it's even quite repetitive. They just don't specify the symptoms caused by the distress, which is also good as it leaves room to atypical symptoms. 

Source: http://www.psychnet-uk.com/dsm_iv/gender_identity_disorder.htm (http://www.psychnet-uk.com/dsm_iv/gender_identity_disorder.htm)

Assume that one has to have satisfy the conditions of the DSM IV TR to be labeled Gender Dysphoric, hence you must be Mentally Ill or have a Mental Disorder.  I have lifted the relevant text from the DSM IV TR page 578 and assigned a corresponding analysis to each of those Criterion.

There are two components of Gender Identity Disorder, both of which must be present to make the diagnosis.  There musty be evidence of a strong and persistent cross gender identification, which is the desire to be or the insistence that one is, of the other sex (Criterion A).

"Evidence for who?"  I never told my psychiatrists anything about my 'strong desire' or 'desire' to be a female or insistence that I was a female or better still, we can discount 'insistence' because I never once voiced it to any one so lets discount that, shall we?

Lets count how many times during my life that I wanted, wished, imagined, dressed, played or part took in activities that were for girls or females only.  From a rough count I would say about 30 for the first 30 years of my life.  But lets say there are actually 90 and this occurred between the ages of 20 and 30 just before I actually changed.  This translates roughly to 1 event per month per year up and till I actually changed.  So this does not indicate a strong and persistent cross gender identification or does it?  So I should have failed the diagnosis of Gender Dysphoria for Criterion A

This cross gender identification must not merely be a desire for any perceived cultural advantages of being the other sex.

This one is easy, I would have no advantage because I was going to become the weaker sex, less pay, more easily be assaulted and job options limited.  So I most certainly did not do it for any cultural advantage.  Oh wait maybe my swimming prowess might give me an advantage, well lets see, I was good at the 50m and 100m free and 50 Butterfly, anything beyond that or style, I was just like another stone in the pond. So for this perceived advantage I should also fail the diagnosis of Gender Dysphoria.

There must also be evidence of persistent discomfort about one's assigned sex or a sense of inappropriateness in the gender role of that sex (Criterion B).

I did not have any persistent discomfort in my assigned sex at the time, it was just part of me.  I knew I did not want to act the part of my assigned gender role that was given to me at birth.  So I should have failed the diagnosis of Gender Dysphoria for Criterion B

The diagnosis is not made if the individual has concurrent physical intersex condition (e.g. partial androgen insensitivity syndrome or congenital adrenal hyperplasia (Criterion C).

Well I don't know if I have these conditions.  Lets assume that I do not have these conditions.  So the Diagnosis for Gender Dysphoria can be made for me in this case.

To make the diagnosis, there must be evidence of clinically significant distress or impairment in social, occupational, or other important ares of functioning (Criterion D).

I worked, lived and played, spent time with my friends and family.  I dated enough to just throw the hounds of the scent, to prevent others thinking, I was gay (and no I was not) and when I left and changed, I worked, lived and played, spent time with my friends, dated and gradually I become involved with my family again.  I just wonder if my psychiatrist thought I was distressed?  I doubt it because I was just living virtually a normal life as a female.  So I should have failed the diagnosis of Gender Dysphoria for Criterion D

So lets sum all of this up shall we.  Diagnosis can be made because of Criterion C.  However, by Criterion's A, B and D.  I fail totally and utterly.  But wait, there's more, my psychiatrist in his letter to my surgeon stated basically the following.

"Sarah B was referred to me in March 89 and has been seen by her endocrinologist and her other psychiatrist, both of whom have written to you.  I believe she is suitable for gender reassignment surgery."

It would have been very interesting to know what he wrote in his notes about me when I was visiting him. However, I will never know because those records were destroyed 20 years ago.  Did my psychiatrist make a mistake or did he get it right? I will never know unless I go back and ask him.

So according to me the DSM IV TR says I do not have Gender Dysphoria and I guess they are right and I would agree with them.  Oh me, Oh my, but I had surgery!  My surgeon stated in a letter and I quote (virtually verbatim).

"This is to certify that Sarah B, born in February 1959, has undergone gender reassignment surgery from male to female in February 1991.  She is to all intents and purposes a female.  The surgery is irreversible."  Thank god for that.

You see the problem is, I have always been female and I always will be and I never did have Gender Dysphoria, the reason I keep saying this is because I have knowledge and understanding.  I have never been as happy as I have been the last 20 years of my life and I have done more in that time than I ever did before I changed.  I love my life, I'm happy and I have never ever regretted my decision.

So am I, the exception to the rule?  Did my psychiatrist not follow the correct procedures? Or am I stark raving mad for doing what I did?  How about, I manipulated the information to the desired outcome? Well, I'm giving you an honest account, maybe all this should have been done twenty years ago and if it had, then maybe I would not be here today.  Only you can decide on the veracity of what I have said.

Because if there is one exception there are others.  Therefore the diagnosis for Gender Dysphoria is fatally flawed.

Kind regards
Sarah B

Well Sarah, let Dr. Julie give her diagnosis.  You are loony, completely bats, totally whacked out and perfectly normal.  ;) As for your gender, you're a chick.  :icon_yes:  I clicked with everything you said, except for the swimming parts - I swam distance freestyle.  8)

If I were an outside observer (that is, outside this society that clings so tightly to the idea that a professional degree makes one correct) I would think the mental health professionals were nuts.  The GRS letter requires one to be clear thinking and of sound mind.  Satisfying the necessary criteria for a GID diagnosis would certainly put into question clear thinking and, in severe cases, sound mind.

But honestly, if you take your argument to the mental health professionals I think you'd have them scrambling.  Or they would just say one needs to allow for some latitude when interpreting the DSM.  Whatever the case, taking the DSM literally AND issuing a GRS letter would create conflicting issues for the professional.

In a general sense, WPATH has a more positive approach but admits it still doesn't know everything.  In the Epidemiological Considerations section of the Standards of Care it states:

Four observations, not yet firmly supported by systematic study, increase the likelihood of an even higher prevalence (of incidence of GID):
1) unrecognized gender problems are occasionally diagnosed when patients are seen with anxiety, depression, bipolar disorder, conduct disorder, substance abuse, dissociative identity disorders, borderline personality disorder, other sexual disorders and intersexed conditions;
2) some nonpatient male transvestites, female impersonators, transgender people, and male and female homosexuals may have a form of gender identity disorder;
3) the intensity of some persons' gender identity disorders fluctuates below and above a clinical threshold;
4) gender variance among female-bodied individuals tends to be relatively invisible to the culture, particularly to mental health professionals and scientists.

It's certainly not an exact science.  Maybe they should provide an opt out clause, or better yet, an opt in clause.  That way the TG person is assumed perfectly sane (not disordered) except those who insist they have a disorder.  The social stigma would gradually subside and discrimination and prejudice would go along with it.  Who knows, maybe some companies would even WANT a TG person working for them and maybe even be their representative in the business world without needing the TG to be perfectly passable. 

Okay, I'm dreaming.

Sarah, I anxiously await to see how the proponents of GID in the DSM answer your post.  It will be interesting.  In the meantime, let's hit the pool!  I need a good workout.

maybe I'm a victim of the culture but I personally can't work up an outrage that i might have a "mental condition" - i tend to think i do.

the only thing i really struggle with is the distinction between a mental defect that was born of a birth defect (like, for instance, autism) and a mental defect that arises from a "normal" brain falling into disorder (as in multiple personalities or bipolar)

That said, I'm ok with copping to having a "mental problem"

If that makes me somehow ill-informed or something then so be it.

My only reply regarding BIID is that, while yes one must be compassionate, that falls in the same category as those who think they are, for instance, vampires - there is no biological mechanism (at least, not one yet identified) under which one might normally develop in the womb into a vampire are a limbless torso, whereas there are well identified processes for gender differentiation.

That makes all the difference in the world to me.

'Cause Julie Marie wants to see it, here goes... :P

Let me preface this by saying that I think the DSM-IV is a highly flawed diagnostic tool that desperately needs a revision. That said, I do not think that GID should be taken out of the next DSM (even if it should be revised).

In response to Sarah:
Criterion A:
A strong and persistent gender identification.

Firstly, if you don't accurately tell your diagnostician about what you're going through, I think it's fairly obvious that they will not be able to appropriately diagnose you. If I go to my GP and complain of leg pain, while I DON'T tell her about the severe headaches and arm numbness I've been having, do you think she's going to know what's really going on?

Secondly, "strong and persistent" identification is not necessarily defined as the things you said. Acting it out is an unfair way to judge it, as you can identify with a gender without feeling able to express it. Wanting and imagining that you are the correct gender is a CONSCIOUS identification--and denial can really strongly interfere with that. I know it did for me. There isn't a hard and fast definition for how persistent the thoughts need to be-- that simply wouldn't make sense to put in there.

(not merely a desire for any perceived cultural advantages of being the other sex).
I believe that you misinterpreted this line. If you read it as, "there must be no cultural advantages to transitioning", then yeah, EVERY SINGLE PERSON would fail the diagnosis, because there are SOME cultural advantages to being either male or female. The point of this is to make sure that the person truly identifies as their perceived gender, rather than transitioning FTM just to get higher wages, for example.

Criterion B:
Persistent discomfort with his or her sex or sense of inappropriateness in the gender role of that sex.

Really? You had ZERO dysphoria about your body not being what it was supposed to, the way you were viewed as the wrong gender by others? You didn't feel pigeonholed into the wrong gender roles?

Lucky you. From my own experience and everything I've heard from other trans people, those feelings of dysphoria are very common. I'm wondering, though, how you figured out that you were TG if you had no dysphoria...?

Criterion C:
The disturbance is not concurrent with a physical intersex condition.
As I think you know, this is there to exclude any other cross-gender identifications for which we already understand the underlying cause. This is the problem with the vast majority of mental disorders-- we DON'T understand the underlying cause, and more often than not, that cause is both physical and social-- caused by the interaction of the social environment and life experience/stresses and inbuilt genetic risk. The claim that TG is biological and therefore should not be in the DSM ignores the fact that mental illnesses are ALL biological AND social--they are affected by what you experience and what you've been dealt biologically. If you take GID out of the DSM, you might as well take out schizophrenia, major depression, and ADHD-- all of these mental illnesses have strong links to genetics and are therefore biological.

Criterion D:
The disturbance causes clinically significant distress or impairment in social, occupational, or other important areas of functioning.
Not sure if you knew this, but this criterion is in about half of the disorders in the DSM. This line effectively says, "if it doesn't cause problems, it's not a disorder." You misinterpreted this one, too. It doesn't mean that you don't have relationships at all; it doesn't mean that you can't be functional in a work environment. It means that whatever the mental disorder is is causing some sort of problem in your life. Dysphoria is exactly that sort of problem.

I find it hard to believe that you felt zero distress around living as the wrong sex, or else you wouldn't have transitioned.

I still don't understand why there is such division over this topic.  Well I can, and I can only surmise that it's those who are being denied their human rights that want to change all of this.  Sure take it out of the DSM and make it a regular medical condition that can be handled by your family doctor;

Hi doc,
Hi Joe, what can I do for you today, what seems to be the problem.
Well it's like this doc, I think there has been a mistake and that I should have been born a woman and not a man.
Oh really Joe, and whats make you think that?
(and so on, and so on - you get the drift)
Well joe, we can solve that problem.  First I'll prescribe HRT, to feminize your body, and then we'll get you scheduled for surgery...

I'm sure doctors will jump at that.

Why do we need to change medical practices to satisfy social stigmas, it makes no sense, surely we should be changing social stigmas.  And I would not be so naive as to think that removing GID from the DSM would automatically remove the stigmas, you will still be TS.

One thing I do know is that the apparent normal brain I was borne with decided at some point in time that the body that carried it was not right, it should have been a female one not male.  As time went on I became so obsessed with changing my body that I turned to self mutilation to try a correct what I perceived as a mistake.  It almost had tragic consequences.

Quote from: Sarah B on August 23, 2010, 07:19:11 AM
Assume that one has to have satisfy the conditions of the DSM IV TR to be labeled Gender Dysphoric, hence you must be Mentally Ill or have a Mental Disorder.  I have lifted the relevant text from the DSM IV TR page 578 and assigned a corresponding analysis to each of those Criterion.

There are two components of Gender Identity Disorder, both of which must be present to make the diagnosis.  There musty be evidence of a strong and persistent cross gender identification, which is the desire to be or the insistence that one is, of the other sex (Criterion A).

"Evidence for who?"  I never told my psychiatrists anything about my 'strong desire' or 'desire' to be a female or insistence that I was a female or better still, we can discount 'insistence' because I never once voiced it to any one so lets discount that, shall we?

So if you didn't tell your psychiatrist why you were there, didn't he ask you why you needed therapy?  Why you needed to see him, did you just drop in, did you expect him to guess?  If a person is going to be less than upfront with their therapist how can you honestly expect them to make a diagnosis.  You didn't see their notes, so you honestly can't relate what he was thinking, what he based his diagnosis on.

QuoteSo am I, the exception to the rule?

- You very well could be - we have no way of knowing.

QuoteDid my psychiatrist not follow the correct procedures? Or am I stark raving mad for doing what I did?

- Again - we have no way of knowing.

QuoteHow about, I manipulated the information to the desired outcome? Well, I'm giving you an honest account

- We have no way of knowing - since you mentioned it you very well may have manipulated information. Crazy people do crazy things.

My experience with both my psychiatrists was completely different than yours, probably completely different from Julie's but these experiences have nothing to do with GID being listed in the DSM.

Steph

Quote from: Sarah B on August 23, 2010, 07:19:11 AM
Assume that one has to have satisfy the conditions of the DSM IV TR to be labeled Gender Dysphoric, hence you must be Mentally Ill or have a Mental Disorder.  I have lifted the relevant text from the DSM IV TR page 578 and assigned a corresponding analysis to each of those Criterion.

[...]

Because if there is one exception there are others.  Therefore the diagnosis for Gender Dysphoria is fatally flawed.

Kind regards
Sarah B

I'll play.

Let's say you in fact, TRULY, do not fit any of the current diagnostic criteria for Gender Dysphoria.  What does that mean?  It means you don't have gender dysphoria.  Fine, I can handle that.  You got surgery and were even recommended for it - fine I can handle that too.  Why is it then that because you DON'T have a mental disorder it means that this mental disorder you DON'T have SHOULDN'Tt be diagnosed?  I hope that wasn't too many negatives.  I'll put it more simply.  Why do you want to remove GID as a mental disorder if you don't have it?  Is your interest purely altruistic, looking to right the wrongs of the DSM?  Perhaps you feel similarly about schizophrenia, or anti-social personality disorder (both of which I assume you don't have) and are out crusading for them too.

Dear Cindy,

I love your thoughts here.

Quote from: Cindy Stephens on August 23, 2010, 11:25:07 AMBut now, because there are no gatekeepers, someone goes in, with cash and gets GRS.  It turns out they have multiple personality syndrome.  Only one of the eight people inside wanted it, the rest are looking up good lawyers.

I get what you mean here, and it's a very valid point, and I've read about this happen in a medics' journal and well the poor client got themselves into a GID by transitioning as it was just the "hosts" at that time (personality fragments operating in the outside world) that were opposite sex but not the whole multiple system (all people forming the multiple personality) summed up. Opposite-sex hosts experience the typical GID symptoms if they have any connection to the body at all. But there's also other cases where the multiple personality disorder just got worsened by concurring transsexualism, and transition helped a lot as the multiple personality personality disorder was just a coping mechanism for gender dysphoria plus trauma.

Both these cases could be found in the International Journal of Transgenderism or how it was called, but I don't know if I can find these cases again there. Now it's relatively easy to clock a psychotic when they have an active phase, as their thinking and reasoning is somewhat deranged and illogical then, a bit like in a dream - a friend of mine gets such attacks once in a while and what she tells me then is always very WTF???. But you cannot easily clock a host in a multiple system if the host does not tell you that there is a multiple system, is clever, seems normal and has good control over the multiple system, which is usually the case. Also, multiples are usually highly intelligent (IQ 130 or more) which may help them fool most therapists. I know a couple of them, personally, two of them are good friends of mine.

Quote from: Cindy Stephens on August 23, 2010, 11:25:07 AMI believe that a great deal of shrink time that I have spent, is simply ruling out these types of pesky issues.   

Sure. Psychotics are easy to rule out when they have their "phase", but multiple personalities... ouch. Tricky.

Quote from: Cindy Stephens on August 23, 2010, 11:25:07 AMNow, I suppose the issue could be made that "well, you could still require tests for that."  But the truth is, most of the arguments seem to have a large component of "We hate the idea of gatekeepers", and not that it is of and by itself a mental disorder.   

You cannot rule out a host of a multiple personality by "testing" them if they're obstinate, usually they are very clever and have read some of the specialists' books before the tests are made, or even read about the tests themselves in specialists' books and which answers are expected from them. You need to be both highly intelligent and creative to develop multiple personality disorder at all, so multiple systems can often trick out their therapist if they want to. Especially as they know that it's a test they fear to fail. And multiple systems are most functional when it gets to tricky or dangerous situations and "tests" which are important to them, not in every-day life... That's the whole point of a multiple system, being created by extreme situations and being specialized for dealing with extreme situations, not for routine stuff. And they have decades of routine with not outing themselves as being multiple or raising suspicions. Usually, multiples don't let themselves go and switch visibly from one personality to the other unless they feel 100% secure and just let happen whatever comes. And they'll be especially controlled and suspicious in a situation with a therapist who wants to find out whether they're multiple or not.

Unless they are openly multiple and expose honestly what's going on inside to rule out making a big mistake for their life. Which is usually not easy for multiples as they tend to be very suspicious due to very bad experiences they had.

But I get your point of reluctance to gatekeepers and you may be right here. Gatekeepers are annoying, but they're important. E. g. some of the multiples may profit from the delay by thinking it all over and debating with the other people inside them whether they shall do it or not. Or they just change their host and getting hormones etc. is not important at all any more for them, or they don't remember having trans stuff going on at all. So they cancel their dates at the therapist or just don't show up any more.

Quote from: Cindy Stephens on August 23, 2010, 11:25:07 AMFurther, I haven't had anyone respond concerning people with BIID, Body integrity identity disorder.   An interesting perspective comes from sufferers of BIID or body integrity identity disorder.  I'll repeat it, inconvenient though it is.  "They have a condition where they feel that their bodies are "wrong" and try to have limbs either cut off or paralyzed.  The condition hasn't been in the dsmv, which makes it very difficult to treat, because there are no standards at all-talk therapy and pills don't work.  They have been trying desperately to have it INCLUDED.  Before you say it, Google it and read up.  They feel that it is part of their "core" experience and cannot understand why surgeons won't do it, and people don't accept it.  I'm sure that most of us would have an immediate response that we (transsexuals) are different, more pure, more something-anything that makes us better than them.   Not that it would ever make a difference in how I feel, it still adds to the perspective.  I suspect that after reading a few articles about them, you will have the same attitude toward them that many people have toward us.  I'm sorry, but my personal, visceral reaction is "Damn, they're nuts!"   Sorry, It is hard not to feel this way, not experiencing nor really being able to empathize with their feelings.  I just can't do it.  Just as many non-transgendered can't with us.  I don't pretend to know how they should be treated, except that it should be with extreme kindness and consideration."   

I think BIID is as valid as GID, and it seems to be a body mind map problem in many cases. I don't get anyone wanting to get rid of a limb, but I can kind of relate to that and think it has a lot of parallels to transsexualism, at least in some cases. You could say I have a BIID concerning my breasts as a part of my GID, and I would not object to that. I would not call anyone having a BIID as being "nuts" for this.

Quote from: Steph on August 23, 2010, 04:31:09 PMAnd I would not be so naive as to think that removing GID from the DSM would automatically remove the stigmas, you will still be TS.

And when homosexuality was removed from the DSM gays & lesbians were still gays & lesbians.  They just no longer had a mental disorder stigma attached to them.  And they could take that to the society that discriminated against them because it believed they had a mental problem and flip them the bird.  ;D

Quote from: Julie Marie on August 23, 2010, 08:43:48 PM
And when homosexuality was removed from the DSM gays & lesbians were still gays & lesbians.  They just no longer had a mental disorder stigma attached to them.  And they could take that to the society that discriminated against them because it believed they had a mental problem and flip them the bird.  ;D

Errrr that's because being homosexual is a sexual preference and not a mental disorder, no similarities what so ever.  Your turn :D

Steph

The thing with gays and lesbians though is that they do not need expensive hormones and surgery to be covered by insurance. We do(for the most part)

Quote from: Kyle XD on August 23, 2010, 09:38:37 PM
The thing with gays and lesbians though is that they do not need expensive hormones and surgery to be covered by insurance. We do(for the most part)

Right. The point is that we need treatment. That's what a mental disorder really says, if you take it at face value instead of buying into the stigma.

I don't agree that being transsexual is a mental disorder, but I don't mind it being in the dsm because it will get us the treatment we need. Plus most gender therapists with a brain these days are good enough at their job to know we aren't lunatics I'm hoping.

Anyway, I don't see where the problem is about having a "mental disorder".

I mean, a close friend of mine was diagnosed with "schizoid personality disorder" - sounds like schizophrenia but has nothing to do with it, no frigging halluzinations, voices talking to you or whatsoever. He explained this to me, and I read up the disorder and thought - okay, he's like that, but it's just normal human variation, why is that even called a disorder? ???

"Schizoid personality disorder" means you are an introvert, hardly make your emotional reactions visible to other people, are much into stuff you do alone and phantasy stuff in the broad sense, have rather few friends than many, you're not good at socializiing and you don't get along with kids. I mean, what's wrong with that? Okay, not everybody is like that, and it's not 100% normal/usual, but it's absolutely okay. You're a nerd, but where's the problem with that? Sure, you need to know that person well to capture their emotions unless they tell you right away how they feel, but what the heck? And I was like - THIS is called a personality disorder? As most other personality disorders are much more extreme and some of them help develop behavior like serial killing or extremely criminal behavior etc., for example narcissistic or antisocial personality behavior.

(https://www.susans.org/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.22dakika.org%2Fimaj%2Fcherry%2520blossom%2520girl%2Fdilbert-02.jpg&hash=aacb18024bc964736481d4bea9f1cdd2495a4630)

This is when I lost my trust in mental shrinks (again). I'm sure they see "schizoid personality disorder" as a mental disorder because not being able to "read" another's emotions well if you're not best friends and know the person very well makes them freak out. They live on reading their clients' emotions, and if it does not work - then they freak out and of course the client must be very disordered. And lots of mental shrinks together developed the "schizoid personality disorder". Yeah. My friend's the best friend you could imagine, a really nice guy, honest, reliable, intelligent, funny, I'd risk my live for him and he'd risk his for mine... you just need a lot of time to get behind his emotionally even facade and I don't care about him being a nerd. I have known him for 8 years or so, and if my friend can be called disordered for being a nerd, then I'm disordered too, just out of solidarity.  PERIOD! As transsexuality is probably regarded as more "deranged" by the mental shrinks than sheer nerdiness.

Just to give you an idea how culturally biased, non-objective and close-minded the DSM can be. And ruled by powers. Don't take this sh*t too seriously. The Dilberts, Trekkies and Computer nerds  of our planet might take over in the future and then, the DSM might lose it's "schizoid personality" disorder. It's more a question of power than anything else.

The mental disorder part I think is not that we are crazy for presenting the way we do, but that the mental disorder is the body dysphoria and hormones and surgery are the treatment.

Quote from: brainiac on August 23, 2010, 09:45:52 PM
Right. The point is that we need treatment. That's what a mental disorder really says, if you take it at face value instead of buying into the stigma.

Nope. I did not NEED treatment. I WANTED treatment because I saw other people getting it and being happy afterwards and I WANTED to have what they had. There is, in my mind, a difference.

If the treatment had been brain modification, then as I already said, I would have lived with what I had and not taken the treatment.

In order to get what I wanted I employed a combination of skillful distortion and taking matters into my own hands (which I wouldn't recommend as I now realise how dangerous it was particularly as I later turned out to have an undisclosed partial intersex condition which meant that the standard dosages actually resulted in DANGEROUS blood levels for me.)

The distortion consisted of telling the doctors ONLY what they wanted to hear and carefully editing out anything which didn't fit their current theories. Having already had one doctor try to stop me because I was honest with him in my later teens I was determined that the second time I was going to get through, and I did in record quick time.

Nearly 30 years on I feel I have justified my actions, but I still maintain that this is merely an intricate from of cosmetic surgery. It has not changed who I am one jot. I was no more or less female after the surgery than I was before it. It has just made it easier for a few other people (those few who see me naked) to see that, and it has recently, and thanks to the UK law changing, allowed me to apply to the legal system for legal recognition of that.

My point is that if GID is a disorder then so is ALL desire for cosmetic surgery. That, to my mind is irrefutable. I wanted the appearance of my genitalia changed, someone else wants a different appearance to their nose. It is the same thing EXACTLY to me.

All I personally want to see is consistency here. If this is to be a discorder then make all the other elective surgeries into disorders. If not then find another form of words which, whilst allowing a diagnosis does not end up stigmatising those with the condition.

as far as stigma goes - I feel like I am a lot LESS stigmatized by being thought of as a person with a mental disorder than I would be if I was widely considered a "pervert" who was doing this when I didn't need to.

Not speaking here of logic, but perception - because it is how you are perceived that leads to stigmatizing, not how you ARE.

One unrelated point about the angle that this is basically ramped up cosmetic surgery. i see what you are saying and don't entirely dispute it, but I think perhaps I would refine it by comparing it to plastic surgery which corrects what the person perceives as an unbearable flaw. Say the woman who lost a breast to a mastectomy and has an implant....or someone who's badly burned or injured in an auto accident and seeks plastic surgery to repair the damage...a child born with a cleft lip...

Yes, that could extend to the person who's just so obsessed with her oversized nose that she can't be happy with herself but the former examples are much better comparisons, IMO.

Do I NEED breasts and a vagina to be a woman? No, I really don't.

I don't NEED to remove the hair from my body or wear makeup or acrylic nails to be female either - but I find myself in considerable mental distress when confronted with the possibility that these things will not be so. Natal women are not overly distressed when their legs get hairy or their nails are not pretty - but I do.

The same instinct that drives me to recreate, as much as possible given my circumstance, a female presentation - and grieves me when for whatever reason I cannot - is the same instinct that makes me want to modify my body, only writ much larger.And it's not just for public appearance. I shave parts of my body no other person (save a medical professional) is ever likely to see because I want it feminine.

Is that normal? is it disordered? I don't have answers to these questions...but I do think it is something other than simple vanity of the sort that drives a lot of elective plastic surgery.

*Anyway, I don't see where the problem is about having a "mental disorder"*

Try getting a job as an employee in say Banking, Govt, Law, Medicine, Aviation, Marine....and/or a whole host of other ultra conservative industries...

If it's clearly stated and on your record that you be menatly ill....

Quote from: Fencesitter on August 23, 2010, 10:15:44 PM
"Schizoid personality disorder" means you are an introvert, hardly make your emotional reactions visible to other people, are much into stuff you do alone and phantasy stuff in the broad sense, have rather few friends than many, you're not good at socializiing and you don't get along with kids. I mean, what's wrong with that?

it's not just being an introvert or "hardly" making your emotional reactions visible.
What you described does not seem enough to cause problems with "living in human society, which is what you need to call it a disorder.

I looked it up.

"People with SPD are seen as aloof, cold and indifferent, which causes some social problems."
"Because of their lack of communication with other people, those who are diagnosed with SPD are not able to have a reflection of themselves and how well they get along with others."
"Those people who have SPD are happiest when they are in a relationship in which the partner places few emotional or intimate demands on them, as it is not people as such that they want to avoid, but both negative and positive emotions, emotional intimacy, and self disclosure."
etc. etc.

We human beings are social animals.
We rely on others in society to function.
Without emotional attachment to other individuals of the same species, there's no "social" structure.

We are geared towards having emotional reactions, needs and attachments.
With Far less than normal of these, problems arise.
Lack of empathy, lack of being able to associate with others, etc.

Which sounds and awful lot like it would make functioning in society "harder" than it is for others.
Which is the base definition of a disorder.

Quote from: rejennyrated on August 24, 2010, 03:14:32 AM
My point is that if GID is a disorder then so is ALL desire for cosmetic surgery. That, to my mind is irrefutable. I wanted the appearance of my genitalia changed, someone else wants a different appearance to their nose. It is the same thing EXACTLY to me.

Just cause you didn't have dysphoria doesn't mean other people don't.
Just means that you didn't.

If this was all about cosmetics for me, then I wouldn't be after it.
I'm terrified of surgery. The thought of it is enough to make me feel physically ill.
But the thought of living any longer as a lie, as something I'm not, with all these things that are not me still attached to this body, is even worse.
I honestly do not think I would have made it past age 30 without these steps taken to correct my flesh to match my mind.

The dysphoria was starting to kill me.
That means, that the dysphoria was actively, negatively effecting my ability to live a functional life via psychological distress.
That means, that the dysphoria was, and probably still is, a disorder in my life.

Quote from: Miniar on August 24, 2010, 04:48:54 AM
Just cause you didn't have dysphoria doesn't mean other people don't.
Just means that you didn't.

Well clearly I actually was dysphoric otherwise I wouldn't have wanted to change things. My point is actually the reverse of what you have assumed namely that someone not liking their nose or small breasts seem to me actually just as much a case of dysphoria as hating your genitals - which both I and you evidently did.

My beef is purely that this is singled out because it is socially borderline in its acceptability, whilst other forms of dysphoria such as the nose job, breast job, or tummy tuck are regarded as "understandable".

I think people put genitals in some sort of special category as if they define you in some way or other, whereas as an unashamed bisexual feminist I strongly refute that. For me genitals do NOT define a person. You are male with or without surgery just as I was always female. The surgery pretty much helps us to feel good about ourselves, but it doesn't actually make us something which we weren't already.

Purely cosmetic surgery isn't considered "understandable" by anyone I know as such.
Most people I know simply gawk at each other and go "why would you risk {insert potential complication and pain here} for something so superficial?"
I've even gotten that exact comment in regards to my chest.

Even more so, people who have "extensive" cosmetic surgery. Not just a little nip here and tuck there, but a complete re-haul of their appearance, they don't got the "understandable" label either. They get a "there must be something wrong with him/her".
Why?  Because it's a complete re-haul.
Because it's extensive.
People tend to think those that opt to have extensive, purely cosmetic surgery, must have some deep-seated insecurities and possibly even hatred of themselves.

i.e. dysphoria of some sort

Which again, if it negatively affects your quality of life by interfering with your ability to function in society, would be a mental disorder.
(There is even a disorder connected with plastic surgery called Body Dysmorphic Disorder.)


And a nose job doesn't mean you literally remove your ability to breed, or that you take hormones or even any medication for the rest of your life.

Combining the hormone therapy, the change in wardrobe, and the surgical alterations of the flesh, and other small things, and a transition is more compatible to getting a complete re-haul of appearance, though it's even "more" than that as it's a life-long investment of time, money and so on, in the form of "continued" treatment.

All absolutely true Min! I'm not disputing the facts.

But then I had already changed my wardrobe a long time back, and I took hormones long before I had even formally sought medical help towards the surgery. Yes I know better now! But back then the potential dangers weren't so widely known.

Because of my IS condition I was probably sterile anyway even though I didn't know it at the time. Interestingly BOTH my male cousins turned out to be so. One is Klinefelters, the other is also PAIS but unlike me he is not trans. Clearly our family has some genetic flaw.

Thing is, as far as I can see you and I aren't that far apart in pov.  We are in a way arguing semantics here. It's just that I object to what I perceive as the selective nature of the formal label of disorder. I would like to see GID treated as routinely as other forms of bodily dysphoria, and yes of course because of the reproductive impact it is something that has to be approached with a degree of caution. But I think that is something for each individual to weigh up for themselves.

That's the trouble with threads like this, and indeed diagnosis labels. We can all only talk from our own individual experiences, which are all subtly different.

Quote from: rejennyrated on August 24, 2010, 06:27:31 AM
....

Because of my IS condition I was probably sterile anyway. Interestingly BOTH my male cousins turned out to be so. One is Klinefelters, the other is also PAIS but unlike me he is not trans. Clearly our family has some genetic flaw.
...

Being Intersexed is a whole different kettle of fish.  Generally speaking folks with an IS condition do not suffer the same or any disforia for that matter.  See:

http://www.isna.org/faq/transgender (http://www.isna.org/faq/transgender)

If you indeed have an inter sex condition then one would understand your thinking about this topic.

Steph

Quote from: Steph on August 23, 2010, 09:32:19 PM
Errrr that's because being homosexual is a sexual preference and not a mental disorder, no similarities what so ever.  Your turn :D

Steph

"Preference?"  Oh boy, don't go saying that in the company of LG activists.  You'll get an earful!

To your point:
1) Homosexuality is not a preference or a choice just as heterosexuality is not a preference or a choice just as being TG is not a preference or choice.  Similarity noted.
2) Homosexuality USED to be a mental disorder until it was removed from the DSM.

The point I've been trying to make from the beginning, and made several times since, seems to be falling on deaf ears.   

a) We are discriminated against, when identified as transgender

b) There is a negative stigma about us

c) The unemployment rate for TGs is dramatically higher than the general population

d) The under-employment situation is considerably worse than the general population

e) The general population discriminates against those it considers to be mentally disordered

f) The general population considers us to be screwed up in the head

g) The DSM, a professional reference book, says we are mentally disordered.

h) If we want a job or housing or other needs, we have to go out into the general population to get them, presently, as a mentally disordered person. 

"We just can't trust those people!  They're not right in the head."

And if you say, "Well I'm stealth and I don't experience those things", that doesn't disprove anything I said above.  All it proves is you had to be stealth to be treated as normal.  Look at the stealth threads here and you'll see how important it is to most of us.  Why?  So we don't have to deal with discrimination, prejudice and hatred.  The need for stealth is further proof of the damaging effects of the stigma.

If I was one of those people I often refer to as phobes and I came here and read this thread. I'd pick out all the posts that defend GID as a mental disorder and take that back to my local phobe group and use it to prove that TGs have a mental problem, not a physical problem.  And that they need psychotherapy for as long as it takes to fix their brains.  And until their brains are fixed they cannot be treated as normal citizens because they cannot think normally and cannot be trusted with the same rights and privileges as normal adults.  Besides, many of them are pedophiles and prostitutes and we don't want them in our society.  ENDA?  Not for those people?  They're nuts!

This thread reminds me of scenes from One Flew Over The Cuckoos Nest where McMurphy is trying to convince some of the inmates they don't belong in a mental institution and they vehemently argue they do.  I thought they were just funny scenes.  Now I'm not so sure.

I guess I'll have to just go back to what I said earlier:  If you think being TG is a mental disorder then you have a mental disorder.  If not, then you don't.  Same goes for having red hair, blue eyes, being short, being tall and anything else that's "wrong" with you.

Quote from: Julie Marie on August 24, 2010, 07:18:21 AM
"Preference?"  Oh boy, don't go saying that in the company of LG activists.  You'll get an earful!


The point I've been trying to make from the beginning, and made several times since, seems to be falling on deaf ears.   

a) We are discriminated against, when identified as transgender

b) There is a negative stigma about us

c) The unemployment rate for TGs is dramatically higher than the general population

d) The under-employment situation is considerably worse than the general population

e) The general population discriminates against those it considers to be mentally disordered

f) The general population considers us to be screwed up in the head

g) The DSM, a professional reference book, says we are mentally disordered.

h) If we want a job or housing or other needs, we have to go out into the general population to get them, presently, as a mentally disordered person. 

"We just can't trust those people!  They're not right in the head."

I agree Julie that these are all the reasons why something needs to change, but not GID in the DSM.  What needs to be changed is the various human rights legislations that govern your country.  It pains me so much to see the freest country in the world can oppress it's citizens ???.  You are not going to change people.  You can change the DSM but for many in society will still see you as TS, still discriminate, still create negative stigma, still prevent TS from employment and housing etc  What is needed is protection.

Ha, ha, I think we've beat this one to death :)

Steph

Short, personal opinion:

Personally, I feel that the medical establishment should depathologize us.  Of course, that is not likely to happen.  Many of you have given excellent answers.  I have nothing to add.  You've all said it so well. 

As I write this, my favorite song from my favorite band in my favorite version just came on the radio.  Listening to it, my mentation is becoming most disordered ... happily so!  Give me a time machine.  Let's go back to 1968.  Those wavy lines, bright colors, beautiful girls ... The 1960s loom large before me.

The Beatles - Revolution (Live) (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Imb4tYOk8GE#)

Just kidding!    :D   Okay, I admit it:  I'm a terminally-weird, life-long rock addict.  Love it!

Both sides of the "mental disorder" issue mentioned here have merit.  We are apt to be listed in the Diagnostic Statistical Manual for some time to come.  Personally, I kind of resent the medicalization of our treatment, not because of its necessity but rather because of it's expense.  The money ... always the money ... always.  It does not have to be this way, it really doesn't.  Well, enough from me.  Like all your answers on this thread.  So interesting.

Hi Brainiac

Firstly, if you don't accurately tell your diagnostician about what you're going through, I think it's fairly obvious that they will not be able to appropriately diagnose you.

Well I'm sorry, that is not necessarily so.  I had a letter of referral from my GP, asking my psychiatrist to see me. On my first visit with him, yes I was dressed appropriately and I was as nervous as a bag of >-bleeped-<.  I also did not tell him that I was nervous either and as a side note between reading an article in a 'playboy magazine' which I will come to later and me visiting him, I had read maybe in a limited sense, about other girls and what they had to do and the problems they encountered,  I don't know, because it is nearly 20 to 30 years ago that I did any reading on these issues and at the time this information was extremely limited.

But one thing was for sure I understood 'psychiatrist's' in a limited sense, yes I was naive and I did not have the knowledge or understanding that I have now.  My instinctive nature told me that psychiatrists could and would play games.  Yes, there it is again, I knew I had to keep my big mouth shut.  Unfortunately that is me,  I know what is right and what is wrong and that is my nature.

Anyway back to the consultation with my psychiatrist, after handing him the letter and maybe a little about where I came from.  The consultation ended with an arrangement that I would see him regularly every two weeks, if I remember correctly.  Anyway in the mean time I had found a job and I was was working full time.  I then attended my second session.  I was happy, confident, relaxed and in a sense was not even worried about this consultation.  I told him I had a job and the conversation got around to my first visit and he remarked about my unease at the first consultation and I confirmed with him that I was nervous.

So he knew my 'state of being' without me saying anything.  Then at the end of this consultation or the next one he said, he only wanted to see me every month and this is what happened for the next two years.  Why did he change the appointment schedule?   Maybe he realised that I had my head screwed on properly and recognised that I was mentally sound.

Secondly, "strong and persistent" identification is not necessarily defined as the things you said. Acting it out is an unfair way to judge it, as you can identify with a gender without feeling able to express it.

Sorry the Criterion A states "There musty be evidence of a strong and persistent cross gender identification" note the operative words 'there must be evidence'. So what evidence must one present then?  You are right, 'one can identify with a gender without feeling able to express it.  I never expressed myself verbally or insisted I was a female, because I never had to.  People just saw me as a female.

Wanting and imagining that you are the correct gender is a CONSCIOUS identification--and denial can really strongly interfere with that. I know it did for me.

Point is I never ever denied my identification as a female, full stop period, I embraced it fully, so hence I never suffered per se.  Again I never told any one about it

(not merely a desire for any perceived cultural advantages of being the other sex).
I believe that you misinterpreted this line.

No I did not, because again the operative words are 'for any perceived cultural advantages', not my words, 'their words' and I wanted all the 'perceived cultural advantages", why? Because I'm a female that's why and why would I want all the perceived cultural disadvantages that are associated with being a female?  Because it's part of the culture of being a women and goes with the territory.

Anyway, I hope you really realised the heavy sarcasm that was being used and the mockery I made of this particular condition and in this day and age we have 'gender equality', yes I know it's not perfect.  Yes, I did consider all the ramifications of competing in swimming and not swimming was not an option.  There was no way I was going to give up swimming, because if I did, a part of me would have died and I was not prepared to accept that.  Yes I did win the short sprints and I did lose the longer distances.

Really? You had ZERO dysphoria about your body not being what it was supposed to, the way you were viewed as the wrong gender by others? You didn't feel pigeon holed into the wrong gender roles?

Really truly, I had no 'dysphoria', it's hard to believe is it not?  Well it goes like this.

Hypothesis: All trans people have dysphoria.  Which is basically what you are saying and the DSM manuals as well.  However, this statement is falsifiable, because it only takes one trans person to prove it wrong.  Well I'm that person.

Well actually no, I'm not, because I have never identified as being trans whatsoever and I find it absolutely distasteful that I have to use those terms and being referred as trans, but in this instance I will put up with the terms, because I find it absolutely repugnant that I can be labeled or I once was mentally ill, or had a mental disorder or suffer from any one of Julie Maria's eight points.  Now you know why, I never open my mouth period.

Lucky you. From my own experience and everything I've heard from other trans people, those feelings of dysphoria are very common. I'm wondering, though, how you figured out that you were TG if you had no dysphoria...?

Please, I'm not TG or TS,  I did not do what I knew had to be done just to be stuck with those labels.  I'm a female.  If other people want to be referred to as such, then that is there prerogative and I will address them appropriately.  Anyway sit back, read and you shall find out.

What pushed me to leave my family and friends?  Well several things, my thoughts on my problem were getting stronger and stronger and may be I was becoming a little unsettled.  I did not fight these thoughts but I accepted them for what they were, they were a part me.  These thoughts would not go away, this started to manifest more so after coming back from boarding school (high school),

One of the main pushes that led me to think more and more about my problem was discovering an article in a playboy (or similar) magazine which had a picture, which started of with a sketch of a boy or a man (my memories on this part of my life are sort of vague) and several sketches later (about 5 sketches in total) there was a picture of a girl (or a woman),

I suppose after reading the article to death.  I realized, what my problem was, I wanted to be a female.  The article mentioned the word transsexual, however I never thought I was one and to this day I never think of myself as such and as a matter of fact I detest those words and I never describe myself as such, not now, not ever.

I had completed a trade which took 4 years to complete part time, I did this trade right after I had finished boarding school and I was working in a government office (this was the time I started my swimming career) and in the office the guys often talked about going to university.  I was also in on those discussions as well and one of my dreams at the time was also to go on to university and get a degree.

After I finished my trade, I got involved in swimming in a big way and sure enough, something else came along and smacked me right in the face, literally and figuratively, I did not realize it at the time (one can be so dumb at times) and it took a couple of years for this one to sink in.

There was a young man who was also involved in swimming and we became very good friends.  We trained at the same pool, went to swimming meets, camped at different swimming spots before going on to a swimming meet, stayed at each others house, scuba dived and saw the odd movie together, I was at peace, I enjoyed his company, I felt comfortable around him and until he became involved with a girl, I then felt I was out of place after this.  Well as you can guess, I liked him more than I realized and I could not understand why I felt this way.

I knew I was not gay, I was not sexually active.  To put it bluntly I was not very happy at the current situation.  It took me a long while to figure this out until finally I connected the playboy article and these feelings, finally the penny dropped.   I was a female and my problem with this young man was that I loved him as a young woman.  He was in a sense to me, a soul mate and I 'wanted' him in every sense of the word.  Yes, this realization tore me apart,  I did not stop the friendship, but something had to give.  I also knew certain things about his attitude towards certain people.  My decision was going to tear me apart. 

I was also buying and wearing the clothes that I felt comfortable in a lot more, but nobody new what I was doing.  On one occasion I was nearly undone at one stage, maybe the burden was too much, or may be I wanted to live my life normally and as a result I was just plain careless.  Anyway my brothers and cousin were trying to get into my cupboard and I realized that one of them saw something (some of my clothes more than likely), so I managed to lock them away somewhere else.  I then showed them what they were trying to find was not there.

Later my uncle (same uncle who new why I left the family), who new about this stuff came to me and said to be careful.  So this was how one of the first family members came to know of my problem to a certain extent. In one of our discussions he said, I needed to live as woman and find out if that is what I wanted in life.

As I said things were coming to a head and the three things that finally made me decide to leave, was one, finding out I lost a soul mate, two, I wanted to sort out my personal problem once and for all and three, I wanted to go to university.  I had been with the government job for ten years, which meant that I had long service leave up my sleeve (which basically meant I could have a whole year of from work and still have money)  By this stage I had applied to several universities and I was accepted into several of them.

So at the start of 1989 I left my family and friends who believed that I was going to university and I had every intention of going to university, but not to the one that my family and friends thought I was going to.  I was going to a university that was situated near the resources that I needed to solve my personal problem and I wanted to attend the university that I had chosen in a more appropriate name, but that was not to be and that part of my dream where I would go to university would not happen for another 5 years.

When I left, I got a hotel room and I then went to a salon where they did ear piercings and got my ears done, why do I remember this so well? It's is because I had both ears done consecutively at the time and this was the start of more dramatic changes that were to come.

My aunt (wife of my uncle who knew and at this stage the second person in my immediate family who knew) came around to see me on my way that evening.  I was not going to see her again for a at least a couple of years, then she left.  After she left, the enormity of what I was embarking upon finally caught up with me and I started to cry and I did not stop for a couple of hours in a sense, I cried because I was alone, I cried for the loss of a soul mate, I cried because I believed I was never going to see my family again and I cried because I was happy at last that I was making a decision, that I knew resonated so deeply inside me with such conviction that I never questioned what I was doing or what I was going to do.  I knew it was the right thing to do.

Early in the morning I dressed myself properly, put a little make up on, did my hair in a French braid, which I could do because my hair is very long and I was travelling in a car and I wanted to be comfortable for the trip, it was going to take a couple of days and their was no rush, I was travelling from one part of the country to another and I was going to start my new life.

Lucky no, extremely lucky yes in more ways than I can say.  No dysphoria, able to pass instantly, got my hormones from my doctor GP on the first visit, able to get a job virtually straight away, no problems with my psychiatrists and I had my surgery within two years.

Not sure if you knew this, but this criterion is in about half of the disorders in the DSM. This line effectively says, "if it doesn't cause problems, it's not a disorder." You misinterpreted this one, too

Sorry, I did not misinterpret the condition, because even if your interpretation is correct, that is "if it doesn't cause problems, it's not a disorder."  Well my 'disturbance', wanting to be a female, something is not quite right did not cause me any problems, so 'it's not a disorder', hence, I still fail the diagnosis of Gender Dysphoria for Criterion D.

I find it hard to believe that you felt zero distress around living as the wrong sex, or else you wouldn't have transitioned.

But the point is, I did change and I had no distress in regards to my body or mind (well, maybe I just might concede a tiny bit of distress in my mind about, wanting to be a female, with the appropriate body, because I was constantly thinking about it more and more up until I left and wondering why I was thinking about it all the time).  I live my life as one who is extremely happy, confident, friendly outgoing, kind hearted, who cares for others that are around me and who passes the knowledge I have gained onto others.  My journey was different and everyone around here can attest to that.

I'm sorry that others suffer, it hurts me deeply in more words than I can say.  I wish that I could take their pain and suffering away, but I cannot. I wish they could have the safe and uneventful journey that I had.  I have never ever regretted my decision and I will always be eternally grateful to my surgeon who gave me my life that I have now.

My kindest regards to one and all
Sarah B

Hi Julie Marie

What you said below, is one of the reasons why I keep my big mouth shut and I do not tell anyone about me.

Quote from: Julie Marie on August 24, 2010, 07:18:21 AM
The point I've been trying to make from the beginning, and made several times since, seems to be falling on deaf ears.   

a) We are discriminated against, when identified as transgender

b) There is a negative stigma about us

c) The unemployment rate for TGs is dramatically higher than the general population

d) The under-employment situation is considerably worse than the general population

e) The general population discriminates against those it considers to be mentally disordered

f) The general population considers us to be screwed up in the head

g) The DSM, a professional reference book, says we are mentally disordered.

h) If we want a job or housing or other needs, we have to go out into the general population to get them, presently, as a mentally disordered person.

"We just can't trust those people!  They're not right in the head."

And if you say, "Well I'm stealth and I don't experience those things", that doesn't disprove anything I said above.  All it proves is you had to be stealth to be treated as normal.  Look at the stealth threads here and you'll see how important it is to most of us.  Why?  So we don't have to deal with discrimination, prejudice and hatred.  The need for stealth is further proof of the damaging effects of the stigma.

Kind regards
Sarah B

Hi Interalia

• Why do you want to remove GID as a mental disorder if you don't have it?
  Because it's not a mental disorder or mental illness, but a medical condition


• Is your interest purely altruistic, looking to right the wrongs of the DSM?
  Yes


• Perhaps you feel similarly about schizophrenia, or anti-social personality disorder (both of which I assume you don't have) and are out crusading for them too.
  Yes

Kind regards
Sarah B

After reading this thread a few times I think I can safely come to this conclusion......
You guys are not even listening to eachother. There is an attitude that seems to say "I am right and you are wrong" comeing from many diferant quarters.
Maybe it would be nice if one or two of you took the time to consider eachothers opinions instead of imediatly looking for flaws in eachothers reasoning and building your arguments just to make your self look inteligent. Pretty much all discussion stoped some time ago.

So my 2cents....You do not have any true desire to listen. Looking like you personaly have all the answers is more important than discourse.

Quote from: Sarah B on August 25, 2010, 06:58:13 AM
Because it's not a mental disorder or mental illness, but a medical condition[/li][/list]

I think you'd have to prove that. If it is a medical condition it has to have physical signs and symptoms. If it met those conditions then it would probably be bundled into the same bracket as IS conditions.

Definition of a medical disease.
A disease is an abnormal condition affecting the body of an organism. It is often construed to be a medical condition associated with specific symptoms and signs

If I say I'm a transsexual and choose to transition people have to take that. There is no proof one way or another. There is no signs and symptoms within my body.

If I say I'm inter-sex you can test for that condition and examine certain aspects of my anatomy or DNA and confirm my claim or not.

Hi Steph

Quote from: Steph on August 23, 2010, 04:31:09 PM
Why do we need to change medical practices to satisfy social stigmas, it makes no sense, surely we should be changing social stigmas.

Having a label of mental illness or mental disorder, will and can be used against you, for example custody battles, discrimination, better still see, Julie Marie's list.

Quote from: Steph on August 23, 2010, 04:31:09 PM
And I would not be so naive as to think that removing GID from the DSM would automatically remove the stigmas

You are right it would not remove the stigmas, it would take time.

Quote from: Steph on August 23, 2010, 04:31:09 PM
you will still be TS.

Removal or not of GID from the DSM.  TS would still be an insult to me.

Quote from: Steph on August 23, 2010, 04:31:09 PM
So if you didn't tell your psychiatrist why you were there, didn't he ask you why you needed therapy?

No, he did not ask why I was there, it was self evident. from the initial letter of introduction from my then GP.

Quote from: Steph on August 23, 2010, 04:31:09 PM
Why you needed to see him, did you just drop in, did you expect him to guess?

I had to go, because of the SOC and no I did not drop in I made an appointment. and no again it was self evident why, I was there from the initial letter of introduction

Quote from: Steph on August 23, 2010, 04:31:09 PMIf a person is going to be less than upfront with their therapist how can you honestly expect them to make a diagnosis.

I saw him for nearly two years, he gave me my letter for surgery.  The amount of personal questions that he asked and honestly, I'm trying to remember as much as I can of those consultations.  Was extremely limited as far as I can remember and as I have mentioned before I'm a very private person and that includes very personal information.  He knew I was functioning extremely well in my life and that was self evident from the second consultation.

Quote from: Steph on August 23, 2010, 04:31:09 PMYou didn't see their notes, so you honestly can't relate what he was thinking, what he based his diagnosis on.

No, I did not see his notes.  But, I can infer what he could have been thinking and I just made a phone call to a long time friend who worked as a counsellor, said to me, "he was fair in dealing with his clients".  So he based his diagnosis on a genuine, reserved person and had her head screwed on correctly, was reliable and new what she wanted.

King regards
Sarah B

Just a few comments...
To the need for therapy to get treatment: I started a thread here regarding implied consent HRT where the individual only needs to be evaluated by a doctor to determine health conditions and by a therapist to determine soundness of mind and a full understanding of what HRT does.  There's the initial doctor visit, then the therapist visit then back to the doctor for prescriptions if the person is healthy and sane.  That's it.  I thought this was something relatively new but it seems many here have implied consent where they live too.  In other words, this is being handled as a medical condition.  Even the AMA agrees.

As to the medical diagnosis criteria: My sister and my daughter have been diagnosed with fibromyalgia.  My sister was told for decades it was all in her head.  It wasn't until she was in her 40s that medical science started rethinking their attitude toward the patients who all complained of the same ailments.  Even my daughter had to initially endure the mental problem diagnosis.  I remember those days.  It was horrible.  Today we have ways of medically diagnosing the condition and medically approved treatments for the condition.  The same could happen with the gender identity condition.  Just because we don't have a way to medically diagnosis it today doesn't mean we never will.

That it's a mental condition: There is a theory that the brain is flushed with opposite gender hormones during the fetal stage and this causes the transgender condition.  But it could also be true that the brain continues to be influenced by this process all through life.  I've heard countless stories of people saying the feelings subsided for a while then came back with a vengeance then subsided again, and so on.  I experienced that all through my life.  So the body could be producing these chemicals that affect the brain and cause mind-body gender conflict.

The truth is no one really knows, at least not now.  Given sufficient funding and attention, one day we most likely will.  We have to be patient and open minded until that day comes.

And that brings me to that day when we read the headlines that say,
And suddenly people are saying, "Gee, it isn't a choice."  And that leads to better acceptance and one day maybe even being seen as normal.

But change those headlines to something like, "Scientists Prove Transgender People are Mentally Disordered."  What will the reaction of the public be then?

Quote from: Sarah B on August 25, 2010, 06:58:13 AM
Hi Interalia

• Why do you want to remove GID as a mental disorder if you don't have it?
  Because it's not a mental disorder or mental illness, but a medical condition


• Is your interest purely altruistic, looking to right the wrongs of the DSM?
  Yes


• Perhaps you feel similarly about schizophrenia, or anti-social personality disorder (both of which I assume you don't have) and are out crusading for them too.
  Yes

Kind regards
Sarah B

I appreciate your consistency and can respect it even if I disagree vehemently.  Depathologizing anti-social personality disorder would mean an inevitable increase in violent crime - but since this isn't the focus of this thread, I'll refrain.

Quote from: interalia on August 25, 2010, 05:57:54 PM
I appreciate your consistency and can respect it even if I disagree vehemently.  Depathologizing anti-social personality disorder would mean an inevitable increase in violent crime - but since this isn't the focus of this thread, I'll refrain.

Even if this sounds mean - if I had the choice between both, I would still rather be transsexual than suffer from anti-social personality disorder as the former is very extreme and you cannot make it go away. Being transsexual means (in my case) I will always look like a freak once undressed, and have to figure out when to tell whom about my past, but that's "all". I think it's less awful altogether.

Sarah B:

I believe that we are at an impasse at this point. We seem to have had very different experiences, and very different interpretations of these criteria. It was interesting to hear your story--I strongly identify as transgender and not just male.

Either way, what I'm interested in debating is the difference between "mental health" versus medical health. I think that if we're saying that we reject the diagnosis of GID as a mental disorder for reasons OTHER than the stigma against mental disorders, then we need to acknowledge what those differences really are.

In our society, I see a common interpretation of mental illness as being the patient's fault, or something they should have been able to prevent by "thinking straight", on one extreme, and on the other, it's viewed like most people see medical illnesses overall-- as blameless. The black and white view of mental health is inadequate. Research overwhelmingly demonstrates that mental disorders are both biological and social. The disorder is physically manifested in your brain somehow (just like everything in your mind), even if we don't understand exactly how yet; this is affected by your genetics, your environment, and your life experience.

So even if it's genetic... so what? Schizophrenia has genetic links. Depression has genetic links. ADHD has genetic links. That doesn't mean these disorders don't negatively affect your mental life in a significant way, which can and should be alleviated-- which is what I think should in part define a mental disorder.

Quote from: rejennyrated on August 25, 2010, 02:28:58 PM
Julie - you are too late.

The Daily Telegraph in the UK has already carried almost exactly that headline. It was sometime last year. I've even posted links to the article in question on here before but most people evidently haven't seen it. It related to work done by Melbourne geneticist Dr Vincent Harley at the Prince Henry clinic, and although the article which followed was not actually as clear cut as the headline the fact remains that at least in the UK this has already happened. :)

Sadly all that has happened so far is that the argument has now moved to whether the research is flawed or not...

I read your post and Googled it.  Sure enough, a number of sites came up, most of which were LGBT but I did find one from The Daily Telegraph (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/health/2471724/Gene-variant-may-make-people-transsexual.html) and one from BBC News (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/7689007.stm).  And yes, I missed it when it was news.

However, as you mentioned, there seems to be more questions than answers as outlined in this article on POPSCI (http://www.popsci.com/scitech/article/2008-11/discovery-transsexual-gene-raises-more-questions-answers).

An important element in obtaining funding for any type of research is getting people behind the cause.  I'm not sure whether the discovery you mentioned has created further research but if it hasn't or it is going slowly I would guess it's because of poor funding.  If you took a poll of the general public, what percentage would even care about this?  Follow the empathy.

What I'm seeing more and more is acceptance towards early transition.  These kids will grow up "looking normal" and will therefore not be subjected to the level of prejudice and discrimination many of us have experienced.  And it's quite possible this direction may more quickly change public sentiment than an educational campaign, removing GID from the DSM or any other attempt to change the negative stigma attached to transgender.

If they can't find a way to "correct" the variant gene, they may simply accept the fact the gene is there and make early transition an acceptable treatment.  Whatever the case, the end result would be people who are affected by this would suffer less social trauma and therefore need less therapy, if any at all.  Fixing the body fixes the mind.

Quote from: Julie Marie on August 15, 2010, 08:22:46 AM

Imagine you live in a world where those born with the mind and body being of different genders are revered, seen as a blessing to society.  You are believed to be gifted because you have a dual view into the genders and can relate to both in a way non TGs can.  People come to you for help.  They respect you and appreciate the insight you bring to their lives.  You are, in effect, placed in a higher position in society because you are TG.

Given that as your reality, how would you respond to someone who came to you and told you that you were mentally disordered?

I'm not Native American, and don't wish to co-opt their culture, however I perceive myself as being similar to the Two-Spirit that you describe. My response; I am not mentally ill, it is our western patriarchal society that is completely out of balance.

Z

I haven't read the whole thread (it's gotten pretty long) so I apologize if this has already been discussed. 

But I think it might be interesting to talk about the new draft of the DSM V, which proposes that post transitioners will no longer be considered mentally ill.

http://www.dsm5.org/ProposedRevisions/Pages/proposedrevision.aspx?rid=193# (http://www.dsm5.org/ProposedRevisions/Pages/proposedrevision.aspx?rid=193#)

Quote from: http://www.dsm5.org/ProposedRevisions/Pages/proposedrevision.aspx?rid=193#
For the adult criteria, we propose, on a preliminary basis, the requirement of only 2 indicators. This is based on a preliminary secondary data analysis of 154 adolescent and adults patients with GID compared to 684 controls (Deogracias et al., 2007; Singh et al., 2010). From a 27-item dimensional measure of gender dysphoria, the Gender Identity/Gender Dysphoria Questionnaire for Adolescents and Adults (GIDYQ), we extracted five items that correspond to the proposed A2-A6 indicators (we could not extract a corresponding item for A1). Each item was rated on a 5-point response scale, ranging from Never to Always, with the past 12 months as the time frame. For the current analysis, we coded a symptom as present if the participant endorsed one of the two most extreme response options (frequently or always) and as absent if the participant endorsed one of the three other options (never, rarely, sometimes). This yielded a true positive rate of 94.2% and a false positive rate of 0.7%. Because the wording of the items on the GIDYQ is not identical to the wording of the proposed indicators, further validational work will be required during field trials.



End notes

1. It is proposed that the name gender identity disorder (GID) be replaced by "Gender Incongruence" (GI) because the latter is a descriptive term that better reflects the core of the problem: an incongruence between, on the one hand, what identity one experiences and/or expresses and, on the other hand, how one is expected to live based on one's assigned gender (usually at birth) (Meyer-Bahlburg, 2009a; Winters, 2005). In a recent survey that we conducted among consumer organizations for transgendered people (Vance et al., in press), many very clearly indicated their rejection of the GID term because, in their view, it contributes to the stigmatization of their condition.

2. In addition to the proposed name change for the diagnosis (see Endnote 1), there are 6  substantive proposed changes to the DSM-IV descriptive and diagnostic material: (a) we have proposed a change in conceptualization of the defining features by emphasizing the phenomenon of "gender incongruence" in contrast to cross-gender identification per se (Meyer-Bahlburg, 2009a); (b) we have proposed a merging of the A and B clinical indicator criteria in DSM-IV (see Endnotes 10, 13); (c) for the adolescent/adult criteria, we have proposed a more detailed and specific set of polythetic indicators than was the case in DSM-IV (Cohen-Kettenis & Pfäfflin, 2009; Zucker, 2006); (d) for the child criteria, we have proposed that the A1 indicator be necessary (but not sufficient) for the diagnosis of GI (see Endnote 5); (e) we have proposed that the "distress/impairment" criterion not be a prerequisite for the diagnosis of GI (see Endnote 15); and (f) we have proposed that subtyping by sexual attraction (for adolescents/adults) be eliminated (see Endnote 18) but that subtyping by the presence or absence of a co-occurring disorder of sex development (DSD) be introduced (see Endnote 14). As in DSM-IV, we recommend one overarching diagnosis, GI, with separate, developmentally-appropriate criteria sets for children vs. adolescents/adults. The text material will provide updated information on developmental trajectory data for clients who received the GI diagnosis in childhood vs. adolescence or adulthood.

The term "sex" has been replaced by assigned "gender" in order to make the criteria applicable  to individuals with a DSD (Meyer-Bahlburg, 2009b). During the course of physical sex differentiation, some aspects of biological sex (e.g., 46,XY genes) may be incongruent with other aspects (e.g., the external genitalia); thus, using the term "sex" would be confusing. The change also makes it possible for individuals who have successfully transitioned to "lose" the diagnosis after satisfactory treatment. This resolves the problem that, in the DSM-IV-TR, there was a lack of an "exit clause," meaning that individuals once diagnosed with GID will always be considered to have the diagnosis, regardless of whether they have transitioned and are psychosocially adjusted in the identified gender role (Winters, 2008). The diagnosis will also be applicable to transitioned individuals who have regrets, because they did not feel like the other gender after all. For instance, a natal male living in the female role and having regrets experiences an incongruence between the "newly assigned" female gender and the experienced/expressed (still or again male) gender.

3. It has been recommended by the Workgroup to delete the "perceived cultural advantages" proviso. This was also recommended by the DSM-IV Subcommittee on Gender Identity Disorders (Bradley et al., 1991). There is no reason to "impute" one causal explanation for GI at the expense of others (Zucker, 1992, 2009).

4. The 6 month duration was introduced to make at least a minimal distinction between very transient and persistent GI. The duration criterion was decided upon by clinical consensus. However, there is no clear empirical literature supporting this particular period (e.g., 3 months vs. 6 months or 6 months vs. 12 months). There was, however, consensus among the group that a lower-bound duration of 6 months would be unlikely to yield false positives.

13. In the DSM-IV, there are two sets of clinical indicators (Criteria A and B). This distinction is not supported by factor analytic studies. The existing studies suggest that the concept of GI is best captured by one underlying dimension (Cohen-Kettenis & van Goozen, 1997; Deogracias et al., 2007; Green, 1987; Johnson et al., 2004; Singh et al., 2010).

14. There is considerable evidence individuals with a DSD experience GI and may wish to change from their assigned gender; the percentage of such individuals who experience GI is syndrome-dependent (Cohen-Kettenis, 2005; Dessens, Slijper, & Drop, 2005; Mazur, 2005; Meyer-Bahlburg, 1994, 2005, 2009a, 2009b). From a phenomenologic perspective, DSD individuals with GI have both similarities and differences to individuals with GI with no known DSD. Developmental trajectories also have similarities and differences. The presence of a DSD is suggestive of a specific causal mechanism that may not be present in individuals without a diagnosable DSD.

15. It is our recommendation that the GI diagnosis be given on the basis of the A criterion alone and that distress and/or impairment (the D criterion in DSM-IV) be evaluated separately and independently. This definitional issue remains under discussion in the DSM-V Task Force for all psychiatric disorders and may have to be revisited pending the outcome of that discussion. Although there are studies showing that adolescents and adults with the DSM-IV diagnosis of GID function poorly, this type of impairment is by no means a universal finding. In some studies, for example, adolescents or adults with GID were found to generally function psychologically in the non-clinical range (Cohen-Kettenis & Pfäfflin, 2009; Meyer-Bahlburg, 2009a). Moreover, increased psychiatric problems in transsexuals appear to be preceded by increased experiences of stigma (Nuttbrock et al., 2009). Postulating "inherent distress" in case one desires to be rid of body parts that do not fit one's identity is, in the absence of data, also questionable (Meyer-Bahlburg, 2009a).

16. Although the DSM-IV diagnosis of GID encompasses more than transsexualism, it is still often used as an equivalent to transsexualism (Sohn & Bosinski, 2007). For instance, a man can meet the two core criteria if he only believes he has the typical feelings of a woman and does not feel at ease with the male gender role. The same holds for a woman who just frequently passes as a man (e.g., in terms of first name, clothing, and/or haircut) and does not feel comfortable living as a conventional woman. Someone having a GID diagnosis based on these subcriteria clearly differs from a person who identifies completely with the other gender, can only relax when permanently living in the other gender role, has a strong aversion against the sex characteristics of his/her body, and wants to adjust his/her body as much as technically possible in the direction of the desired sex. Those who are distressed by having problems with just one of the two criteria (e.g., feeling uncomfortable living as a conventional man or woman) will have a GIDNOS diagnosis. This is highly confusing for clinicians. It perpetuates the search for the "true transsexual" only, in order to identify the right candidates for hormone and surgical treatment instead of facilitating clinicians to assess the type and severity of any type of GI and offer appropriate treatment. Furthermore, in the DSM-IV, gender identity and gender role were described as a dichotomy (either male or female) rather than a multi-category concept or spectrum (Bockting, 2008; Bornstein, 1994; Ekins & King, 2006; Lev, 2007; Røn, 2002). The current formulation makes more explicit that a conceptualization of GI acknowledging the wide variation of conditions will make it less likely that only one type of treatment is connected to the diagnosis. Taking the above regarding the avoidance of male-female dichotomies into account, in the new formulation, the focus is on the discrepancy between experienced/expressed gender (which can be either male, female, in-between or otherwise) and assigned gender (in most societies male or female) rather than cross-gender identification and same-gender aversion (Cohen-Kettenis & Pfäfflin, 2009).

17. In referring to secondary sex characteristics, anticipation of the development of secondary sex characteristics has been added for young adolescents. Adolescents increasingly show up at gender identity clinics requesting gender reassignment, before the first signs of puberty are visible (Delemarre-van de Waal & Cohen-Kettenis, 2006; Zucker & Cohen-Kettenis, 2008).

18. In contemporary clinical practice, sexual orientation per se plays only a minor role in treatment protocols or decisions. Also, changes as to the preferred gender of sex partner occur during or after treatment (DeCuypere, Janes, & Rubens, 2005; Lawrence, 2005; Schroder & Carroll, 1999). It can be difficult to assess sexual orientation in individuals with a GI diagnosis, as they preoperatively might give incorrect information in order to be approved for hormonal and surgical treatment (Lawrence, 1999). Because sexual orientation subtyping is of interest to researchers in the field, it is recommended that reference to it be addressed in the text, but not as a specifier. It should also be assessed as a dimensional construct.

19. The subworkgroup has had extensive discussion about the placement of GI in the nomenclature for DSM-V, as the meta-structure of the entire manual is under review. The subworkgroup questions the rationale for the current DSM-IV chapter Sexual and Gender Identity Disorders, which contains three major classes of diagnoses: sexual dysfunctions, paraphilias, and gender identity disorders (see Meyer-Bahlburg, 2009a). Various alternative options to the current placement are under consideration.

Quote from: glendagladwitch on August 29, 2010, 03:04:26 PM
I haven't read the whole thread (it's gotten pretty long) so I apologize if this has already been discussed. 

But I think it might be interesting to talk about the new draft of the DSM V, which proposes that post transitioners will no longer be considered mentally ill.

Hi Glenda,

Yes, this was already mentioned.  That whole thing is kind of head scratching. 

"The day I realized I was a transsexual I also found out I had a mental disorder.  I later had surgery to make my body align with my brain.  Now I'm happy and I no longer have a mental disorder."

Wouldn't it have made a lot more sense to just remove TS from the DSM-V because, as the proposed changes imply, the cure is medical, not mental?  Therapy will still be necessary because surgeons will want some level of protection should a patient later try to sue them.  So for those who feel therapy is a necessary part of transition, it will still be there.

No matter what we think here, eventually most of the transgender condition will be removed from the DSM.  There are too many legitimate organizations behind that movement and that will only increase.  Society always favors progress in the long run and removing it from the DSM will help de-stigmatize it.

You know , we don't have a  "Mental disorder " , the rest of the worl does ! Yep, I said this to my younger brother just the other day . I know he will never accept me for being a Transwoman . Heck , he dosent accept me for staying on dissability as I have terminal Emphazemiea but thats another story. I told him , "I'm not crazy, the rest of the world is insane . " Ellen

Everything I've said previously aside, if you told me that a set of changes would be put in place in which:

1. all implication that this is a mental illness was removed  and

2. the condition was universally recognized as a medically treatable (thus eligible for insurance coverage) birth defect with a standard course of treatment for resolution (just as one might fix a cleft palliate or whatever)

...then I'd be on board with that 150%

Hi Tammy Hope

I agree with what you said and I quote;

Quote from: Tammy Hope on August 30, 2010, 08:39:48 PM
1. all implication that this is a mental illness was removed  and

2. the condition was universally recognized as a medically treatable (thus eligible for insurance coverage) birth defect with a standard course of treatment for resolution (just as one might fix a cleft palliate or whatever)

...then I'd be on board with that 150%

Kind regards
Sarah B

Tammy, that's the direction this is going.  But we need to consider that, at this time, most insurances don't cover HRT or GRS.  Mine doesn't because they claim this is a mental disorder and they will gladly pay half of whatever therapy I have and 90% of any hospitalization that results from my mental problem until the day I die.  But they will not cover anything related to what they call "Sex transferral".

The AMA has urged insurance companies to cover GRS and HRT because it categorizes the TS condition as medical.  Many in the mental health community are also on board with this.  It will happen but many of us here might be long gone unless we actively engage in pushing this forward.

Some other readings:
http://www.gidreform.org/ (http://www.gidreform.org/)
http://www.mindofmodernity.com/not-sick-the-1973-removal-of-homosexuality-from-the-dsm (http://www.mindofmodernity.com/not-sick-the-1973-removal-of-homosexuality-from-the-dsm)
http://womenborntranssexual.com/2009/09/03/why-gid-must-be-removed-from-the-dsm/ (http://womenborntranssexual.com/2009/09/03/why-gid-must-be-removed-from-the-dsm/)
http://www.transgender.org/gidr/ (http://www.transgender.org/gidr/)
http://www.professionals.gidreform.org/ (http://www.professionals.gidreform.org/)

perhaps if someone made the case that as a fiduciary matter, they would spend less on the surgery than they would spend on long term therapy and treatment for the side effects (depression et al)?

TGs and TSs are uncomfortable in their own skin. Their brains reject their bodies and they feel overwhelmed by what your average person finds comfortable. It's not natural and it doesn't serve any specific purpose. If that's not a mental disorder then I don't know what is. I don't see what the big deal is in admitting it though. It's not like it makes us insane. Some people have mental disorders that cause them to sense things differently than most people. Some have their wires crossed and think foul smelling things are pleasant while sweet smelling things make them hurl. Some listen to Bach but only hear random, off rhythm tones. Some taste nothing but bitterness in sugar... none of these disorders would cause anyone to think any less of these peoples' abilities to reason. The only reason GID falls into another category of mental disorders is because it's so closely tied to sexuality in most peoples' minds. However, in reality they couldn't be further apart, which is what mental problems like transgenderism seem to be evidence of. It's a case of the GID/TS victim(?) having more insight into an area that is more natural to be taken for granted without the disorder. I think the whole "GID is not a mental disorder" stance is only keeping people blind to what it is that we suffer from.

Apologies for slight necrobump here but this morning I was browsing and came across this article http://cjonline.com/news/state/2010-09-01/city_cant_define_gender_identity (http://cjonline.com/news/state/2010-09-01/city_cant_define_gender_identity)
which made me think of this thread. In particular one comment in the article seemed to sum up the difficulty and at least partially prove the point which a lot of people have been making in this thread.

QuoteCommissioner Bob Strawn is concerned with another definition, though. The American Psychiatric Association's Diagnostic and Statistics Manual IV defines Gender Identity Disorder as a mental disorder.

Strawn said that he doesn't necessarily think gender identity is the root of a mental disorder, but he's wary because some professionals consider it one.

"I feel strongly that we should not codify discrimination by what professionals call a mental disorder," he said.

Of course in DSM V there is an exit clause in that once we have transitioned and had surgery we can be regarded as cured. However you can bet your bottom dollar that those who would want it to be legal to discriminate against us would not accept such an idea.  They would doubtless maintain once trans always trans, which is why this kind of argument is so worrisome.

Jenny, thanks for the link.  I just read the article and over half the responses.  Anyone wanting to get a feel for how middle America feels about us should read the responses.  There are some very positive ones and some very negative ones.  From this girl's perspective, it seems the positive ones are rather intelligently written.  Not so much with the negative ones.

QuoteExample
Submitted by AdAstraKS on Wed, 09/01/2010 - 1:52pm.

You put your rental property up for rent. A person wearing a beard and a dress shows up to tour your property, introducing themsleves as Jennifer. You decline the offer to rent. Jennifer sues claiming her(his) right to self-gender identification led to being discriminated against...

That is what Manhattan is talking about.

Quote
Cateluv, if you own
Submitted by smellmyfinger on Wed, 09/01/2010 - 2:42pm.

Cateluv, if you own property, do you have to rent to anyone? No. You can make choices based on non-protected criteria. Don't want to rent to a biker, don't have to. Don't want to rent to someone you think is creepy, don't have to. You can't discriminate based on race, sex, skin color, religion, national origin, etc. If someone doesn't want to rent to a crossdresser, they don't have to, but Manhattan is trying to change that. Do you understand any of this issue? If you can't see both sides, you're kind of a moron honestly.

If you want social equality it will be a lot tougher to achieve if stigmatized.

QuoteI think I have as much right
Submitted by Nunyabiz1 on Thu, 09/02/2010 - 6:27am.

I think I have as much right to NOT rent to bearded "Jennifer" as I do to not rent to a wild-eyed toothless wifebeater-shirt-wearing Jim-Bob who has a Pabst in one hand, driving up in his rusted-out 4-wheel-drive Chevy pickup with his barefoot wife sidled up next to him, and 6 kids in the back.

Or, will that start a push for protected status for meth-head rednecks?

My property. My choice. Keep out of my business. If I want to rent to he/she, I will. If I don't want to, I won't. Fix the streets, do something to free people up to create jobs, catch criminals...and stay the %#%& out of my personal business.

A key underlying issue with this....for me comes down to quality work prospects and the chance of regaining serious money graded jobs....once your transitions is many years past – history in fact......

i.e. You're successfully through the GID programme, now a lovely smart woman living a completely normal life ala femme, you're Bsc/MA qualified..  have shown real stability with behaviour for years....so apply for senior grade jobs in the current double-dip depression market, and though you're more than a match and meet all the criteria, tick boxes and all the relevant experience required...

However as your very honest, you state quite openly on your CV that you've been a man and transitioned some years back...?

And this blatantly honest CV hits the blue-chip HR dept desk where all the other applications go to be graded (and out there its well known and clearly defined and accepted that as a bunch of peeps we TS folk are all mentally ill!!)

So what are your 'real' odds then of making the short-list interview selection....?

Now do you get the 'difficulty' that we all have to accept with such denigrating labelling...?

(Well that's a problem, I don't accept, and is why my CV doesn't mention at all my career or life pre 1989)

(And all my first-rate references only relate to me as a woman)

Quote from: Cruelladeville on September 05, 2010, 12:09:09 PM
A key underlying issue with this....for me comes down to quality work prospects and the chance of regaining serious money graded jobs....once your transitions is many years past – history in fact......

i.e. You're successfully through the GID programme, now a lovely smart woman living a completely normal life ala femme, you're Bsc/MA qualified..  have shown real stability with behaviour for years....so apply for senior grade jobs in the current double-dip depression market, and though you're more than a match and meet all the criteria, tick boxes and all the relevant experience required...

However as your very honest, you state quite openly on your CV that you've been a man and transitioned some years back...?

And this blatantly honest CV hits the blue-chip HR dept desk where all the other applications go to be graded (and out there its well known and clearly defined and accepted that as a bunch of peeps we TS folk are all mentally ill!!)

So what are your 'real' odds then of making the short-list interview selection....?

Now do you get the 'difficulty' that we all have to accept with such denigrating labelling...?

(Well that's a problem, I don't accept, and is why my CV doesn't mention at all my career or life pre 1989)

(And all my first-rate references only relate to me as a woman)

Hey I resemble those remarks ;)

Which is why I operate a mixed mode in my life. As far as social circles are concerned I will be honest, if asked about my past. As far as work is concerned I remain very quiet about it all.

I am not actually formally in stealth but I make no mention of it on my CV, my references make no mention of it and I do not volunteer any information, precisely because I got utterly sick of being turned down for jobs where in one case at least I could PROVE that I was better qualified for than any other candidate, wholly and solely due to misplaced honesty and certain corporate HR people explaining to me "well our corporate policy will not allow us to employ a person with what we view as a potential history of mental instability"

And in my case it all happened nearly 30 years ago for God's sake, almost before I started work. But I know from conversations that I have had, that even now, IF I were to mention it, there are many employers out there who would still treat something which happened 30 years ago, as relevant!

That's why I never ever open my mouth.  I never say anything to any one period about my previous life.  One its none of their business and two by saying nothing, I eliminate all the 'discrimination' and other problems associated with my change.  I have only revealed my personal life 6 times over a period of twenty years and some of those times I should not have, but I live and learn.

Yes, by saying nothing I have to tell lies, for example 'when I was little girl', or 'I went to a girls boarding school', I would rather put up with telling lies than having to deal with any ramifications of people knowing about me and treating me completely different from other females.  Yes there are some wonderful people out there that would be totally understanding of my situation and others.

So why in the hell would I want to be labeled with 'mentally ill' across my forehead as well and be 'discriminated' even further?  So that is why all my past papers and pictures do not exist and I never ever will tell anyone about my past unless it is a doctor or a long time partner.

Kind regards
Sarah B

Quote from: Julie Marie on September 01, 2010, 10:24:38 AM
Tammy, that's the direction this is going.  But we need to consider that, at this time, most insurances don't cover HRT or GRS.  Mine doesn't because they claim this is a mental disorder and they will gladly pay half of whatever therapy I have and 90% of any hospitalization that results from my mental problem until the day I die.  But they will not cover anything related to what they call "Sex transferral".

The AMA has urged insurance companies to cover GRS and HRT because it categorizes the TS condition as medical.  Many in the mental health community are also on board with this.  It will happen but many of us here might be long gone unless we actively engage in pushing this forward.

This is my hope too, that it will be seen as a physical condition as opposed to a mental one. I see and understand WHY they consider it a mental disorder and with the crazy definitions we have of mental disorders, it is to vaguely defined imo.

I think there is a lot more political standing in it being seen as medical/physical in nature because it gives us more opportunity to push for health care coverage and in some cases political rights too. The American people tend to be more friendly towards those of us they see as "disabled" due to physical medical issues when it comes to protecting us from hate and discrimination (certainly in social situations this is not the case).

I do agree with them considering those who have undergone a SRS and HRT cured though. This is purely based on my experience with being bipolar. There is a different between my being bipolar and my being transsexual. Having SRS and undergoing HRT will relieve the negative symptoms of transsexualism like depression and dysphoria in my opinion, with those things gone I no longer feel "ill" in any way. It no longer is something that prevents me from living my life happily. However I will always have to take medication for being bipolar. Without medication I cannot function in a normal way and would honestly be a good candidate to be classified as disabled legally. I know we have to do HRT for our entire lives but I don't see that as being the same, I think I see the two differently though because I feel one is a physical illness and the other is a mental illness.

It's different needing insulin than it is needing medication for a mental illness. One is like a physical upkeep or follow up designed to prevent our body from crashing or functioning improperly while the other is designed to create normal mental function, I would not have a physical body reaction to not being medicated for bipolar disorder, I would only have a mental one and while I do see the chemicals in my brain as being a physical function these particular ones don't create a body disorder or illness.

I don't even know if that made sense... I kind of got lost in what I was trying to say there. As my english teacher once told me, "The point of the paragraph was lost in the sentences." I have a special talent for talking in circles and then forgetting my actual point, it usually leads to vain attempts at making my point after having forgotten what it even was.

Quote from: Julie Marie on September 01, 2010, 10:24:38 AM
Tammy, that's the direction this is going.  But we need to consider that, at this time, most insurances don't cover HRT or GRS.  Mine doesn't because they claim this is a mental disorder and they will gladly pay half of whatever therapy I have and 90% of any hospitalization that results from my mental problem until the day I die.  But they will not cover anything related to what they call "Sex transferral".

Actually, it sounds like you're "lucky" (I use that word reservedly) compared to me and a lot of other folks. My insurance classifies GID as a mental problem and won't cover anything transition-related. But once GID or something like it is reported to them, they STOP covering the therapy.

Fu**wads. You cannot have it both ways...and yet they do.

I don't think it should be necessary to have TG classified as a mental disorder to get medical coverage.  Therapy can certainly get coverage using the same code they use for anyone dealing with stress, just like therapists still treat people who are gay for coming out issues, despite homosexuality being removed from the DSM decades ago.  And having it in there as a mental disorder hasn't resulted in insurance companies covering surgery.  What's the benefit supposed to be?

Quote from: Arch on September 12, 2010, 01:02:01 PM
Actually, it sounds like you're "lucky" (I use that word reservedly) compared to me and a lot of other folks. My insurance classifies GID as a mental problem and won't cover anything transition-related. But once GID or something like it is reported to them, they STOP covering the therapy.

Fu**wads. You cannot have it both ways...and yet they do.

I've never heard of any insurance not covering GID... until now.  The general idea is therapy will CURE you and then they won't have to worry about "you people" anymore. 

With enough brainwashing and social punishment anyone can have a "normal" life.  It's easy!  ::)

Quote from: Julie Marie on September 13, 2010, 10:32:41 AMWith enough brainwashing and social punishment anyone can have a "normal" life.  It's easy!  ::)[/color][/font]

Hilarious!
May I use this as my signature? I'll write behind it that it came from you

Quote from: Fencesitter on September 13, 2010, 12:33:36 PM
May I use this as my signature? I'll write behind it that it came from you

By all means.   ;D

Quote from: glendagladwitch on September 12, 2010, 01:18:37 PM
I don't think it should be necessary to have TG classified as a mental disorder to get medical coverage.  Therapy can certainly get coverage using the same code they use for anyone dealing with stress, just like therapists still treat people who are gay for coming out issues, despite homosexuality being removed from the DSM decades ago.  And having it in there as a mental disorder hasn't resulted in insurance companies covering surgery.  What's the benefit supposed to be?

No, but having it listed as a medical disorder rather than a mental one could result in getting insurance companies to cover surgeries. It is harder to convince them that one thing can be both a physical and mental disorder.

The American Medical Association has publicly urged insurance companies to cover hormones and GRS.  The American Psychiatric Association has publicly stated it feels GID needs to be removed from the DSM. 

So far the insurance companies aren't listening.  I guess that means further "encouragement" needs to be applied.  The DSM-V committee has drafted some changes that will remove GID but in it's place will be "gender incongruence".  So they will still list some forms of gender related dysphoria in the DSM.  I'm not sure that's progress.

Hi Julie Marie

You said in your previous post:

Quote from: Julie Marie on September 14, 2010, 10:00:02 AM
The American Medical Association has publicly urged insurance companies to cover hormones and GRS.  The American Psychiatric Association has publicly stated it feels GID needs to be removed from the DSM.

I have had a quick look on Google and have not found any reference yet, Its early morning where I am, so I will not be able to look again until much later and my beautiful work is calling me.  Do you have a link for the "The American Psychiatric Association has publicly stated it feels GID needs to be removed from the DSM"? or source for this?

I would have thought that a statement such as this would be more widely known among our 'circles'.  Especially coming from the APA.

Kind regards
Sarah B

I don't have a reference (and am honestly too lazy to look for one right now) but I can second the statement about the AMA saying insurance should cover it. It was something that came up in our local trans groups email conversations a few months back and I know that it was linked to several references, it's just been so long and I don't commonly keep things like that.

I have never heard about the APA stance, but then again sometimes I'm shocked at the things that don't make it around the circuit.

@Sarah B
Dear Sarah...
Thank you for posting in this thread  ..  14 years ago !!!!
It is very, very, true today.
HUGS, Danielle

Quote from: Sarah B on September 14, 2010, 02:08:35 PMHi Julie Marie

You said in your previous post:

I have had a quick look on Google and have not found any reference yet, Its early morning where I am, so I will not be able to look again until much later and my beautiful work is calling me.  Do you have a link for the "The American Psychiatric Association has publicly stated it feels GID needs to be removed from the DSM"? or source for this?

I would have thought that a statement such as this would be more widely known among our 'circles'.  Especially coming from the APA.

Kind regards
Sarah B

This from link below:
The American Psychiatric Association has revised its Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders and it no longer lists being transgender as a mental disorder, among other changes announced this past weekend.

Transgender people will now be diagnosed with "gender dysphoria," which means emotional stress related to gender identity. "Gender identity disorder" had been listed as a mental disorder since the third edition of the DSM more than 20 years ago.

https://nicic.gov/weblink/being-transgender-no-longer-mental-disorder-apa-2012

Hugs,

Allie

Well it seems that here in the UK we have gone back 14+ years with the Cass report on transgender care for young people. It is now saying that being transgender does not really exist and these thoughts are caused by mental illness or other factors such as autism. That talking therapies, a euphemism for conversion, is the way forward.

They are also talk of extending this into adulthood, to 24. Life is going to be dire here soon. Give it a few years and all transgender medical help will tbe banned as we are all ill, and all our human rights will be removed.

Quote from: Jessica_K on April 09, 2024, 10:27:24 PMWell it seems that here in the UK we have gone back 14+ years with the Cass report on transgender care for young people. It is now saying that being transgender does not really exist and these thoughts are caused by mental illness or other factors such as autism. That talking therapies, a euphemism for conversion, is the way forward.

They are also talk of extending this into adulthood, to 24. Life is going to be dire here soon. Give it a few years and all transgender medical help will tbe banned as we are all ill, and all our human rights will be removed.

You know what makes me really mentally ill? Growing up like this and the trauma of being violated again and again in attempts to change me. I have much younger spent too much time thinking I just had to try harder because you know men need to try to be men right? All that conversion therapy was really the equivalent of throwing a fish at a tree and wondering why it won't climb. Maybe care in the future if mankind could just get over the fact that gender and the underlying genetic components of it are not as simple as many want to believe would get even more advanced and effective. What makes me the most sick is when cases with unfortunate results of ruthless abuse are used to go "See look how mentally ill and sickly they are!". Maybe if I was given the actual care I needed when it mattered I wouldn't be so messed up and chronically ill right now!

Hi Starryskyy

You said in your post above:

Quote from: Starryskyy on April 29, 2024, 10:37:16 PMYou know what makes me really mentally ill? Growing up like this and the trauma of being violated again and again in attempts to change me. I have much younger spent too much time thinking I just had to try harder because you know men need to try to be men right?

I'm sorry to hear that you were violated. No one deserves to be treated like that.

The text that I have emphasised in what you wrote is one of the most salient points that kept crossing my mind,  I did not like what men did to women, it actually disgusted me no end and I did not want to be like them.

Quote from: Starryskyy on April 29, 2024, 10:37:16 PMAll that conversion therapy was really the equivalent of throwing a fish at a tree and wondering why it won't climb.

They tried to use conversion therapy on gays and it did not work out either.

Quote from: Starryskyy on April 29, 2024, 10:37:16 PMMaybe care in the future if mankind could just get over the fact that gender and the underlying genetic components of it are not as simple as many want to believe would get even more advanced and effective.

There was one thing that I knew at some stage and that was, nature stuffed up.  I was very naive when I changed my life around and it was the lack of knowledge and information that I had to deal with at the time.

There is nothing wrong with us Period, it is those, who say we are and then try to fix or correct our way of thinking, not realising that in certain circumstances you cannot fix nature.

Quote from: Starryskyy on April 29, 2024, 10:37:16 PMWhat makes me the most sick is when cases with unfortunate results of ruthless abuse are used to go "See look how mentally ill and sickly they are!". Maybe if I was given the actual care I needed when it mattered I wouldn't be so messed up and chronically ill right now!

Once again I'm so sorry to hear that you were violated. You are not mentally sick and its those who perpetrate violence on others that are sick perversely so.  Its also good to hear that you are seeking help with your issues.

Susan's has a place where one can talk in real time and if you want you can have private conversations with other members if you so wish.  The link is: Susan's Discord Channel (https://discord.gg/x5KZH4VhTJ).

In addition there is list of resources, that should you need one.  Then you can find out more by visiting those websites.

Here are some resources if you need them. Transgender Help Links (https://www.susans.org/index.php/topic,2.0.html)

Take care and if you want to talk or vent then you can do it here and we will listen.

Hugs
Sarah B
Official Greeter

Quote from: Sarah B on April 30, 2024, 01:14:22 AMHi Starryskyy

You said in your post above:

I'm sorry to hear that you were violated. No one deserves to be treated like that.

The text that I have emphasised in what you wrote is one of the most salient points that kept crossing my mind,  I did not like what men did to women, it actually disgusted me no end and I did not want to be like them.

They tried to use conversion therapy on gays and it did not work out either.

There was one thing that I knew at some stage and that was, nature stuffed up.  I was very naive when I changed my life around and it was the lack of knowledge and information that I had to deal with at the time.

There is nothing wrong with us Period, it is those, who say we are and then try to fix or correct our way of thinking, not realising that in certain circumstances you cannot fix nature.

Once again I'm so sorry to hear that you were violated. You are not mentally sick and its those who perpetrate violence on others that are sick perversely so.  Its also good to hear that you are seeking help with your issues.

Susan's has a place where one can talk in real time and if you want you can have private conversations with other members if you so wish.  The link is: Susan's Discord Channel (https://discord.gg/x5KZH4VhTJ).

In addition there is list of resources, that should you need one.  Then you can find out more by visiting those websites.

Here are some resources if you need them. Transgender Help Links (https://www.susans.org/index.php/topic,2.0.html)

Take care and if you want to talk or vent then you can do it here and we will listen.

Hugs
Sarah B
Official Greeter

It wasn't just that I didn't like it either, I didn't understand it. I had that sexual desire and drive, that was completely normal. I understood socializing and social cues well too, so it wasn't that either. I couldn't approach them in a masculine way, I just simply didn't have those social instincts which would lead to a lot of misunderstandings about me throughout my life. That's probably where a lot of the damage began because that attracted a lot of predatory people and because I was still viewed as male I also got treated much differently anyways which was confusing and damaging on it's own. That blend of mixed signals and danger is likely what really threw me off because I remember when I first started to develop my primary trauma responses very young is when I couldn't make many connections at all anymore and I would simply try to suppress all expressions and all body language since just expressing myself normally became an issue. That of course didn't work either and that boulder continued to roll down the hill. The only thing that did  but ended up making most things worse all the same was building a fortress, keeping it guarded, and never letting anyone in or myself out. 

Like you said what also fueled it was not entirely knowing what was going on and having no resources, I just knew it had something to do with my gender, masculinity was weird, it had nothing to do with any fetish, and developing all of this boy stuff physically as I continued to get older was extremely distressing. I have so many memories of trying to work around appearing too male while flying under the radar. Like I'd try to get the clothes that would look the most feminine and flowy on me with a style that's as feminine as possible but still just not enough so to draw too much attention (these days I don't care too much as long as it makes my body look nice and doesn't frame it in a way that looks too masc). I'd want a purse but I couldn't get one or needed a backpack (still do, walking backpacker for life!) so I'd wear it in a way that was as not masculine looking as possible and subtly decorate it in a pretty way. The body hair wars began when I was a kid and followed the same general stealthy approach, maybe I'd do a little on this day and a little on that day so the changes aren't too obvious too quickly. And the voice wars, those were the most embarrassing. I had social issues as it was and never learned how to use it properly in the first place but still tried to aggressively keep the tone higher which isn't how achieving a better voice works either but eventually I found my way there even if sometimes I lose tone range and don't form words as well because of my anxiety issues sometimes when I'm stressed. It's like I always knew just what to do! lol

I may join the discord at some point, I joined this place after just searching transgender forum and this was one of the results. I like the format of traditional forums better because I can take my time and everything is slower. Gradually getting back into the more fast moving space of instant messaging though. 

I look at it this way. There is nothing wrong with my brain, it's my body that is not right. Simples.

Jessica xx

Quote from: Jessica_K on May 05, 2024, 06:21:45 AMI look at it this way. There is nothing wrong with my brain, it's my body that is not right. Simples.

Jessica xx

Exactly why I say our diagnosis should be Body Dysphoria. We don't have a problem with our gender. We change our bodies to match our gender, not the other way around.