Susan's Place Transgender Resources

Lynn Conway.com

Basic TG/TS/IS Information
by Lynn Conway
http://www.lynnconway.com/ (http://www.lynnconway.com/)
Copyright @ 2000-2005, Lynn Conway.
All Rights Reserved.


A WARNING FOR THOSE CONSIDERING MtF SRS:

What if you "succeed" in completing a TS transition, but did it for the wrong reasons?

Yep, you get the idea! This is one place you do NOT want to go!

Retrieved from the Internet on September 2, 2011 by SJ


http://ai.eecs.umich.edu/people/conway/TS/Warning.html (http://ai.eecs.umich.edu/people/conway/TS/Warning.html)

Samantha Kane

Then we have those who "change sex" on a whim and have the financial means to do so, then afterwards have regrets and sue everyone in sight who "did this to them" - while not taking any responsibility whatsoever for their own actions.

For example, consider the case of "Samantha Kane", and then think about the damage that this impulsive person has done to himself and about the harm he is now doing to trans women everywhere by his irresponsible actions - both in transitioning and then in lashing out as those who tried to help him in the first place.

Thanks for posting this. Like many, I've seen this and other sites, reporting the claims of Mr. Cane, and others.

There are a number of quite obvious problems jump out but one, rather obvious one is, why would he chose to change his name to Charles?

But as has been said many times, some people say they regret transision. Some regret almost anything. But SRS is unlike most medical procedures in that it has an overwealming success rate. I recently saw a claim that it was 97%, with a rider that some claimed it was only 80%. That reminded me of the radio interview a few years ago, with the head of the Zimbabwian central bank, on a report that Zimbabwian inflation was 9mill%. He retorted, (with expletives), that it was actually only 3mil%.

Considering the requirements of the SoC, I have trouble with the concept of "SRS on a whim".  Bloody long slow whim in my opinion.   All sounds just a little bit BS to me.

Karen.

 You should be responsible for your own decisions, where adults. I agree SRS is not for everybody, but for some it is a life saver. People who have SRS and then come to regret it try to blame everybody in sight for it. Transition can be very expensive and many family's are torn apart with it. It should be something that is thoroughly thought out and expect the consequences of it.

Chloe

Quote from: justmeinoz on September 02, 2011, 07:29:32 AM
Considering the requirements of the SoC, I have trouble with the concept of "SRS on a whim".  Bloody long slow whim in my opinion.   All sounds just a little bit BS to me.

Not everyone who performs SRS pays heed to the SoC...there are a handful of plastic surgeons that will take any request for the right amount of money.  Essentially informed consent on a more permanent scale than HRT...

The SoC was the bane of my existence in the mid-80's...

Quote from: Ann Onymous on September 02, 2011, 08:23:45 AM
Not everyone who performs SRS pays heed to the SoC...there are a handful of plastic surgeons that will take any request for the right amount of money.  Essentially informed consent on a more permanent scale than HRT...

The SoC was the bane of my existence in the mid-80's...

I have come to resent to so called "Standards of Care". I feel that I am an adult and fully capable of making my own educated decisions regarding how I choose to live my life. I resent that I have to spend so much time with therapists who act as gate keepers to "officially" start me on HRT, that I have to do a year of RLT, and then get two letters from professionals that go into a lot of detail to get SRS. (assuming you follow the rules)

If I want to get just about any other type of plastic surgery I can just go talk to a doctor. I don't need to be checked out and certified by a therapist to get it. Just as there are a few people who get obsessed with plastic surgery there will be people who do SRS for the "wrong" reason. But for gods sake, we are adults and we should be held responsible for our own decisions. If I decided to have my penis medially enlarged, and it caused erectile dysfunction, that is my decision.

The SOC kept me from seeking care for many many years as it seemed like just too restrictive of a process. So for years I held off on doing anything and now at 38 am wishing I would have started earlier. (like most others). It is wise to seek therapy in this process, absolutely. Should it be required, perhaps on a certain level. But at this point in my life I am pretty certain what I need to do and the process is just going to get in the way. I started HRT on my own and THEN elected to seek therapy and medical supervision for my own reasons. That is my decision and I don't like the idea of having the fears of the actions of "the least common denominator" dictate what I have to do. If this were applied to everything we would end up having to wear helmets to drive a car!

Ok, that was my rant...... begin the abuse.... lol
-M

Quote from: melissa42013 on September 02, 2011, 08:50:42 AM
I have come to resent to so called "Standards of Care". I feel that I am an adult and fully capable of making my own educated decisions regarding how I choose to live my life. I resent that I have to spend so much time with therapists who act as gate keepers to "officially" start me on HRT, that I have to do a year of RLT, and then get two letters from professionals that go into a lot of detail to get SRS. (assuming you follow the rules)

If I want to get just about any other type of plastic surgery I can just go talk to a doctor. I don't need to be checked out and certified by a therapist to get it. Just as there are a few people who get obsessed with plastic surgery there will be people who do SRS for the "wrong" reason. But for gods sake, we are adults and we should be held responsible for our own decisions. If I decided to have my penis medially enlarged, and it caused erectile dysfunction, that is my decision.

The SOC kept me from seeking care for many many years as it seemed like just too restrictive of a process. So for years I held off on doing anything and now at 38 am wishing I would have started earlier. (like most others). It is wise to seek therapy in this process, absolutely. Should it be required, perhaps on a certain level. But at this point in my life I am pretty certain what I need to do and the process is just going to get in the way. I started HRT on my own and THEN elected to seek therapy and medical supervision for my own reasons. That is my decision and I don't like the idea of having the fears of the actions of "the least common denominator" dictate what I have to do. If this were applied to everything we would end up having to wear helmets to drive a car!

Ok, that was my rant...... begin the abuse.... lol
-M

No abuse but the arguments you've presented are old news many have had the same feelings, "It's my body, I'll do what I want with it".  The folks mentioned in the article were adults too and obviously thought they knew best.  They are just safe guards to protect the patient.  Comparing plastic surgery to SRS is not quite fair.  Given the advances made, a person who goes in for a face lift/brow lift etc. and isn't happy with the results can usually have it repaired, SRS is forever, there ain't no going back.  SOC protects those wannabes who think it would be neat to have a vagina and be a woman.  People who think they know best can really mess it up for every one else.  SOC protects the patient and the surgeons from idiotic clients.  Surgeons getting sued will certainly think twice about continuing to provide SRS.

Ya it's a pain in the ass, but damn this is forever.

And Kane still denies responsibility for it.  Lynn Conway lists 4 of the most well known SRS "regrets", there's probably a few more. The SOC isn't foolproof, but like Steph sez, this is forever, few are rich like Kane and can afford a "redo".

I dont know about you, but i had to jump a lot of hoops and take a test to make sure i wasn't crazy before i was approved for SRS by my therapist and later confirmed that by another therapist before surgery. 

After SRS i knew i made the right decision, it was a relief to have it out of the way so i could go on with my life.  For me SRS was a step not the goal of my existence.  I lived as a woman for 2 years pre SRS and never wanted to go back, having SRS hasn't changed that but it has made my life a lot easier and a lot more comfortable although it doesnt seem that way sitting a donut heh. 

Anyone who bypasses the safeguards in place to make sure your doing the right thing, runs the risk of regretting it later.   The best thing to do is be honest with yourself and your therapist and go from there.  I do hate it though when people have SRS for the wrong reasons and make me look like I am crazy when in fact that person was the one that was crazy not me.

I also deeply resent the methods and procedures curently being applied for people seeking SRS. The cases of Mr Kane and a few others demonstrate that these are ineffective. I find them offensive.

Granted, it is permanent. But this is my body. I accept that any competant surgeon will want to be sure that it is in my best interests. That, however, is not quite the same as expecting people to preform like trained seals.

As I understand it, the defination of real life experience is that I must live, for a period of time as a woman. I have lived all my life as a woman, A woman affected by the presence of an ugly bit.

Most of the "regret" stories I have heard had less to do with the SRS and their WANTING to live as a woman but rather the resulting prejudices, loss of employment, broken family and personal relationships, etc. 

In many of these cases it appears to me that their regret comes from the impact it had on their lives because of social reaction not a feelings of inconsistency with their birth gender.

I accept reluctantly* the reasons for caution before performing surgery HOWEVER, what other medical condition is there, which when treated has as high of a success rate as this one, where you have to beg, fight, and pay your way through the process (in the USA) to receive treatment?

It would also be extremely prudent for doctors to require you to seek therapy before prescribing an antidepressant. And it would be even safer for them to have two therapists confirm the diagnosis. But in reality how many people would suffer because of this or avoid getting the treatment they needed because of these steps.

Perhaps at 16 caution is prudent but at 38 years old I am pretty darn certain that SRS is the best option I have for easing my mental anguish. I am sane, well balanced, successful, happy, and other than being TG quite pleased with my life. I know that SRS is not going to make things any easier for me in any of those areas and in fact I understand fully that the transition process is more likely to disassemble everything I have built over my life than maintaining the status quo.

Now I am not advocating we set up "mobile SRS trucks" that park on the corner like the taco trucks....... but really? I have to go to a therapist and beg to be put on HRT per the standards of care? I have to spend how much time in therapy before I can move onto the next step? IMO the system needs to be relaxed and adjusted to the modern reality and is based on inaccurate information and a generally uneducated professional base. I would even be as bold as to say that some of the "gatekeepers" of the process are transphobic at worst, ignorant at best. (research Kenneth Zucker and Ray Blancard revised the DSM-V (the therapists diagnosis guide) and they are advocates of repairative therapy.)

While I appreciate the need for caution I also dismiss the level of the standards that are required to "legitimately" complete the process. If you want to short circuit the whole process it can be done really easily  including SRS if you know how. It will not stop a person who wants to try SRS for other reasons. It is the feeling of helplessness that causes trans people to resort to scary and dangerous transition methods (silicone plumping), destructive behaviors (drugs and alcohol), or choosing to make a final exit from life rather than face the many many challenges fo transition. The goal of the medical community should be to help you achieve the body you know is right and not to assume you need to be protected from yourself.

"Then we have those who 'change sex' on a whim and have the financial means to do so, then afterwards have regrets"

Do we have any idea at all of the number of people who fall into this category?

Quote from: Lisbeth on September 02, 2011, 02:50:35 PM
"Then we have those who 'change sex' on a whim and have the financial means to do so, then afterwards have regrets"

Do we have any idea at all of the number of people who fall into this category?

One! Charles Kane. Maybe I can think of a second, Wayne something... the ex-trans person who wrote a book that the ex-gay therapy crew promote...

Quote from: spacial on September 02, 2011, 11:59:22 AM
I also deeply resent the methods and procedures curently being applied for people seeking SRS. The cases of Mr Kane and a few others demonstrate that these are ineffective. I find them offensive.

I imagine that any patients that requires surgery is pretty PO'd about the procedures that are applied before being approved for surgery.  Heart patients for example, I can't understand why a heart surgeon wouldn't perform a triple by-pass on me, after all if I think that I need one I should be able to have it performed, it's my body and I know whats best for me.  Why do I need to go through all those stupid tests and see hospital councillors who would advise me on possible out comes.

Yep it makes no sense.  Surgeons should only be governed by their conscience and how much I'm willing to pay.  Sheesh...

When I started transition I resented the SOC very bitterly.
But as time has progressed I have become pro SOC.

I was anti SOC mainly because I waited too long. I held off until it was transition or die.

There needs to be some way to deal with the late in lifer who waited to the point of suicide. If we go by SOC in these cases it can get deadly for the transitioner.
Personaly I circumnavigated the SOC for the first few months of my transition. Mianly due to the dificulty finding a proper GT in my area and a support mechanism.

anyways...I ramble

I know of two who have regretted their surgery. One wants to sue because she says she was under the influence of anti-depressants when going through the process, she lost wife and family and believes she was not in her right mind when she had SRS. The other accepts she will live the rest of her life as female but isn't as happy as she thought she would be and given another chance, would not have had the surgery.

In general, I agree with most of the posts that have some misgivings about the Standards of Care. I think that there are many interests at stake that have helped to prop this up where it could probably be at least a little looser and still protect individuals.

Just a quick note, every country/authority will be different. But, I do think that a great deal of this is not just about the S.O.C. and the professional body associated with it.  Having written health related policy, I can see why many governments would find the fairly rigorous following of the standards of care in their interest as means of not only protecting individuals, but also to control the purse strings  (if part of the public system),  and as a means of insulating itself from too much opposition from certain vocal sections of the public that would oppose spending in this area. Based on the success rates of SRS, I wonder whether the tight controls is rather short-sighted if you discount the surgery costs plus suing costs versus what are long term costs of not resolving the issues earlier (mental health, hospitalizations, lost work productivity, etc.) for this population of people (namely us  ;)).

Yes, people at times need to be protected from themselves and the cost of getting it wrong may be high. That being said, the main concern is whether a person can give informed consent. I don't believe for one second that 1 or 2 yrs RLE is needed to do this. In this respect, I think there are at least 2 questions: (1) what are reasonable steps that any therapist and any client must follow to ensure that the diagnosis and actions to resolve the problem are correct and (2) what are the reasonable steps/hoops/requirements that are needed in order to ensure that a person is capable of giving and showing they have given informed consent. The S.O.C. seems rather rigid in my opinion. A reasonable length of time where a person must show that they are capable of informed consent is what is important to me providing they are willing to foot the bill, plus a clear diagnosis and that reasonable less invasive measures have proven ineffective. Basically, I can appreciate what is happening from a public expenditure point of view even though I hate it on a personal level and why the S.O.C. become such a lightning rod for those going through the process. In the case where a person is not footing the bill then it raises the next question (3) At what point is the medical condition severe enough that the public should pay for the costs and what reasonable restrictions should be put in place to restrict it? I certainly don't have an answer to this but the S.O.C. has been relied on here to a great degree because it is restrictive (again in my opinion).

In my opinion, this is not just about the S.O.C. per se and the body associated with it, but about the political economy of health.

Quote from: Steph on September 02, 2011, 02:56:26 PM
I imagine that any patients that requires surgery is pretty PO'd about the procedures that are applied before being approved for surgery.  Heart patients for example, I can't understand why a heart surgeon wouldn't perform a triple by-pass on me, after all if I think that I need one I should be able to have it performed, it's my body and I know whats best for me.  Why do I need to go through all those stupid tests and see hospital councillors who would advise me on possible out comes.

Yep it makes no sense.  Surgeons should only be governed by their conscience and how much I'm willing to pay.  Sheesh...

Steph.

The comparison is obtuese.

Heart surgery is very risky and done only when it is actually needed. It is all but impossible for the lay person to diagnose themselves. Angina, in itself, is not necessarily an indication for bypass surgery. Heart disease, generally is not either. What is, is the clinical need and the potential for recovery, verses the very real risks.

SRS, on the other hand, is an essentially cosmetic procedure. (Face it). The condition is largely self diagnoised.  The principal physical effect is from the repeated and unpredictable surges of male hormone, which will disappear.

For my part, I'm not questioning the need for a surgeon to ensure that their patient actually wants the surgery and fully understands the risks. What I do question is the standards applied by non-surgical therapists and such, for me to demonstrate that I do.

A therapist will almost certainly expect me to spend a period to time, attempting to give the world the impression that I am indeed a woman, or at the very least, a male, living as female. It is this fakery and how it is defined. I fail to see why, for example, I should be expected to wear a dress, a padded out bra, makup and such.

I didn't choose to be born with the ugly bit. I've only asked that it be removed.

As for my lifestyle, I expect to live as I have done, by my own choosing.

After removal of the ugly bit I won't be surprised if new opportunities and new ambitions come into play. I expect to and will, explore these as I choose and my finances allow.

The effect of the male hormone, for me and I suspect, most transgender people, is rather like an unpredictable dog, that starts jumping around, pulling me, biting people and generally being really annoying.

I will never be a georgous woman. I don't expect to be. I only want my freedom. Because what I have now is just waiting.

Her goes,
* And Kane still denies responsibility for it. *

We used to call this type of person an *arsehole* at EST, and it fits a person that steadfastly refuses to take responsibility for their actions.
I still think just that... you may call me opinionated?

As for SoC...... the paper is fine I think, yet most arguments forget the person that interprets, and 'implements' also is in danger of being called an arsehole, at least by myself.

I went to one such a 'gatekeeper' for 1 year (had no option in my case) so I do know what can be.
They often acquire a 'godlike' complex. Very hard to suffer that is, unless you just look for that sort of thing. Shut up your face, daddy knows best...

As the bible may be just fine too, it is the person getting 'godlike' about it can be a real ..., well you know then.

My 2 cents,
Axelle
PS: do I still sound pissed about this? Yeah well...

I tend to agreee Axelle. But would add again, my further contention, that he has mental health problems.

He has changed his first name. In itself, significant in that Mr Kane has a narcissistic personality and changing the first name is quite unusual for people so obscessed with their identites.

After his divorce, he was prevented from seeing his children. In the UK, this is highly unusual and would only be ordered under the most extreme circumstances. There have been cases of father who have abused their young daughters, still having, albeit, supervised access to their children.

His changes of accounts suggest he is l;ooking for means to cover his own feelings of guilt. He originally claimed it all started with what would have been, by his own description, an identity crisis. By his own account,

Quote"When I was in the psychiatric hospital there was a man on one side of me who thought he was King George and another guy on the other side who thought he was Jesus Christ. I decided I was Sam."

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/6923912.stm (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/6923912.stm)

Now he claims he was pressured:

Quote"I met people at these transsexual clubs who'd kept saying how fantastic it was to be a woman, how great the sex was, how happy they were, and I started to wonder if I should become a transsexual, too.

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-1026392/A-British-tycoon-father-man-woman---man---knows-hed-be.html#ixzz1WsdwH6Qv (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-1026392/A-British-tycoon-father-man-woman---man---knows-hed-be.html#ixzz1WsdwH6Qv)

These are very different accounts, but both, as you point out, are seeking to blame others.

His repeated attempts to make himself noticed are equally notable, from setting up as a a design consultant:

QuoteSamantha Kane became a huge success in her own right, mixing with the jet set, with whom she sipped champagne in the best hotels and bars in Cannes and Monte Carlo

.

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-1026392/A-British-tycoon-father-man-woman---man---knows-hed-be.html#ixzz1WserzjkE (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-1026392/A-British-tycoon-father-man-woman---man---knows-hed-be.html#ixzz1WserzjkE)

To a personality, talking authoritively about SRS.

I don't believe any of this man's claims. I don't doubt some of the details, other than those which have come from him. I especially find it preposterus that he could maintain relationships with successful business types if he were all the things he claims he is. People don't become successful in business by associating with fools. Here in the UK, we have a super rich man, heir to the throne, who has less credability that this man apparently has.

He is a disturbed man who needs help.

It is sad that he is continually wheeled out by the nay-sayers and the Julie Bindles of this world. But not surprising given that their case is little more than intolerant and biggoted.

Quote from: melissa42013 on September 02, 2011, 08:50:42 AM
I have come to resent to so called "Standards of Care". I feel that I am an adult and fully capable of making my own educated decisions regarding how I choose to live my life. I resent that I have to spend so much time with therapists who act as gate keepers to "officially" start me on HRT, that I have to do a year of RLT, and then get two letters from professionals that go into a lot of detail to get SRS. (assuming you follow the rules)

If I want to get just about any other type of plastic surgery I can just go talk to a doctor. I don't need to be checked out and certified by a therapist to get it. Just as there are a few people who get obsessed with plastic surgery there will be people who do SRS for the "wrong" reason. But for gods sake, we are adults and we should be held responsible for our own decisions. If I decided to have my penis medially enlarged, and it caused erectile dysfunction, that is my decision.

The SOC kept me from seeking care for many many years as it seemed like just too restrictive of a process. So for years I held off on doing anything and now at 38 am wishing I would have started earlier. (like most others). It is wise to seek therapy in this process, absolutely. Should it be required, perhaps on a certain level. But at this point in my life I am pretty certain what I need to do and the process is just going to get in the way. I started HRT on my own and THEN elected to seek therapy and medical supervision for my own reasons. That is my decision and I don't like the idea of having the fears of the actions of "the least common denominator" dictate what I have to do. If this were applied to everything we would end up having to wear helmets to drive a car!

Ok, that was my rant...... begin the abuse.... lol
-M

     To hold off for years because the SOC are too restrictive strikes me as a silly statement.  The SOC is not that difficult to navigate if you simply set out from the start to complete the requirements.

      You start with therapy, according to the SOC, a minimum of 12 visits is required.  If the sessions are a week apart, that's only 3 months.   The therapists job is to determine whether you do, in fact, suffer from GID or are there other mitigating things in your head that may result in you believing that you are GID.  This is probably not that difficult.  At that point, they will generally write you a referral for HRT.

       All you have to do after that is to convince them that you have been living as a female in order to get a letter of recommendation for a surgeon.  Then a second letter from another therapist.  The second may only have to see you once and may simply write a letter of concurrence with the first (basically, that they agree).

      The reasons for all this are simple:  After surgery, are you able to live and function in your preferred gender role? (female).  Can you hold a job and support yourself?  This is not that difficult.

      No one has brought this up, yet, so I will.  I can make a case that the SOC is in place to protect the Doctors as much or more than the patients.  Once the SOC has been satisfied, the Dr. has legal protections against lawsuits.  Without them, the Dr. is vulnerable.  Despite what you may believe, not every Dr. has the patient's best interests at heart.  Some of them will do pretty much anything you are able to pay for.

       GCS is not "cosmetic" surgery.  It is life-altering.  It completely changes the way you view yourself and your life.  In many cases, it completely cures GID and clears your mind.

        If you have a bunch of other mental problems, it won't fix those.  The SOC is in place to help you be certain that GCS is right for you.

       Start making phone calls to therapists.  Tell them that you've been living full time and self medicating and want to start through the process "legally".  Tell them you are willing to commit to 12 sessions, but you want your letters after that if they find that you are of sound mind.  Tell them you seem to be getting along fine and have no other issues that need to be fixed, other than GID.

       You can complete the "rigorous" standards of the SOC in about the same time as the waiting period for some surgeons.  This is not some process that takes decades.  I've personally known a number of women who have completed this in a year or a little less.

       You can find a therapist who will agree to this, *if* you really are "of sound mind".  Make enough calls and explain what you're looking for.  Don't leave them guessing and don't waste time and money with them if they can't agree up front.  What you're asking is not unreasonable.

       In order to fulfill the "full time" requirement, you do not have to wear makeup, a padded bra or a dress.  You do have to present as female, change your name to one that at least sounds female and convince others that you are, in fact, female.  Lots of women don't wear makeup, padded bras or dresses.  They are, however, women.

       If you just want to continue living as a man, consider an orchie.  I don't believe there is much required to get that and it will certainly solve the male hormone problem.

       If you're going to take a position, at least get your facts straight.   :)

       Gender surgery is a serious, life-changing event that should not be looked upon lightly and the SOC are simple, easy to fulfill and make sense.

Hi Joice,
what you outlined is the US position (my best guess) so I may not comment on that.
HOWEVER --- it is not e.g. the South African, German or Swiss position AT ALL.

So long we clear on that all is fine by me.

In SA you do not get HRT before 1 year full time on RLE - an absolute joke!
The 12 sessions are much the same but need to coincide to 12 month minimum seeing a psychiatrist.
2 t-girls I know had to spend 3 years +/- !!

Sexologists or other therapist do NOT count at all to get local GRS.
You do NOT get a referral letter either. It is a gatekeeper / GRS team 'hand shake' affair of a 3 liner email you will NEVER see, even if you are begging for it.

If you get the "green light", after ~12 month, you still have to speak to another 'forum' (the monthly GRS meeting at the Academic State Hospital) and you may be rejected there - DESPITE WHAT YOU BEEN TOLD BEFORE BY THE PSYCHIATRIST, you had seen > 1 year!

What you are then being 'labelled' is GIDNOS, you have not touched on in your précis.

GIDNOS stands for "GID Not Otherwise Specified", and once you got that, - the door to SRS will slamm closed.

Just so to add some perspective as to how SoC can be interpreted, honey. In my case it happened just so, that's how I know. And so much for SoC in the hands of some experts.

Axelle

Quote from: Re: Joyce on September 04, 2011, 09:57:53 AM

       If you just want to continue living as a man, consider an orchie.  I don't believe there is much required to get that and it will certainly solve the male hormone problem.

This is where I have a serious problem.

The argument for the RLE is to ensure that you do indeed want this and that the process is irreversable. There are no similar requirements for other plastic surgery, because it is argued that others are reversable.

But most of the SRS is reversable, other than the 'orchie'.

I have no problem with being interviewed, even over a period of time, to ensure I am, in fact sane. But I think your argument falls down on this bit. (I can't believe I just made a references to a bit  :laugh: )





Just read Axelle's contribution. Good points. I avoided going into that area myself, because I felt it would complicate the discussion. But thank you Axelle for adding that.

Quote from: spacial on September 04, 2011, 02:02:14 PMBut most of the SRS is reversable, other than the 'orchie'

lol none of it is reversible.  Most of the inside of the penis is discarded.  The skin is totally rearranged, turned inside out, and sewn together in a completely different configuration.  A small portion of the glans is cut away with the "bare wires" exposed, tucked inside the clitoral hood and the rest of it is discarded as well.  Sex Reassignment Surgery for women makes the little male wee-wee thingy and attached dangly bits go bye-bye FOREVER (and good riddance).  To me part of the beauty of it was that it was completely irreversible.  Thank the gods.

479 days (1 year, 3 months, 25 days) after my first therapist appointment I checked into the hospital in Lower Bucks County and had my irreversible surgery.  Sure there were some hoops to jump through, but I would have jumped through 10 times more to get what I needed.  I was surprised at how easy it was actually.  Far from being "cosmetic surgery", it was the procedure that saved my life.  Anyone can argue otherwise, but then they didn't live in my body so they have no idea how adversely the insidious affliction of the transsexual birth condition affected me.  I am cured now and I feel as though life has just begun.  One of the greatest things about it is in knowing that no one can ever take that cure away from me (irreversible).

Quote from: Axélle on September 04, 2011, 01:51:54 PM
Hi Joice,
what you outlined is the US position (my best guess) so I may not comment on that.
HOWEVER --- it is not e.g. the South African, German or Swiss position AT ALL.

So long we clear on that all is fine by me.

Hi Axell,

     The abbreviation was used "SOC", which are generally regarded as the International (Not U.S.) Standards of Care, found here:

     http://wpath.org/Documents2/socv6.pdf (http://wpath.org/Documents2/socv6.pdf)

     Please note, I was not the one who originated this term in this discussion, the OP to whom I directed my comments was.

In SA you do not get HRT before 1 year full time on RLE - an absolute joke!
The 12 sessions are much the same but need to coincide to 12 month minimum seeing a psychiatrist.
2 t-girls I know had to spend 3 years +/- !!

      I am not familiar with procedures in South America (SA).  I was discussing the SOC, Standards of Care.  It would appear that there are substantial problems with the Health Care Systems in many countries, but those have little to do with the WPATH Standards of Care.  Mistreatment in those countries is tragic, but is really a political discussion related to health care in those countries.


GIDNOS stands for "GID Not Otherwise Specified", and once you got that, - the door to SRS will slamm closed.

Just so to add some perspective as to how SoC can be interpreted, honey. In my case it happened just so, that's how I know. And so much for SoC in the hands of some experts.

     This is why many people, from many places, travel to other countries, such as Thailand or the U.S. to buy their own treatment.  I believe you still need to meet the International Standards of Care referenced above to do so.

Axelle

Quote from: spacial on September 04, 2011, 02:02:14 PM
This is where I have a serious problem.

The argument for the RLE is to ensure that you do indeed want this and that the process is irreversable. There are no similar requirements for other plastic surgery, because it is argued that others are reversable.

     Just to be clear, the discussion centers around the International Standards of Care and their requirements to qualify for Gender Confirmation Surgery.  They are found here:

     http://wpath.org/Documents2/socv6.pdf (http://wpath.org/Documents2/socv6.pdf)

     The requirements for RLE (Real Life Experience) are found on page 17 and 18.  The need for that is due to employment, personal, marital and social consequences of gender change.  Basically, can you function in your chosen gender and live the life you want to live to make you happy?   If you can't support yourself and all your friends and family abandon you, then perhaps the surgery isn't a good idea for you. 

      Reading those 2 pages is quite enlightening and the reasons for the RLE seem quite reasonable and well thought out.

But most of the SRS is reversable, other than the 'orchie'.

     There is not one part of this surgery that is reversible, to the best of my knowledge, as presented very well by Fairy Girl.  I have also complied with all the Standards of Care that she did and, like her, I found that the surgery is a complete cure for Gender Identity Disorder.  In fact, this cure is referenced in the International Standards of Care. 

I have no problem with being interviewed, even over a period of time, to ensure I am, in fact sane. But I think your argument falls down on this bit. (I can't believe I just made a references to a bit  :laugh: )

      I never intended to suggest any treatment for you or anyone else when I suggested an orchie.  It's just a way to treat the disorder that doesn't require as much paperwork.  As I've never undergone that procedure alone, I am not qualified to comment on it's effectiveness.

     
Just read Axelle's contribution. Good points. I avoided going into that area myself, because I felt it would complicate the discussion. But thank you Axelle for adding that.

Quote from: spacial on September 04, 2011, 02:02:14 PM
But most of the SRS is reversable, other than the 'orchie'.

News to me......

Like to see them try and reverse what was done, considering bits were cut up, moved about, left overs thrown out and probably incinerated.  No hope to reverse whatsoever.  Not that I would ever want to try as I'm quite happy with my new anatomy.

Dinky,
maybe the post was referring to phaloplasty?

Just a thought, I think it's been done. Yet it NEVER be the original, eh :-)

Axelle

Hi Val,
it's actually been done, the now again guy (a rich Arab person) also claiming it was someone else's fault misguiding him after his divorce... etc. and wanted to be reimbursed.
(All I recall, and actually best forgotten)

There will NO emotional reimbursement, you so right about that.

Maybe, I was thinking, the Arabian world for women, must have been one big motivation to go back to male after the poor girl got the full taste of it?

Axelle

Brrrrr, goosebumps just thinking about a reversal.........definitely, positively, not now not ever....

Dinky,
sounds like de-transitioning to the power of the cube, eh?

Axelle

Quote from: Axélle on September 05, 2011, 03:52:04 AM
Dinky,
sounds like de-transitioning to the power of the cube, eh?

Axelle

Lol.........and some.

Has lizard man been mentioned in this thread? I think these threads are always empty without an obligatory lizard man reference.

(https://www.susans.org/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Flistsoplenty.com%2Fpix%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2010%2F03%2FCrazy-body-art-Lizard-Man.jpg&hash=62a1a359c044940613526ec62f3ae766cf7aabac)
He didn't require any letters of approval from self-appointed gatekeepers, why should we?

Quote from: FairyGirl on September 04, 2011, 03:24:13 PM
lol none of it is reversible. 

Quote from: Re: Joyce on September 04, 2011, 06:20:17 PM
There is not one part of this surgery that is reversible, to the best of my knowledge, as presented very well by Fairy Girl.

Quote from: Dinky_Di on September 04, 2011, 09:45:49 PM
News to me......

Like to see them try and reverse what was done, considering bits were cut up, moved about, left overs thrown out and probably incinerated.  No hope to reverse whatsoever.  Not that I would ever want to try as I'm quite happy with my new anatomy.

None of you are sticking to the point. On these bases, nothing is reversable. Non sequitur under the circumstances.

My point:

Quote from: spacial on September 04, 2011, 02:02:14 PM
But most of the SRS is reversable, other than the 'orchie'.

Was in reference to previous points, that the need for the intrusive interference is that SRS is irreversable.

I was making the point, in part, in response to the assertion by Joyce about orchie, that the only part of SRS that is not reversable is the orchie.

If you wish to extend the logic into wider philosophy, then we will be here forever. (And I doubt many of you could put up with me for that amount of time).

Quote from: Re: Joyce on September 04, 2011, 06:20:17 PM
Just to be clear, the discussion centers around the International Standards of Care and their requirements to qualify for Gender Confirmation Surgery.  They are found here:

     http://wpath.org/Documents2/socv6.pdf (http://wpath.org/Documents2/socv6.pdf)

     The requirements for RLE (Real Life Experience) are found on page 17 and 18.  The need for that is due to employment, personal, marital and social consequences of gender change.  Basically, can you function in your chosen gender and live the life you want to live to make you happy?   If you can't support yourself and all your friends and family abandon you, then perhaps the surgery isn't a good idea for you. 

      Reading those 2 pages is quite enlightening and the reasons for the RLE seem quite reasonable and well thought out.

Again, we're back to the issue, self appointed individuals, to whom approval must be sought, based upon what we might do in the future.

My life is my own. I don't need anyone's permission to exist. I chose each of my several careers. It is my choice to decide where I live, how I live and with whom. It is not the place of others to presume to decree if, in their opinion, I will be capable of living, what is, in their opinion, a reasonable life.

Those sorts of supervisory approaches are fine for children and necessary. Though I will argue, strongly, that in the case of children, parents should normally be given that authority.

But to impose thoise sort of restrictions onto adults is insulting, demeaning and frankly, anti-democratic.

+ 1

This argument seems circular by now.
It always goes back to the assumption that these 'selfappointed individuals' are acting in a patient's best interest alone.
This assumption in my experience is simply NOT the case.
And in particular if one may not even be able to choose from a number of individuals as is the case in my place. It makes a mockery of the a possibly reasonable idea (SoC).

Axelle

On that point Axelle, I agree with you completely.

As an adult I should be free to make decisions about my own life.