Susan's Place Transgender Resources

Kia Ora,

::) I can't remember if I've done a similar thread here or not...But anyway...........

Trans-wars are being fought on all fronts so to speak, transsexual against transsexual-  transgender against transgender – transsexual against transgender[and visa verse]

::) So here's the deal, if  those who have been there and done that [post opers] had more input in policing the SOC, say 75/25 input[75 % post-opers 25 % professional cis] do you think the system would run more smoothly, that is, less stressful for GID sufferers ?

Or would it be potential for disaster -the clashing of egos be too great ?

::) I should have added post and non opers who are legally qualified/professionals in GID like their cis counterparts...

Metta Zenda :)

My therapist was post-op and she really wasn't sympathetic at all to my issues. She totally discounted I had been living full time for over two years. Like that proves nothing about if I am trans enough to get on HRT. If anything I got this "I had to jump through a LOT of hoops so you will too".. I honestly think a sympathetic cis gendered person would be a LOT less likely to have this "You're not gonna get off that easy" attitude that I saw.

Also is someone who -needed- GRS to end their GID going to by sympathetic to people such as myself that had other problems other than what's in my pants at the root of it? Or lets say this post-op was suicidal over their GRS, if they saw people who weren't talking about killing themselves, would they see them as "not serious candidates or they would want to die"?

I think what you are suggesting here is a recipe for disaster.

Quote from: Stephe on September 18, 2011, 11:52:24 PM
My therapist was post-op and she really wasn't sympathetic at all to my issues. She totally discounted I had been living full time for over two years. Like that proves nothing about if I am trans enough to get on HRT. If anything I got this "I had to jump through a LOT of hoops so you will too".. I honestly think a sympathetic cis gendered person would be a LOT less likely to have this "You're not gonna get off that easy" attitude that I saw.

Also is someone who -needed- GRS to end their GID going to by sympathetic to people such as myself that had other problems other than what's in my pants at the root of it? Or lets say this post-op was suicidal over their GRS, if they saw people who weren't talking about killing themselves, would they see them as "not serious candidates or they would want to die"?

I think what you are suggesting here is a recipe for disaster.

Kia Ora Stephe,

::) I should point out I'm not suggesting having trans-people has gate keepers be a better option, I'm just putting forward something for others to ponder. because it would seem there are a number of members here who are not happy with the present system in place...

::) When I transitioned I was only seem by straight cis-people, psychiatrists [3] psychologist[1] counsellor[1], I had no problems whatsoever with the system, things ran quite smoothly, I couldn't have asked for a better service...However I've met other Kiwi trans-people who've had nothing but problems...

Metta Zenda :)

Honestly, I think there should just be more information and education on the positives of GRS, FFS, and hormone therapy; and how dangerous it can be to keep patients from accessing these things, especially in cases where the patient indeed looks too genetically masculine to realistically and happily pass as female. It's a fact that during RLE, the more masculine a Trans is, the the higher the chance he will be discriminated and taunted on his way to becoming a female, especially if he is young and surrounds himself with a young crowd, or works in an appearance-based career system.

RLE to some people is the cause of suicide; many Trans suicide cases have been during the hoop-jumping and RLE phases. It's an extremely sick practice in my opinion, especially for the people who cry and voice that they do not want to go that route, and it's why I have given up my Letter in protested against it. I obviously will end up finding a pill-mill, and I obviously will end up getting FFS, but I'd rather spend a year searching the globe for those rare, open-minded doctors than to waste money in a therapist's office when I have no mental disorders that transitioning wouldn't cure to begin with.

Quote from: RhinoP on September 19, 2011, 12:01:07 PM
Honestly, I think there should just be more information and education on the positives of GRS, FFS, and hormone therapy; and how dangerous it can be to keep patients from accessing these things, especially in cases where the patient indeed looks too genetically masculine to realistically and happily pass as female. It's a fact that during RLE, the more masculine a Trans is, the the higher the chance he will be discriminated and taunted on his way to becoming a female, especially if he is young and surrounds himself with a young crowd, or works in an appearance-based career system.

RLE to some people is the cause of suicide; many Trans suicide cases have been during the hoop-jumping and RLE phases. It's an extremely sick practice in my opinion, especially for the people who cry and voice that they do not want to go that route, and it's why I have given up my Letter in protested against it. I obviously will end up finding a pill-mill, and I obviously will end up getting FFS, but I'd rather spend a year searching the globe for those rare, open-minded doctors than to waste money in a therapist's office when I have no mental disorders that transitioning wouldn't cure to begin with.

Just FYI i looked pretty masculine and didn't think i had a chance in hell without surgery, turned into an average looking woman for my age, enough so that people cant tell at all.  So there is something to be said about the effects of HRT when combined with other factors outside of surgery such as diet, exercise, etc.. etc..

Quote from: RhinoP on September 19, 2011, 12:01:07 PM

RLE to some people is the cause of suicide; many Trans suicide cases have been during the hoop-jumping and RLE phases. It's an extremely sick practice in my opinion, especially for the people who cry and voice that they do not want to go that route, and it's why I have given up my Letter in protested against it. I obviously will end up finding a pill-mill, and I obviously will end up getting FFS, but I'd rather spend a year searching the globe for those rare, open-minded doctors than to waste money in a therapist's office when I have no mental disorders that transitioning wouldn't cure to begin with.

How is Real Life Experience sick?

And do you have these statistics to back up that girls living fulltime kill themselves because they are fulltime? Suicide among trans happen for many reasons.

There are many reasons why fulltime is so important.  Do you expect that people are going to let you take HRT, get SRS, etc etc as a female but still live as a male? Do you know how fundamentally confusing that is for people? To live as a male but take hrt and live outwardly as a man but is post op sexually as a woman??

Call me crazy as a hound, but as soon as I went fulltime, my mind was at ease. I was more suicidal pre RLE than I ever was RLE. RLE was a blessing for me

Quote from: Annah on September 19, 2011, 12:43:08 PM
Call me crazy as a hound, but as soon as I went fulltime, my mind was at ease. I was more suicidal pre RLE than I ever was RLE. RLE was a blessing for me

I never was suicidal. But I was a LOT more depressed pre RLE than I was after I started living full time, and I was pre HRT when I did it. Yes when I look back at the pictures of myself when I first started full time I shutter but that is part of it, discovering your own look etc. It also helps thicken your skin for later. If I can live though that, I can live through being clocked every once in a while now.  Honestly I can't imagine why someone would feel SRS would be some huge change in their ability to live full time or would make the transition into RLE any easier.

As far as FFS goes, as far as I know that is totally an informed consent thing. At least mine was. The HRT on the other hand did require a diagnosis of a metal disorder to start. I honestly think some RLE should be able to replace therapy and I think it's supposed to. Just not all docs follow that standard.

Quote from: Stephe on September 19, 2011, 03:59:11 PM
Honestly I can't imagine why someone would feel SRS would be some huge change in their ability to live full time or would make the transition into RLE any easier.

some of us are sexual beings...having the matching organ to go with appearance goes a long ways towards relationships of a sexual nature.  Not to mention there are any number of other facets in which it is really convenient to be properly equipped...also not to mention a hell of a lot more comfortable. 

To paraphrase, honestly I can't imagine why someone would NOT feel SRS would be some huge change in their ability to live full-time. 

Quote from: Ann Onymous on September 19, 2011, 04:57:17 PM
To paraphrase, honestly I can't imagine why someone would NOT feel SRS would be some huge change in their ability to live full-time.

So back to the context of my comment and this thread, are you saying you agree with the other poster that people should wait to completely finish the results of HRT and be given SRS before they start to live full time because being asked to complete RLT before SRS is cruel?

That's what this thread is about, the SOC. My comment was in response to "I was more suicidal pre RLE than I ever was RLE." which was discussing if RLE should or should not be required for SRS. Not whether or not some people might find that having SRS would improve their lives. Obviously for some people it's a HUGE change and improvement.

Hi Stephe

Quote from: Stephe on September 19, 2011, 03:59:11 PMHonestly I can't imagine why someone would feel SRS would be some huge change in their ability to live full time or would make the transition into RLE any easier.

One year after having my epiphany I got my hormones, I changed my name and basically the next day I was working full time.  So for me there was no transition, there was no RLE.  I would have had surgery the same day if it was possible.  No, I never had or suffered from GID (the term or terms where not around when I had surgery and the definitions are a contradiction in terms).  No, I never was suicidal.  No, I never had any gender problems.  So why in hell did I have surgery?  So that I could function as a female no less and no more and it is just that simple.

Ann also says it quite eloquently:

Quote from: Ann Onymous on September 19, 2011, 04:57:17 PM
some of us are sexual beings...having the matching organ to go with appearance goes a long ways towards relationships of a sexual nature.  Not to mention there are any number of other facets in which it is really convenient to be properly equipped...also not to mention a hell of a lot more comfortable.

To paraphrase, honestly I can't imagine why someone would NOT feel SRS would be some huge change in their ability to live full-time.

I was not sexually active until after I was 32 years and that was after I had my surgery.   Also I'm a competitive swimmer and swimming coach and I'm constantly in and out of change rooms, so being able to dress and undress without worrying about the consequences, however that did not really stop me before surgery.  This is what is meant by being able to function as a female.

One final thing, having surgery finally gave me peace of mind and contentment in my life.

Warm regards
Sarah B

To answer the question, "Would the SOC be any better if run by post-op trans-people ?" NO, because they are not medically qualified (unless of course they are).  Yes, the current SOC or WPATH guidelines are not perfect and not all doctors are up to speed with treating our condition.

However that is not to say that post ops, non ops or even pre ops should not be able to provide guidance in the formation of the standards.  However, unless one has the necessarily paper work (qualifications), one cannot vote, especially if one wants to be a member of WPATH.  As for the APA and what influence that can be brought to bear in regards to the DSM, then that is a completely different ball game.

Warm regards
Sarah B

It surprises the hell out of me that the SOC is still in use.  Informed consent is a much more patient-friendly model.  I passed on surgeons who demanded that in addition to forking over my cash, I jump through hoops, too.

I think that the original question has merit but it also has some complications.
Mainly already pointed out by the poster who had a trans therapist requiring her to jump through the same hoops she did...

As for the RLE being cruel thing...

I thought the SOC, RLE and therapy were all bad ideas that I should not have to put up with.
I was wrong.
RLE was the best choice I could have made. I got a therapist and she is great. After awhile she made me stop coming to see her as she said she only sees people who are unwell, so much for the wallet raping therapist meme... As for the SOC, it is there for the costors protection more than yours. So that kinda sucks, but the entire idea is to go safe and get the end,

My cis, straight, femme, heteronormative therapist is one of the most kind and sympathetic people I've ever met, and she understands me a hell of a lot better than most other trans folks do. She's arranged for me to have SRS after only 8 months of being full time cause she knows how important it is to me, and how certain I am. She's never questioned my identity, orientation or style of expression. In fact she's one of the only people in my life who hasn't expected or pushed me to be more feminine. And as weird as it is to have a straight lady old enough to be my mother explain that post-op, having a partner screw me with a strap-on can't replace dilation, I appreciate her efforts to be inclusive. ;) I can't imagine anyone I'd rather have speak for me in regards to the SoC.

All of us have different experiences, and expecting any random post-op trans woman to somehow magically relate to every other trans person any better than a non-trans person is unrealistic.

and my cis, straight, femme, heteronormative therapist gave me my hormone letter after my first visit.  I had very few token hoops to jump through.  But like others have said, my god, RLE was such a blessed relief to me that I immediately knew I would never, ever go back.  In the big scheme of things, it wasn't a hardship, rather I thrived on it and knew it was what I had needed my whole life.

Speaking as a post-operative woman, I know I personally would be very strict.  That's because as much as I know without a doubt and still feel that surgery was the absolute right choice for me, I also see it as a drastic, desperate measure to be cured.  I mean let's face it; once ol' Humpty Dumpty's been sliced and diced, turned inside out and shoved back up a hole in your crotch and your testicles incinerated, all the king's horses and all the kings men... well, you get the idea.

My surgeon is a post-operative woman herself.  She was very adamant about both the RLE requirement and the 2 therapist's letters which had to be by the SoC book.  Personally to me it was a very minor thing to fulfill the requirements; that time was fleeting and passed before I knew it, and now I will never again have to live up to anyone else's standards just to be myself.  But I'm a firm believer in the Standards.

As for these threads here where people are saying they're not sure about it, I would say... it hurts like bloody hell.  :o  And then there's the risk you may end up with no feeling at all, and never have another orgasm the rest of your life.  Of course if you have the surgery and then later decide it wasn't for you, well, it's too late then.  It is permanently permanent and irreversible.  There is no going back, which to me is one of the most wonderful things about it and one of its most attractive features.  But if that thought scares you, then you aren't ready.

Never mind that it is a cure that has worked for thousands.  Never mind that to most, the results of female SRS are indistinguishable from original equipment.  Never mind that the peace and rightness of being I experience now is like something I never could have even dreamed possible before surgery.  Never mind all that, because none of that stuff matters at all if it is not the one and only thing in your life personally that is going to cure your GID and let you get on with your life.

Surgery is not for everyone.  It is a last resort when all else fails, and anyone who goes under the knife had better be very sure of themselves, be very sure of the risks and possible rewards, and have realistic expectations of the results.  My own expectations were far exceeded, but by its nature it is an experience that is non-transferable to anyone who hasn't been there.  It's a risk.  If you're doing it for anything less than absolute necessity, then again, you aren't ready.

I admit my motives are selfish.  Every person who wrongly chooses SRS and later regrets it is just another Charles Kane, someone whose experience will be flaunted back to us as "proof" that everything we say about the transsexual condition is a lie.

so anyway yeah, it's probably a good idea I'm not in charge of these decisions lol

Quote from: Stephe on September 19, 2011, 07:40:44 PM
So back to the context of my comment and this thread, are you saying you agree with the other poster that people should wait to completely finish the results of HRT and be given SRS before they start to live full time because being asked to complete RLT before SRS is cruel?

That's what this thread is about, the SOC. My comment was in response to "I was more suicidal pre RLE than I ever was RLE." which was discussing if RLE should or should not be required for SRS. Not whether or not some people might find that having SRS would improve their lives. Obviously for some people it's a HUGE change and improvement.

"results" from HRT are never 'finished.' 

As to RLE/FT, some people are clearly candidates for SRS from day one.  And IMO, integrating into society necessarily incorporates relationships.  The CURE for transsexualism IS the surgery.  Everything else is ancillary.  And in that respect, I simply cannot fathom WHY someone would NOT want the cure for the medical condition...to live in an incomplete state is tantamount to not living at all. 

While I have no qualm with the premise that the SoC is a flawed instrument that didn't work 25 years ago and is just as flawed now, it is not something that should be 'run' by non-professionals.  I would certainly opine, however, that those who have been through SRS are the most qualified of the population contemplated by the SoC to point out the various flaws in the document since we have been through the experience and reached our point of cure... 

Quote from: AnnI simply cannot fathom WHY someone would NOT want the cure for the medical condition...to live in an incomplete state is tantamount to not living at all.

This statement completely invalidates the non-ops lives and the lives of people like my spouse who strive to be in the middle. Where you or I would feel tortured, some people like my hunny are most comfortable.

If someone only needs partial transition or seeks to put themselves in the middle, who are we to gainsay them?

Quote from: Ann Onymous on September 20, 2011, 09:27:02 AM
The CURE for transsexualism IS the surgery.  Everything else is ancillary.  And in that respect, I simply cannot fathom WHY someone would NOT want the cure for the medical condition...to live in an incomplete state is tantamount to not living at all.

This comes across rather as a blanket condemnation, but perhaps wasn't intended to be so. I think it's very simple: if you don't know why someone is not opting for SRS in response to transsexualism (assuming that term means the same to them as it does to you) then you just need to ask them. You don't need to work it out on your own, you just need to ask.

You know were all supposed to be on the same side here, when we fight over differing opinions we give ammunition to those who want to dismiss us just what they need.

We have open dialoge here and we are not going to agree all the time.  We have to accept that and get over it.

Why not just say, "I disagree with your thoughts/opinion, here is why and what my thoughts on the subject are."

Quote from: Padma on September 20, 2011, 10:37:20 AM
This comes across rather as a blanket condemnation, but perhaps wasn't intended to be so. I think it's very simple: if you don't know why someone is not opting for SRS in response to transsexualism (assuming that term means the same to them as it does to you) then you just need to ask them. You don't need to work it out on your own, you just need to ask.

It makes me wonder if anyone bothered to read the earlier exchange in THIS VERY THREAD!  From the last few posts, it would seem not.  Instead, it comes across as yet another example of attacking the messenger.  And yet another example of why the former transsexuals don't feel welcome here...

Quote from: Sarah B on September 19, 2011, 10:16:41 PM
Also I'm a competitive swimmer and swimming coach and I'm constantly in and out of change rooms, so being able to dress and undress without worrying about the consequences, however that did not really stop me before surgery. 

Hi,

Please take my comments in context with the subject of this tread. I'm not trying to be a smart alec either saying this.

I do NOT question that SRS is a huge change for some people in their happiness and ability to enjoy their life. The question here arose about the SOC RLE requirement for SRS and someone said it was cruel to ask someone to go through RLE before SRS.

My comment was related to this; how can RLE  be cruel when for this short period of time you are asked to live as a woman and just not display what's between your legs to others? You even noted "That didn't really stop me before surgery" which doesn't sound like it was cruel or an undo hardship. I have lived this was for years now and am REALLY happy, I can't see how this is a cruel test for people to go through.

Of course SRS improves people's lives for a variety of reasons, -that- isn't what was being discussed or questioned here. No need for post ops to list why SRS improved their lives, no one is questioning it. The -only- thing being questioned is: is asking someone to live full time for a while before surgery cruel? I say no. Others might say yes. I don't see how my comment on this has invalidated anyone.

Quote from: Stephe on September 20, 2011, 05:28:31 PM
My comment was related to this; how can RLE  be cruel when for this short period of time you are asked to live as a woman and just not display what's between your legs to others?

The human experience is so varied that it can happen.  Maybe someone wants to go to graduate school, can't afford to take a month off, and wants to do surgery before the program starts?  There can be thousands of reasons someone doesn't want to wait because the time is simply right as of right now.  It may be nothing at all to do with showing what's between your legs or not.

If I had the money, you bet I'd want to do it right this minute.  How nice it'd be, if I could afford surgery and still have cushion funds to live on for a while, to do surgery right now during a period of unemployment.  I've only been full time for six months though.  I need a job now or I'm going to be homeless.  I don't have surgery money or rainy day funds anymore because my life savings are now gone.  And in the meantime, I've watched all my long-time friends get with someone and stop calling me or hanging out with me because I'm single.  Could I find someone?  I guess... but I'm a heterosexual woman who wants a heterosexual man, which is pretty damn unlikely to happen in my body's current state.  So I need surgery so I can start dating again, and then maybe my friends will want to see me again too because they don't seem to care about me anymore.

There are many reasons people can want surgery now... and many reasons it's cruel to make them wait.

Quote from: Zoë Natasha on September 20, 2011, 06:38:01 PM
There are many reasons people can want surgery now... and many reasons it's cruel to make them wait.

a point that the non-ops seem incapable of grasping.  But the fact that some of us with vaginae recognize that (having been through the process) seems to result in our voices not being important to these discussions...and it IS leading to the exodus elsewhere.

No one is attacking you Ann.

Just asking you to look at others situations before you make blanket statements.

As for post ops...Susans has a number of them here.

Quote from: Zoë Natasha on September 20, 2011, 06:38:01 PM
  So I need surgery so I can start dating again, and then maybe my friends will want to see me again too because they don't seem to care about me anymore.

Your friends dump you because you're not dating anyone?

I'm just curious, you think you had a BF/date all your friends would call and come hang out again?

Quote from: Stephe on September 20, 2011, 10:01:11 PM
Your friends dump you because you're not dating anyone?

I'm just curious, you think you had a BF/date all your friends would call and come hang out again?

Considering they've been ditching me to go out on double dates, say they have no time for me, and then tell me about all the evenings spent with their couple friends?  Yes.

And only one of my in-town friends has responded to any of my calls or texts in three weeks now and it's because her boyfriend is in Paris.  It's seriously getting old.

Quote from: Zoë Natasha on September 20, 2011, 10:05:09 PM
Considering they've been ditching me to go out on double dates, say they have no time for me, and then tell me about all the evenings spent with their couple friends?  Yes.

And only one of my in-town friends has responded to any of my calls or texts in three weeks now and it's because her boyfriend is in Paris.  It's seriously getting old.

I guess my friends are different, I've been single for long periods of time and never run into things like this. Sorry they are treating you that way.

Quote from: Ann Onymous on September 20, 2011, 09:27:02 AM
The CURE for transsexualism IS the surgery.  Everything else is ancillary.  And in that respect, I simply cannot fathom WHY someone would NOT want the cure for the medical condition...to live in an incomplete state is tantamount to not living at all.

I kneejerk-reacted to these statements yesterday, and posted a not-very-helpful response as a consequence. I've had more time since to ponder over why the above made me uncomfortable, and so I'm going to have a better go at explaining my response.

For me, the above statements could only hold true for someone who considers their gender dysphoria to be an illness/condition - because if you don't have an illness/condition, the concept of "cure" is redundant. And for me, I don't experience my dysphoria as an illness or condition - I experience it as an emotional and somatic response to a disability.

How it feels to me is that I'm female, but I was born with a physical disability that has forced me to spend my life "passing" as male. My desire for HRT and SRS is an expression of my desire to have corrective/cosmetic treatment for this disability, in order that I can live more normally. Like the muscles I was born missing, there's no "cure" for my missing genuine, functional female anatomy (or for my lack of a lifetime of socialisation as female); the current state of the art in medicine only allows for me to have my body tweaked so that it resembles my female body enough for me to be happy with it, and to live as I feel I'm supposed to live. That will have to do - and that will do, that will be enough for me.

I'm in no way writing this with an expectation that anyone else does or should feel the same way I do - and that's the point. If just I and the next person along who wants (or has had) SRS can want apparently the same thing, for such very diverse reasons on the basis of such different experiences of ourselves, then it's obvious to me that transitioning people in general want SRS (or don't want it) for an unimaginably vast array of different reasons.

My knee-jerk reaction to what you wrote was a knock-on effect of feeling lately that some people on Susan's, sometimes (on "both sides" of the argument for SRS being The Touchstone), are saying just this: "if you don't feel exactly the same as me about this, then you're clearly just either deluded or damaged." I'm no longer assuming that's what you were saying here, so I'm not reacting to you any more ::), but I wanted to explain where I'm at with this. I've said this before: we can't second-guess other people's motives (and I shouldn't have done so with yours).

Wow Padma, I know the point of your post was differences, but that's the closest I've ever seen to someone understanding it the same way I do.

Back to the original topic... I understand that being post op per se is not a qualification to run the SoC, since the lack of medical training, etc etc... However, even though every life runs in through different paths, maybe the opinions and experience of post ops could be used to help evaluate a "new" case?

The psychiatrist who gave me my 2nd referral letter told me she thinks it's not the role of psychiatrists to decide if a person needs SRS or not (or was the hormone treatment? Don't remember now, but anyway). According to her, GID has been under the role of psychiatrists much more due historical reasons rather than medical reasons. She stated some very reasonable arguments to support that, but I don't remember them cause it was a year ago I had my consultation  ::) :-\

Regarding RLE, I can say that even though I was quite masculine in body appearance (still am?), it was a bless. (estradiol, I love you  :-* ) More cruel than needing RLE before SRS (is it really cruel???) is to have RLE before HRT like happens in some other countries or how some gender therapists evaluate you. If such thing happened to me, I would have failed for sure and wouldn't be the happy post op woman I am now.

Quote from: Padma on September 21, 2011, 01:18:03 AM
I kneejerk-reacted to these statements yesterday, and posted a not-very-helpful response as a consequence. I've had more time since to ponder over why the above made me uncomfortable, and so I'm going to have a better go at explaining my response.

For me, the above statements could only hold true for someone who considers their gender dysphoria to be an illness/condition - because if you don't have an illness/condition, the concept of "cure" is redundant. And for me, I don't experience my dysphoria as an illness or condition - I experience it as an emotional and somatic response to a disability.

a disability is, by its inherent nature, a condition.  Transsexuality is defined by the persistent need to have corrective intervention (I'm to lazy to go get the word-for-word definition as it existed when I started down this road all those years ago).  But because of the slap-downs I get if I try to expound upon that, I really cannot go into greater detail. 

A common thread amongst the former transsexuals who HAVE had the surgery has been the profound recognition of WHY some of us who came before them hold the opinions that we hold.  This is nowhere more evident than at another board that recognizes OUR right to speak our minds on the matter.  There are reasons why former transsexuals, having been cured and no longer being dissatisfied with their bodies, simply fade away into the backdrop and melt away into society as just normal everyday men or women, some straight, some bi and some lesbian or gay. 

QuoteMy knee-jerk reaction to what you wrote was a knock-on effect of feeling lately that some people on Susan's, sometimes (on "both sides" of the argument for SRS being The Touchstone), are saying just this: "if you don't feel exactly the same as me about this, then you're clearly just either deluded or damaged." I'm no longer assuming that's what you were saying here, so I'm not reacting to you any more ::), but I wanted to explain where I'm at with this. I've said this before: we can't second-guess other people's motives (and I shouldn't have done so with yours).

If you go back and re-read the thread, you would find that I had posted in response to someone who effectively claimed that they saw no reason why someone would feel that SRS would help them meld into normal everyday life (you know, the essence of being full-time, having stripped away all facets of a former life).  The SoC was designed to address the needs of the transsexual.  It was not designed to address the needs of those that choose to be something else.  And given that the CURE for transsexuality is the medical intervention, culminating in a final irreversible, irrevocable, ever-after-effing permanent surgery, my follow-up comments to some in this thread were QUITE appropriate.

My feelings in the matter become even MORE appropriate when we look at the problems Zoe describes.  And yet she, even as a mod, seemingly gets taken to task precisely because she cannot have a normal life at this precise moment because of a condition for which she has not yet been able to obtain the cure.  Once cured, life becomes normalized...she is not stuck having to look for someone on the fringe of society but instead has a normalized dating pool from which to potentially select.  She then also has the same array of life activities that are available to natal women.  And THAT is precisely the end-game from which the transsexual hopes for at the end of the steps proscribed by the SoC, flawed as they may be...



 

Quote from: Annah on September 19, 2011, 12:43:08 PM
How is Real Life Experience sick?

Just to that specifically: RLE might work fine for people that are not established in life, are short, are androgynous, etc. But for those that are over 6' tall and in jobs/situations/locations that are not necessarily T-friendly, an RLE is not really an option.

The thing to remember is that everybody's situation is different. When you force an RLE on a person that is decidedly male in appearance and/or is not yet in an environment where non-stealth is an option, you put a target on their back.

Quote from: NatashaD on September 21, 2011, 09:03:50 AM
Just to that specifically: RLE might work fine for people that are not established in life, are short, are androgynous, etc. But for those that are over 6' tall and in jobs/situations/locations that are not necessarily T-friendly, an RLE is not really an option.

The thing to remember is that everybody's situation is different. When you force an RLE on a person that is decidedly male in appearance and/or is not yet in an environment where non-stealth is an option, you put a target on their back.

re: the bolded portion, I would opine that begs the question of just how that person expects to function in the corrected role to begin with...

My response is in relation to RLE prior to HRT.

An RLE should be part of the deal when it comes to SRS.

Sorry for the confusion.

Quote from: Ann Onymous on September 21, 2011, 09:11:09 AM
re: the bolded portion, I would opine that begs the question of just how that person expects to function in the corrected role to begin with...

Without HRT many of us have no hope of passing durring RLE.
Personally I was not willing to go full time until I had a few months of HRT under my belt.
Now that I am past that, I can see that it would have served me much better to have waited until I had at least a year of HRT before I went full time.

Quote from: NatashaD on September 21, 2011, 09:13:57 AM
My response is in relation to RLE prior to HRT.

An RLE should be part of the deal when it comes to SRS.

Sorry for the confusion.

gotcha. 

I'm not a fan of RLE as a requirement for HRT but I also believe in informed consent and am not opposed to the concepts of self-medicating provided that an individual gets periodic bloodwork done (far easier in this day and age than when I began HRT). 

Although, that being said, some of the same obstacles/impediments described are still going to exist for certain people...the sad reality is that SOME transsexuals are destined to be a walking stereotype, no matter HOW much HRT or surgical intervention they get. 

Quote from: Ann Onymous on September 21, 2011, 08:53:05 AM

If you go back and re-read the thread, you would find that I had posted in response to someone who effectively claimed that they saw no reason why someone would feel that SRS would help them meld into normal everyday life (you know, the essence of being full-time, having stripped away all facets of a former life).  The SoC was designed to address the needs of the transsexual.  It was not designed to address the needs of those that choose to be something else.

  Actually if you read what I posted in context, I posted that I don't see NEEDING to be post op to complete RLE in an uncruel manner.. I see no NEED for RLE for HRT. I never posted on this forum anywhere at anytime what you just said I did.

  Honestly I don't need help anymore with this stuff, I've been cured of my GID a while ago so now it's time to go enjoy my life.

I also realize I can't help if a few people like Ann believe I'm not a woman or that I live in an incomplete state that is tantamount to not living at all etc etc. But I do know it's not healthy to hang out in the same space online or in RL where this sort of narrow minded bigotry is condoned and supported. I had hoped in the ten years I have been absent from the online TG community that these old views would have disappeared. That it would have grown past the "I am not trans, you're not a real woman like I am because I have a vajajay and you don't". Sadly it appears some people still follow and believe this mantra. I'm just glad people in my life don't share this view.

I do pray these people eventually find peace and there is an end to this searching for whatever is still missing in their lives. But I've realized I have found the missing pieces in mine and somewhat selfishly don't see there being anything positive to gain from posting here anymore.

I do hope -everyone- can find the happiness and peace I have! I hope in my short time here I have opened some minds and eased a few people's lives as each of us looks for happiness.

The original topic was "Would the SOC be any better if run by post-op trans-people ?".

Please keep discussion to OT, and refrain from personal attacks. Susan's is a diverse community, the right solution for everyone's struggle with GID is different for each of us, and no less valid.

Quote from: Stephe on September 21, 2011, 09:45:50 AM
I also realize I can't help if a few people like Ann believe I'm not a woman or that I live in an incomplete state that is tantamount to not living at all etc etc. But I do know it's not healthy to hang out in the same space online or in RL where this sort of narrow minded bigotry is condoned and supported. I had hoped in the ten years I have been absent from the online TG community that these old views would have disappeared. That it would have grown past the "I am not trans, you're not a real woman like I am because I have a vajajay and you don't". Sadly it appears some people still follow and believe this mantra. I'm just glad people in my life don't share this view.

I do pray these people eventually find peace and there is an end to this searching for whatever is still missing in their lives. But I've realized I have found the missing pieces in mine and somewhat selfishly don't see there being anything positive to gain from posting here anymore.

1) re: the bolded portion, its called a vagina.  Women have them.  They exist in locker rooms and bed rooms all around the world. 

2) we, the post-operative community, HAVE found peace in our lives.  It is those who would seek to 'other' us who are pissing us off to no end while at the same time driving us away.  Yet despite certain people who insist on trying to step on the last effing nerve, I don't recall any of the former transsexuals trying to call people out by name for beliefs we did not agree with...   

3) the more I see comments in this thread, yes, I do feel the SoC would benefit from the input of more post-operative people.  Input being the operative word (no pun intended) given that few of us are in the various medical fields but many are in fields tangential to the process and possess significant insight into both the personal and legal/extralegal issues that factor into the process.

Quote from: Ann Onymous on September 21, 2011, 11:36:36 AM
2) we, the post-operative community, HAVE found peace in our lives.  It is those who would seek to 'other' us who are pissing us off to no end while at the same time driving us away.

I am truly glad you have found peace in your life, and appreciate your considerable soul searching and effort to get there.

As an admin, what concerns me is when ANYONE 'others' ANYONE else here at Susan's, and I see too much of that going on.

Z

I'm sure no one can speak for all people in a group using the royal "We" unless they have some facts to back it up, and there are no such studies.  People have SRS and then walk out into the void, how many are 'happy', 'unhappy' or anything else is impossible to say except on a case by case basis.

Quote from: Ann Onymous on September 20, 2011, 09:27:02 AM
The CURE for transsexualism IS the surgery.  Everything else is ancillary.  And in that respect, I simply cannot fathom WHY someone would NOT want the cure for the medical condition...to live in an incomplete state is tantamount to not living at all. 

I havent had a chance to fully read this entire thread.

I am having SRS surgery later next month and I have to completely disagree with you, Ann. Sorry. Surgery is not designed to CURE transsexual for everyone who is trans. Some girls are fine being non op. Some girls are not.

To throw a blanket statement that GRS is the cure is not a very accurate statement and also implies to me that everyone must have the surgery to be "right." Which I will never agree with.

Quote from: NatashaD on September 21, 2011, 09:03:50 AM
Just to that specifically: RLE might work fine for people that are not established in life, are short, are androgynous, etc. But for those that are over 6' tall and in jobs/situations/locations that are not necessarily T-friendly, an RLE is not really an option.

The thing to remember is that everybody's situation is different. When you force an RLE on a person that is decidedly male in appearance and/or is not yet in an environment where non-stealth is an option, you put a target on their back.

So if a person is not comfortable wearing feminine clothing in public and changing their identity to switch their gender to female, then how will having sexual reassignment surgery with female parts while dressing, acting, presenting, holding legal documents as a male, make them a female? Or more importantly, make them at peace? Because to everyone in the world they will be known as a man. In my opinion, having a vagina is great but if the world walks by you everyday without the slightest hint you are female unless you zip down your pants then what would the purpose be?

Would having a vagina necessarily outweigh one's comfort as knowing they are female even if they present as a man to the world? I guess that is different for everyone.

I know, for me, people see me as a female in everyday life as I am i n RLE. So I feel more at peace knowing this and the thing between my legs is secondary. But everyone is different.

I know gender is a very complicated issue. But my opinion is, if you feel uncomfortable putting a skirt on, then I wonder how so much more uncomfortable putting a vagina on will be?

Quote from: Annah on September 21, 2011, 01:17:17 PM
So if a person is not comfortable wearing feminine clothing in public and changing their identity to switch their gender to female, then how will having sexual reassignment surgery with female parts while dressing, acting, presenting, holding legal documents as a male, make them a female?

I know gender is a very complicated issue. But my opinion is, if you feel uncomfortable putting a skirt on, then I wonder how so much more uncomfortable putting a vagina on will be?

I wasn't aware that that was a requirement to be female. I guess I was misinformed. I suppose I'll have to go inform my butch friends of the bad news. :P

Look everyone is different. Gatekeepers have in the past caused problems for people who don't fit the perfect transsexual pattern. I'm not super comfortable with anyone having subjective control over my medical needs. My therapist uses: one year of HRT, currently full time (various ways to define this - but basically, people know your correct gender), and a declaration of readiness. I prefer that system, less subject to abuse.

And for the record, I have never and probably will never wear a skirt in my life. It has absolutely nothing to do with my genitals, and since going full time I have yet to be mistaken for male. I am an androgynous presenting lesbian. I am also trans. My existence is no less valid than yours.

The endless efforts here to conflate social norms of femininity with female are very sexist and kind of disturbing. Not super pleased at the moment with the direction some of the threads on this site have taken.

Quote from: Annah on September 21, 2011, 01:12:56 PM
I havent had a chance to fully read this entire thread.

I am having SRS surgery later next month and I have to completely disagree with you, Ann. Sorry. Surgery is not designed to CURE transsexual for everyone who is trans. Some girls are fine being non op. Some girls are not.

To throw a blanket statement that GRS is the cure is not a very accurate statement and also implies to me that everyone must have the surgery to be "right." Which I will never agree with.

we'll just have to agree to disagree then.  I was diagnosed under the DSM-III, and still hold very firmly to the definition of transsexualism as it existed back then and that incorporates the persistent desire for surgical intervention in order to bring about the mental and physical congruences.  The SoC as it existed back then was ALSO directed towards the treatment of transsexuality and the surgery tracked individual.  I have YET to meet a transsexual IN PERSON who was content to live their live in an 'in between' state...they all, both M2F and F2M, desired surgery for the sake of congruence so that they could get on with their life as it SHOULD have been. 

And for those who are post-operative, very few have ANY desire to make further correction to the appearance of their genitalia for the precise reason that the genitalia is now aligned with the mental component of their life.  In other words, the transsexuality was CURED.

Ann that definition does nothing to adress the needs of people like my spouse who are not binary.

I can assure you that the androgyns, nutrois and bigenders are just as genuine in their needs as you or I are in ours.
Before Sevan came out I would hava been one of the first to say male or female and nothing else. But I know better because I am living with such a person.
If my spouse is happy and comfortable and productive with a beard and breasts then I am perfectly fine with that.
Just because I completely do not get it has no bearing on the situation. I want and need a happy spouse who is well adjusted.

That requires a partial transition for my spouse, so I have to say that I completly disagree with your position.

For Ann Onymous (and so many others) GRS is/was the cure.  It would have been the cure for me if other medical reasons hadn't made me a poor candidate for surgery.

Androgyny's are  a completely different branch of TG, there needs and desires are different, that does not make them any less important or genuine.

Quote from: Sarah Louise on September 21, 2011, 02:28:40 PM
For Ann Onymous (and so many others) GRS is/was the cure.  It would have been the cure for me if other medical reasons hadn't made me a poor candidate for surgery.

Androgyny's are  a completely different branch of TG, there needs and desires are different, that does not make them any less important or genuine.

I would say that it's the final step for the cure. HRT is as important as SRS...

haha this is so funny- first we get accused of being "more trans than thou", then when we point out that uh.. sorry, we aren't trans at all, we get accused of being "more woman than thou".   There's a whole lot of damned if we do and damned if we don't going on.  That isn't a royal "we", it's a post-operative women of transsexual history "we".  The truth is, having a vagina is a very different sort of life experience from having a penis.  There's nothing elitist about saying that, it's just a simple fact of reality.  Even if your SRS is scheduled for tomorrow and all your friends and your mother are post-op, there is no possible way to understand this reality or comprehend the personal experience of it until it becomes yours.  It is no less fundamental than the difference between having a penis and having a vagina.  Unless/until you have a vagina, then for good or for bad, you will never know what it's like; the experience is non-transferable.  And trust me, it changes everything.  Anyone who thinks it doesn't has simply not experienced it.  Elitist?  Hardly.  This is reality from the SRS side of life, and I will be so bold as to say most, if not all, women with vaginae who used to have penises will agree.  By definition, all post-ops were once pre-ops, and yes, we do remember.

A couple of quotes from our esteemed leader:

Quote from: Susan on January 26, 2009, 10:04:38 PMTranssexual: a person who is mentally one gender, but has the body of the other. They desire to live and be accepted as a member of the mental gender, this is generally accompanied by the strong desire to make their body as congruent as possible with the preferred sex through surgery and hormone treatments.

"Strong desire" is not the same as "I see no need to have SRS".  What we have here is one group of people, those who neither need nor desire SRS, being forced to follow standards which were created, not with them in mind, but for men and women for whom transsexuality is a disease and who desperately seek a real cure in order to function at all.  In this case, the SoC are not a good fit for those who only want hormone treatments but not the final cure.  Instead of getting angry and argumentative with the people who are cured, direct your efforts towards obtaining a set of Standards, or lack thereof, for these people such as Cynthia and others have mentioned for whom the SoC were never designed for.

Quote from: Susan on July 25, 2008, 07:56:21 AM

Quote from: Jasmine on July 21, 2008, 02:33:55 AMDo you think it's possible for a genuine M2F transsexual to like their penis?

The answer is no it is not possible.

QuoteGender identity disorder (GID) is the formal diagnosis used by psychologists and physicians to describe persons who experience significant gender dysphoria (discontent with the biological sex they were born with).

So, If you like it, you are not A MTF TS! Sorry to anyone whose bubbles I have burst, but it had to be said.

I have no need to argue these points, and if you don't like Susan's definitions take it up with her.  For me the transsexual condition was a dreadful birth defect and for me having SRS cured it.  I have no problem whatsoever with what anyone wishes to do with their own bodies and lives.  In fact as I posted earlier in this thread,  if I as a post-op made the decisions, I would first advise people against having SRS, especially if they felt towards it as some here have expressed.   Not because I think it's bad; for me it was the most wonderful, life-changing for the better thing that could ever happen to me, and it permanently cured my affliction.  But because as a post-op I well understand the difference in experience that SRS renders, and if someone is not ready for that experience, all the hormones and all the RLE in the world is NOT going to put their penis back together again.

This is just one of the problems with lumping everyone together under the same umbrella.  Some need SRS, others don't.  Yet we only have one set of standards, and if these endless fruitless arguments are any indication, one-size definitely does not fit all.  If you have a sore toe I don't need to treat your left ear.  For those who seek surgery, the standards are good and necessary.  For those who don't, I think informed consent should be all that is required to obtain the treatments they want.

Just sayin'.

I'm just back from a very long day in London. I've realised I'd like to start a topic to discuss more broadly what I see as the limited value of the term "dysphoria" in its current clinical usage, and how that's confusing the issue in some situations. I don't want to get into a me-vs-anyone-in-particular situation, and I don't want to derail this topic here more - hence starting another topic, though my thinking about it has been inspired by some of the exchanges that I've had (and others have had) in this topic. I'll get something started once I've had a good night's sleep, because I'm really interested in this right now. You'll either find it interesting or you won't!

As regards the OP, thinking about it, I feel that personal experience doesn't on its own qualify someone to give advice in a professional healthcare context. For me to feel confident in anyone's objectivity (whether trans or not, whether post-op or not) who might be involved in making healthcare decisions concerning my transition, I would expect all concerned to have had some professional training. So I'd be very happy to see post-op men and women involved in helping make healthcare decisions to support others' transitions, if they're people who've also had adequate professional training - I think it would be a very valuable asset to the system, and would like to see more people getting involved in that way.

Quote from: Ann Onymous on September 21, 2011, 01:29:13 PM
we'll just have to agree to disagree then.  I was diagnosed under the DSM-III, and still hold very firmly to the definition of transsexualism as it existed back then and that incorporates the persistent desire for surgical intervention in order to bring about the mental and physical congruences.  The SoC as it existed back then was ALSO directed towards the treatment of transsexuality and the surgery tracked individual.  I have YET to meet a transsexual IN PERSON who was content to live their live in an 'in between' state...they all, both M2F and F2M, desired surgery for the sake of congruence so that they could get on with their life as it SHOULD have been. 

And for those who are post-operative, very few have ANY desire to make further correction to the appearance of their genitalia for the precise reason that the genitalia is now aligned with the mental component of their life.  In other words, the transsexuality was CURED.

I understand this definition works for you, Ann.

But it's not the simple and it doesn't work like that for everyone. If the DSM III works for you great. I was diagnosed too. But our paths our different. And what SRS is a cure for you it is NOT a cure for everyone.

While you have never met any trans in person who was content to be in between, I know personally several. Matter of fact, I dated a trans in between and was content. And yes, she is diagnosed the same as you under the DSM. So trust me, despite popular belief in your area, non op trans do exist.

For me, yes. I am getting SRS next month. If I found out I could not get SRS, I would not be depressed. Yes, I do want to have a vagina. No, it is NOT a life or death for me. Yes, i will be happy to have my vagina. No, I will not be content after the surgery. Because I am content now.

I understand the surgery corrected your issues for you, but this doesn't mean your way has to be the right way for every trans. Not everyone feels they have to have surgery to be complete and there is nothing wrong with that. To begin to think people are either misinformed, not really trans, or lying because they don't have the same feelings as you when  it comes to srs begins to make the ice thinner when it comes to acceptance.

This isn't directed to you, Ann. But I have seen SO many trans people have the audacity to tell other trans people they aren't really trans because they have no desire for surgery. When someone falls into that trap and mentality of thinking then you are subscribing the gender is what is between your legs and not who you are and then they fall into the same "bigoted" mentality of those out there who say "trans women are not women; they are men because they were not born with a vagina."

When we begin to judge other trans because "they wont get the vagina" then I know millions of people who will say the same thing to you because "you weren't born with the vagina." When "outsiders" start to question our gender because we are not cis gendered women we start to use language "we are women because I identify as women" or use other tactics like "so if a woman has a cervix removed does that mean they are no longer a woman" or other examples.

It is interesting how some trans people will treat non ops the same way as ignorant people against trans treat us.

I would like to make a little comment here, seeing as I've seen a lot of arguments back and forth between the women on the site.
I'm a guy.
I've always been a guy.
I have a vagina.
I'm still a guy.

I didn't "become" a guy when I took hormones.
I didn't "become" a guy when I had hysto.
I didn't "become" a guy when I had top surgery.
And I wouldn't "become" a guy by having my vagina removed and replaced with a "fully functional" penis complete with testicles and all (if that were possible).

I am, and always have been a guy.

I also happen to be trans.

For me, I do not "have" to have bottom surgery to be at peace with my body.
If you do, then that's your need, not my need.
What's under my pants isn't your business, nor is what's under your pants my business at all.
Just like I shouldn't tell you to just make your peace with what you got you don't get to tell me how I should feel about what I got.

A woman is a woman is a woman, whether she has a penis, a vagina, a magical portal to Narnia, a beer tap or anything else under her pants.
A man is a man is a man, whether he has a penis, a vagina, a stairway to heaven, a purple cow or anything else under his pants.
And the same applies to the non binary people, though I suspect some of 'em would much prefer a portal to Narnia than some of the other options.

SRS isn't a cure to "insert term here", it's a cure for those who "need" it, by whatever word they define themselves and their gender identity.
My gender identity is not in my pants, nor does the contents of my pants "validate" my gender identity.

For me SRS is not a cure in any sense of the word and I would shudder to think that the gatekeeper was someone who was of the opinion that I should have to have a profound need for SRS to be able to access hormones, top surgery, hysterectomy or getting my name changed and getting recognized as who I am.
It's an utterly terrifying thought.

I already feel pressured enough to conform to societal standards of masculine behaviour and need for a penis to be considered a guy.

I do not think that all post-op men or women would pressure me further, but some undeniably would, and I wouldn't wish that on anyone, to feel pressured to pretend to be someone they aren't.
I already did two dozen years of that and it almost killed me.

We already lie and/or tell selective truths to our current gatekeepers and try desperately to get what each and one of us needs to feel whole by whatever means necessary at times.
If we all had the same needs, maybe we wouldn't have to fudge the truth or fake our way into what we needed because there could easily be put up a "one size fits all" plan for transition, but we don't all have the same needs and we don't all fit into some neat little pidgeon-hole.

Yes, The definition of Susan's states;
Transsexual: a person who is mentally one gender, but has the body of the other. They desire to live and be accepted as a member of the mental gender, this is generally accompanied by the strong desire to make their body as congruent as possible with the preferred sex through surgery and hormone treatments.

Nowhere does that define which gender options are available to fit the definition nor does it say "always" or "without fail", it says "generally".
Generally means "usually" or "commonly".
It means that "most often" those that are transsexual will "want" to bring their own bodies "as close as possible" to matching their gender identity, whatever that gender identity may be.
Nowhere does that definition say that SRS is a requirement to fit the definition, in fact, it doesn't define which surgeries are "wanted" either.

You know, this ongoing debate on trans v.s. trans v.s. woman/man v.s. etc is exhausting to me.
Extremely exhausting.

You know what I want?
I want trans, as a term, to not be such a big deal.
I'm a guy, I'm trans. To me it means that I was born with a female body and will have to live with some lingering effects of that for the rest of my life. It carries no more weight to my personal identity than the fact that I'm tall, or the fact that my hands are big, or the fact that I'm nearsighted, or the fact that I'm right handed, or the fact that I was born in 1982.
All of these things are simple little things that are a part of "what" I am and thus have an effect on who I am.
I don't care whether the suffix is "sexual" or "gender".
I don't.
I don't see why it should be such a big deal.

Sometimes, I feel as though those that think that using "trans" makes me less of a man are in some way making me less of a man.
Or that, to them, I'm less of a man.
I am no less a man than my husband is, or my father is, just cause I was born with a vagina.
I'm no less of a man with it than I would be without it.
To suggest that using the word "trans" (whichever suffix) implies that I'm less of a man suggests that being trans makes me less of a man (and makes trans women, or women of transsexual history, less of a woman for it).

It bothers me to feel like I have to go "no, vagina or penis, I'm still a man, I've always been a man, I haven't become a man through transition, I AM a man" to other people who are also in my position, or have been, or will be.
It bothers me to feel like I have to say that on a trans support site.
It bothers me to no end.

I mean,...
Everyone in my life already gets it. They all know me as a man. They all see me as a man.
My 10 year old daughter gets it.
My husband gets it and he sees me naked every night.
Everyone gets it.
I'm a guy.
I'm a man.
Penis or no penis.

Why does it feel like among those that, in this tiny aspect, should be my peers, that I still feel like I have to explain this sometimes?
/rant

Miniar,

Could not have said it better myself.

A sexual organ does not define our gender. You are a man through and through!

Quote from: Stephe on September 20, 2011, 05:28:31 PM
My comment was related to this; how can RLE  be cruel when for this short period of time you are asked to live as a woman and just not display what's between your legs to others?

RLE is a horrible, antiquated system.  This short period of time? Come on.  A year is not 'short,' especially not when most people have agonized over themselves/their lives/their condition for years before seeking treatment.  But to have someone tell you, once you've mustered the gall to ask for the surgery/treatment you want/need, that you MUST endure even longer?  How can this possibly be considered a realistic request? I don't believe that allowing something to fester on your body and in your mind every minute of every hour of every day for a year or more after many have reached their tipping points can be considered a useful aspect of ANY treatment for ANY condition.

As for the not opening your legs to others bit,  transition isn't about other people, it's about yourself.  You can hide your bits from others all day long, as most of us do in our everyday lives, but we still all know exactly what lies beneath our clothes.  And a year (or more) without having sex?  That's cruel in and of itself, without all the RLE/trans business.

Quote from: Mister on September 21, 2011, 06:35:09 PM
RLE is a horrible, antiquated system.  This short period of time? Come on.  A year is not 'short,' especially not when most people have agonized over themselves/their lives/their condition for years before seeking treatment. 

Not for all of us.

RLE was the happiest transition of my entire life hands down. I even go as far as my first day of RLE was being "born again."

Best thing that ever happened to me. Hell, a year of RLE is way too short for me. I went RLE and never went back. Had no reason to. I no longer identified as male and had no desire to transition back.

Quote from: Annah on September 21, 2011, 06:40:27 PM
Not for all of us.

RLE was the happiest transition of my entire life hands down. I even go as far as my first day of RLE was being "born again."

Best thing that ever happened to me. Hell, a year of RLE is way too short for me. I went RLE and never went back. Had no reason to. I no longer identified as male and had no desire to transition back.

And you needed a doctor/therapist required set period of time to figure this out?  Maybe I'm a real self-starter or something, but I started living my life without someone telling me when, how and that I must do it.

Start to dress in the presentation of your gender at the same time as the first day of attending a Christian Seminary yes, you will need some help.

So yes, Mister, some people do need the guidance of others as a coach and a cheerleader to get us to that point in time and to give us the courage to face a potential volatile group of people.

Some of us are not as perfect as you.

Quote from: Annah on September 21, 2011, 06:45:43 PM
Start to dress in the presentation of your gender at the same time as the first day of attending a Christian Seminary yes, you will need some help.

So yes, Mister, some people do need the guidance of others as a coach and a cheerleader to get us to that point in time and to give us the courage to face a potential volatile group of people.

Some of us are not as perfect as you.

I'm not saying a cheerleader or someone to encourage you on.  I'm saying medical professional, sitting you down, saying starting on day X, you will embody your inner lady until day Y, at which time I will decide if you are lady enough to undergo permanent ladyness changes.

Quote from: Mister on September 21, 2011, 06:49:28 PM
I'm not saying a cheerleader or someone to encourage you on.  I'm saying medical professional, sitting you down, saying starting on day X, you will embody your inner lady until day Y, at which time I will decide if you are lady enough to undergo permanent ladyness changes.

Im saying, there are therapist who actually help you and to encourage you and to help you through your fears of starting a RLE. I had the option of starting RLE whenever, but my therapist was instrumental in giving me the strengths I need.

Quote from: Annah on September 21, 2011, 07:02:53 PM
Im saying, there are therapist who actually help you and to encourage you and to help you through your fears of starting a RLE. I had the option of starting RLE whenever, but my therapist was instrumental in giving me the strengths I need.

To me, that is very sane and very normal and has absolutely nothing to do with what my post was about.

Quote from: Stephe on September 18, 2011, 11:52:24 PM
My therapist was post-op and she really wasn't sympathetic at all to my issues. She totally discounted I had been living full time for over two years. Like that proves nothing about if I am trans enough to get on HRT. If anything I got this "I had to jump through a LOT of hoops so you will too".. I honestly think a sympathetic cis gendered person would be a LOT less likely to have this "You're not gonna get off that easy" attitude that I saw.

Also is someone who -needed- GRS to end their GID going to by sympathetic to people such as myself that had other problems other than what's in my pants at the root of it? Or lets say this post-op was suicidal over their GRS, if they saw people who weren't talking about killing themselves, would they see them as "not serious candidates or they would want to die"?

I think what you are suggesting here is a recipe for disaster.

I think you hit the nail on the head with your concerns here.

Personally, the only individual I'd feel comfortable dictating the terms of my transition is myself.

I was diagnosed transsexual in 1993, which appears to have been during the cusp between DSM-III and DSM-IV. My path is non-op, which feels right for me and my circumstances (financial and other), at least for the time being. If at some time it feels right to do something different, well then I'll do it. I have issues with the SOC, and with the idea that there needs to be gatekeepers at all. Plain and simple, there isn't one right way to deal with GID.

Z

Quote from: Zythyra on September 21, 2011, 08:57:46 PM
Plain and simple, there isn't one right way to deal with GID.

I don't even think there is one kind of GID. The way people express it, it has obviously taken different forms and different paths in many of us. There are probably a few dozen conditions/identities/whatever all stuck under the same label at the moment. And until we get some more information on causes, etc., we should at least TRY to get along despite our differences.

Best diagnostic tool we've got so far is "how do you feel?" And really, I'd much rather people be whoever they want to be, than try to fit us all into a box. That can be the problem with gatekeepers - one size fits all is just not an effective model for the variety of folks we've got here needing some kind of assistance.


I think it's sad that people are getting into fights so intense that eventually someone walks away from the whole mess. As we lose variety, we lose voices, we lose identities that can expand our way of thinking, our way of seeing ourselves and the world. If we could avoid generalities, and stick to our own experiences, we'd be able to talk to each other a lot more easily.

Stephe is possibly as far different from me in her experience of GID as it is possible to get... but by trying not to dictate each others' lives we were able to actually gain some understanding of each other, a momentary glimpse into each others' worlds. Don't like seeing that go. Not over this silliness. :(

One of the reasons I bailed out of my counselling training was that I realised I needed to sort out some of my own issues first (which was mainly to do with abuse stuff). Once I am done transitioning, I may well go back and finish my training (if I have any money left by then!) but if I do, I would certainly want very good supervision before taking on transitioning clients, to make sure I keep my own "stuff" around the subject separate from theirs. I've suffered in the past from therapists's "stuff" getting in the way of their objectivity, and I don't see that this arena is any different in its potential pitfalls.

The best therapist is the person you can most easily be yourself with and through, who can reflect you back to yourself in an encouraging way, and enable you - not necessarily the person you have most "in common" with.

We could use the lawyer who triggered a lot of this discussion to really help us out here, because so many of those protocols and procedures - like RLE - have as much to do with the doctors trying to avoid malpractice lawsuits as it does with best practice medical research.  It's a whole lot of both, and unless you are looking at both sides, you're not seeing a complete picture.  For better or worse, the patient is not the only person who has a vested interest in the guidelines, protocols, and procedures - not by a long shot.


Second.  What exactly does best practice medical research say in cases of GID?  Who knows?  It's not like there is a huge (much less overwhelming), or even really a sufficient, amount of good solid scientific (as opposed to scientifically-based) research to frame anything like what the 'best practice' would be.

Where exactly are the numbers (and I'm not even sure if we have an agreed upon 'satisfactory outcome' defined even) of satisfactory outcomes for people who have undergone various means and measures of medical and psychological intervention (as measured against a control group who had neither)?  Nowhere.  No such study has been done.  Like I said, I don't even think there is an agreed upon definition of what such an outcome would consist of.  Can we even say that Treatment A: a year's therapy, one year RLE, then hormones, then surgery (all while continuing the therapy), which is the 'classic' approach is better than Treatment B: Hormones on demand, surgery if one wants it/can afford it based on a Informed Consent model, or Treatment C: therapy only, or, or, or... (and all of those compared to a rigorously monitored control group that has done none of this -- so you don't have it going all Hawthorne/Heisenberg on you)?  Are those numbers at someone's fingertips?  Nope.  They just don't exist.  Not even vaguely.  The vast majority of 'evidence' about GID cures is all anecdotal, and such evidence is not reliable because it's self-selecting.


Third.  If there is one bunch of girls in the world who know one thing ... I mean a substantial, if not overwhelming statistical set of girls who know with absolutely certainly - 100% dead certain - that One Size Does Not Fit All it's girls like me.  And, if that is true for something as simple as a pair of panties or stockings, then how much more complex is a combination of psychological and medical interventions?

We accept that in life there are people who can't come close to estimating the amount of money they are spending walking through the grocery store (my ex for one) and there are other people (usually nice, but no fun at parties) who can do quadratic equations in their heads.  In other words we accept that mathematical skills exist in human beings not at a set level, but on a continuum.  We know that is true for people's abilities and levels of being able to read, write and comprehend information.  We know that people are social on a scale from total attention whores who can't stand not being around people, to totally withdrawn and alone persons who hate the entire conversation/party/social deal and actively avoid it.  We know that there are ranges of psychological and physical ailments from very mild to unable to function at all.

It would stand to reason at the very least that both the levels of GID and what they effect differ from person to person, what treatment(s) and at what levels would be effective would also then have to differ from person to person as a consequence of that.  For an example, there are people with GID of some sort in here who seemingly have very highly developed social skills.  There are other people in here who have high levels of social anxiety and really have no idea at all how to deal with, or behave around, other people.  It's not much of a stretch to see how those two people would have very different paths through therapy right from the outset.

So I've never been to sold on the 'one way' approach.  Not when what I have seen how GID fluctuates as much as it does, has as many manifestations as it does.  Is as tied up into other things (sexuality, social skills, family) as GID gets.  And I'm not adverse to finding best practices, methods and techniques that have higher success rates, but I'll need to see some scientific evidence for that first, and I'm not seeing any at all.

Indeed. And there is statistical evidence (where did I read this recently? can't remember) that an imposed period of RLE before SRS makes no difference at all to the post-op remorse level - i.e. people who have surgery without jumping through the RLE hoops are statistically no more likely to regret it than those that do.

It's something the system has decided is a Good Thing, and that's partly for the benefit of the clients (to give them time to settle into role and be sure of themselves, and perhaps also for people around them to get used to them in their new role and therefore become more supportive), and it's partly for the benefit of the healthcare professionals (to prevent them from lawsuits which lead to more conservatism in the profession). And given that it's a "standard of care" (i.e. a set of guidelines, not rules), there's nothing inherently wrong with wanting either of those two outcomes. It's just that RLE is not relevant for everyone. I count myself very fortunate to have found a psychiatrist who is happy to recommend me for HRT even though I don't present as heterofemme (because some of them are very narrow-minded about such things). My RLE, which is about to start in earnest, will involve me looking like an overtall hippy dyke - but then my body will adjust to help that, thanks to the HRT. The reason (as someone here has mentioned it) why I'm starting my RLE "before my HRT has kicked in" is because I have to. I'm finding it more and more uncomfortable trying to "pass" as male, so I want to stop doing that. Living as female whilst still looking somewhat male may make *others* uncomfortable, but it's going to make me feel happier. That's the plan, anyway - we'll see.

Firstly as someone once said there are women in this world with penises and men without them. It's a fact of life and they have the same rights and right to respect as anyone else. End of.

Secondly I take issue with the feeling uncomfortable in a skirt a business. Only ever saw my second wife in a skirt twice, once at our wedding in javanese traditional dress and once when we went to a fetish club with friends and dressed up for laughs. Same with my best friend except I've never seen her in a skirt ever. Neither of these genetic girls ever felt or feel comfortable in a skirt and dress much the same as I do.

If the appointed gatekeepers have an issue with traditional gender based dress code they need to take a good long hard look at themselves. This is 2011 not 1955.

Quote from: mimpi on September 22, 2011, 11:01:07 AM
Firstly as someone once said there are women in this world with penises and men without them. It's a fact of life and they have the same rights and right to respect as anyone else. End of.

Secondly I take issue with the feeling uncomfortable in a skirt a business. Only ever saw my second wife in a skirt twice, once at our wedding in javanese traditional dress and once when we went to a fetish club with friends and dressed up for laughs. Same with my best friend except I've never seen her in a skirt ever. Neither of these genetic girls ever felt or feel comfortable in a skirt and dress much the same as I do.

If the appointed gatekeepers have an issue with traditional gender based dress code they need to take a good long hard look at themselves. This is 2011 not 1955.

the skirt was metaphorical only. I meant to say RLE can help make you more comfortable in presented gender. I should have been clearer.

If anyone wants to present as male but wants a vagina; nothing wrong with that. Everyone is uniquely different. This is what i was trying to converse but also stressed how important rle is for some.

Kia Ora,

::) It would seem some of you were under the impression I meant any unqualified post or non opers [off the street]...So I've just added the following to my first post  "Post and non-opers who are qualified/professionals !

Metta Zenda :)