Susan's Place Transgender Resources

What's with the classification of transsexuals into "primary" and "secondary"? I've seen these terms in medical and psych journals. What are the implications for our lives?

These are terms Ray Blanchard came up with and if you read any of his work, you will see that he basically says primary TS are really just gay men who only are transitioning so it will be more acceptable to be with a man and that secondary transsexuals are just men who want to live as women because the thought of being a woman is a sexual turn on ( ->-bleeped-<- is the term he came up with).

I obviously do not agree with him because I find his theories diminutive and insulting, so I refuse to use these terms.  I think his very biased ideas are just an attempt to deny transitioning disprove that transsexualism really exists.  Just ignore anything you see about the primary/secondary model, because it really is irrelevant.

Personally, from my viewpoint none. There is not enough education out there to know the difference first of all, and second most people think I am gay or like to crossdress in womens clothes. Society has a hard time seperating Crossdresser from ->-bleeped-<-s/->-bleeped-<-s, to transsexuals whatever class or type they may be.


Second, the moron that wrote the book about  ->-bleeped-<- wouldn't know GID if it bit him in the butt. Stop reading crap and accept things the way they are. You will be much happier getting rid of that load.

Quote from: Hypatia on July 13, 2007, 07:40:24 AM
What's with the classification of transsexuals into "primary" and "secondary"? I've seen these terms in medical and psych journals. What are the implications for our lives?

Only what you allow them to be.

~Kate~

Quote from: Lori on July 13, 2007, 11:04:16 AM
>...
Second, the moron that wrote the book about  ->-bleeped-<- wouldn't know GID if it bit him in the butt. Stop reading crap and accept things the way they are. You will be much happier getting rid of that load.

Indeed.  His theories have been rejected by most medical professionals with the exception of one ally named Dr Anne Lawrence, who even though being a post op MtF TS herself supports his theories.

Sort of a stab in the back towards all TS.

You may want to have a read here and look at the section on the DSM-IV and ICD-10

https://www.susans.org/wiki/Standards_of_Care_for_Gender_Identity_Disorders#The_DSM-IV

Steph

Quote from: Steph on July 13, 2007, 12:25:52 PM
His theories have been rejected by most medical professionals with the exception of one ally named Dr Anne Lawrence, who even though being a post op MtF TS herself supports his theories.

Yeah, I met her a couple of months ago. :-X

Quote from: Lori on July 13, 2007, 11:04:16 AM
Personally, from my viewpoint none. There is not enough education out there to know the difference first of all, and second most people think I am gay or like to crossdress in womens clothes. Society has a hard time seperating Crossdresser from ->-bleeped-<-s/->-bleeped-<-s, to transsexuals whatever class or type they may be.


Second, the moron that wrote the book about  ->-bleeped-<- wouldn't know GID if it bit him in the butt. Stop reading crap and accept things the way they are. You will be much happier getting rid of that load.

[Laughing and shaking her head]

Girl, you just crack me up.  :laugh: :laugh: :laugh:

Until today I had no idea who Blanchard was, now I understand why people think he is crazy  :-\

Well, I really don't know, so let's leave everything to the experts!  ;D ;) >:D

Transsexuals and Transvestities (http://jadephoenix.org/lvtgw/Info_htm/Psyc/transves.htm)

Transvestism and Gender Dysphoria (http://jadephoenix.org/lvtgw/Info_htm/Psyc/transves.htm)

tink :icon_chick:

I am now quite confused about the word " ->-bleeped-<-". I've been thinking about it for the last weeks.

Ray Blanchard was the first who came out with this theory, but more recently this kind of idea was promothed by Michael Bailey and his book "the man who would be queen".

Michael Bailey was hardly criticized and accused by many transgender/transexual communities but his book was nonetheless a best seller and widely appreciated by the masses. What's worse is he apparently was convincing enough to bring to his side some transexuals.

I'm not sure if i'm allowed to post a link, suffice to say i came across a site that totally shocked me. This page apparently adopts Michael Bailey's point of view about transexualism (it even suggests to read his book), and it states that there is an undeniable difference about the two different transexual conditions. They all refer at themselves as HSTS (homosexual transexuals), they refuse the idea of a transexual community, their goal is to counter what they believe is a threaten to their identy caused by so called ->-bleeped-<- ( ->-bleeped-<-) driven coomunities.

As michael bailey did, they seem to only consider the approach of different transexuals.

Basically:

->-bleeped-<-: A condition that brings a heterosexual man to be sexually attracted to the idea of being of the opposite sex, or having the body appearance of woman.

HSTS: A homosexual man that desires to be woman in order to better fit with his sexual orientation.


At first these statements do not seem to have anything derogatory about these different transexual contditions. However they can easily bring to a strongly derogatory consequence.

->-bleeped-<- is the most obvious of the two. While homosexuality is now somewhat accepted and not considered a disease (at least from APA and their DSM, NARTH however would disagree), any other sexual investment towards something that isn't an adult human being is considered a paraphilia. If a man rather have sex with his own female self than with another person, people will see him as a pervert on par with necrophiliacs, podophiliacs, and so on.

However this could be also threatening for HSTS. If we accept the idea that those transexuals are merely "gay men" that do not really desire to be women but rather more accepted by society and their partners... well i can foresee what some right-minded would say:

"HSTS are gay men that aren't satisfied by having sex with other gay men, they sought for the ultimate way of deceivement in order to lure to themselves straight men that would otherwise have a happy life with real women and their own biological sons".

I wonder how could they not see how dramatically threatening this idea can be.

After several thinkings i realized that there is absolutely no way to defend transexualism if you look merely at those motivations. But there's something amiss here, something that is really important, something that really matters, and it can be found in either conditions.

It's the pain that comes from the idea of being of the wrong sex, the pain that comes from the idea of being trapped in the wrong body, the inability to express the true self, the inability to look at the own body without grossing out or crying, the unability to be happy and selfconfident.
There's been a long way to make the world to look at transexualism not as a perversion but as a treatment to a potentially lethal disease.

Frankly speaking, if you feel no pain, you need no treatment. If you don't suffer from your condition then probably you shouldn't change sex at all.

Seeing as how "pain" is a major key to understand transexualism, how could that have been overlooked? I frankly don't get it. I can somewhat understand how Michael Bailey (being a normal man, or so he says) might have not considered it, but how could someone that consider himself/herself a transexual?

I am not denying there are differences as i would not deny that there are heterosexuals and homesexuals, but i believe that the true will to live as the opposed sex is only slightly connected to a supposed ->-bleeped-<- condition or HSTS condition. Gender disphoria is the main cause of transexualism, the rest is secondary.

Please take a second to read the  recent studies. (http://www.gfmer.ch/Medical_education_En/PGC_RH_2007/pdf/Gender_identity_disorders_Porto_WHO_2007.pdf)

tink :icon_chick:

I wouldn't call that a study Tink, its a hodge podge of many things,
without much precision if they all should be taken as facts.
Some things are from the 60's others the 90's, terminology fluctuates,
stereotypes appear and fade in the text.
I don't really like it.

l'm afraid that not much can be said on something which has not been studied thoroughly.  This, among other things, is the best of what you can come up with.  That was the reason I posted it.  I guess it is up to each of us to decide what is and what isn't.  My personal view is that there are differences in the intensity of how gender dysphoria manifests.  It's evident, IMO, that what is unbearable for some is tolerated by others and so on.  I do believe that there is a significant difference between "primary and secondary" transsexualism; however, I'm not sure about defining these differences with such terms.

tink :icon_chick:

Quote from: Nero on July 14, 2007, 12:30:53 PM
Disclaimer - this is Nero's view on Primary and Secondary Transsexualism

I do believe in Primary and Secondary transsexualism. I don't believe  ->-bleeped-<- or transvestism comes into play at all, and both paths are valid.

Primary:

* Recognizes their true gender no later than first grade (age 7 or so). I say this because if they were not aware of something wrong and had no knowledge of their gender before, a classroom situation would surely bring it out. (independent of one's upbringing/doesn't matter whether raised in 'gender neutral' environment or not)

* Upset by his or her sex, disturbed in his or her play and school activities

* As an older child - failure in his or her relations with peers, isolation, confusion, refusal to go to school

* Psychological pain upon onset of puberty

* Sexual attraction to members of the opposite gender (same sex body) at puberty

* Taking hormones and/or dressing in and attempting to assume the role of the target gender (passing is not a factor) no later than age 25



Secondary:

* No knowledge of true gender in childhood, may not even recognize anything wrong

* No noticable discomfort in their birth sex during play, activities, etc.

* As an older child - normal school life and performance

* Puberty is no big deal

* No sexual attraction to members of the opposite gender (same sex body) at puberty

* No attempt to appear as or assume the role of the target sex at or before age 26



It would be ludicrous to pretend these dinstinctions don't exist, and that all TS experience GID in the same way. It's obvious there are different paths.
I didn't come up with these off the top of my head. It's an assimilation of various documents on primary vs secondary.
I don't feel the last two criteria to be nearly as important as the top four. Many people delay transition for a myriad of reasons - that is not the biggest distinction between Primary and Secondary as most claim. Therefore, a homosexual TS transitioning at age 40 is primary provided they have the top four criteria.
If you had no knowledge of your true gender and your GID was not significant enough to disrupt your childhood, you are not primary.

The biggest distinction between Primary and Secondary is how early the GID was manifest.
This is regardless of what decade you grew up in, how 'cool' your folks were, whether or not you were raised in a so-called 'gender neutral' environment, how much personal strength you had, how athletic you were, gender of siblings, personal fortitude, ability to adapt, personality, sexual orientation, I could go on and on...

Example for clarity:

An adult TS starts to experience extreme GID, cannot function properly in any area of their life, and needs to transition. THIS is what a primary transsexual child feels growing up.
See the difference?

Bottom line - If you had no real problems being your birth sex during childhood, but all of sudden into adulthood, find you cannot just 'adapt' to being the wrong sex now, you are a Secondary Transsexual.

Boy, I do feel a debate coming on. >:D

 

I agree 101%, Nero.  BTW This wonderful site is fond of debates; differences of opinion are quite welcome here; however, nothing is absolute IMO.

tink :icon_chick:

Primary? Secondary? - what wonderful terms and classifications

Whatever happened to just plain confused and depressed.

Buffy

Quote from: Buffy on July 14, 2007, 12:38:55 PM
Whatever happened to just plain confused and depressed.

Buffy

That is just that Becky, plainly confused or depressed.  Nothing else.  BTW I am sure that I'm a primary transsexual.  I say this as what I feel myself to be and based on what I have experienced since childhood.  Obviously you are quite welcome to agree or disagree with my POV.  >:D

Okay, I'm out of here... ;D ;)

tink :icon_chick:

Nero, I don't really fit in either of your definition, so what I am?
You can be slight girly in childhood, without ever thinking of gender or feeling apart from the other girls (tomboys exist you know); that was me, I was singled out for bullying though, I never understood why until now.

Early puberty, didn't fit in the world of men, slowly drifted away from my female friends, had no real consciousness of gender or sexuality, just felt intensily alone and retreated in being a top student in school/athlete in the country, basicaly being a workoholic to escape looking at my self.

I had basicaly no introspection beyond 14 (when I wrote many poems I look at now with amazement). I was all about doing stuff that required little socialisation. Without socialisation, there is no gender.

I felt different from everyone, and I for me, I meant I was superior to everyone. A coping mechanism.

Anyway, that was me before age 18.

I think the distinction between primary and secondary is bogus.

If we put GID discomfort on a spectrum, those with the highest level of discomfort will not be able to even try to adapt (that's even more the case when adaption seems to be the only option available) or suppress it and will seek help as early as possible.

I never heard of transexuals before the age of 23 (1990), even if I had started to take birth control pills of my sister at 21!! Its only when I had a serie of big panic attacks at that age that led me to a hospital, that I was refered to a gender clinic.

At that time, the support groups mixed obvious CD's with TS's!!!. Even dealing with gender problems was in its infancy in Montreal, they are not well organized and supportive like now. The clinics were more like the Toronto clinic, very judgemental old men with antiquated ideas "evaluated" me (I felt really uncomfortable about that).

The whole messed up gender clinics and my own fear of being seen as a freak made me believe this whole process would lead me to suicide. I didn't feel strong enough to transition. So, in 1996, stopped self-medicating with very low doses of hormomes, and went into zombieland with no emotion and tried living as something (not a man, that's for sure) for 11 more years!!!

In the 90's information (especially late 90's) started to trickle and then pour in and that gave hope to many. The possibility of FFS also gave hope to many others that thought they would never pass (it gave hope to me, although by all standards I didn't need it to pass (to be beautiful, yes I needed it)!!).

I believe that with time, people with a slightly lower level of GID who in the past would have tried to bear it and would have contacted the gender clinics in their 30's and 40's, will transition in their 20's or teens.

If I had proper support, I would have transitioned in my very early 20's, that's a certainty. Society was what it was and I was what I was, I can't go back now!

Those that transition now in their 50's to 70's come from an area of such repression and desinformation that no correct assessment can be done without touching on the cultural environment in which they were brought up.

Why are there more children with GID now, something in the water, or parents more in tune with this. If my parent's had seen me with all my female friends in childhood, seen how I acted (which was different from all the other boys I knew) and had a the resource that exist now, who knows what would have happened?

I was have been an athletic tomboy into my teens, everything I did now look like that in retrospect.
I never felt the cast of gender falling upon me, until it impacted my social interactions, from
then on I dreamed of being with the girls, of being able to follow them, without any notion that
it was in any way possible (I thought it wasn't). If I had more of a notion of the existence of
TS and treatment, I KNOW I would have started self-medicating in my teens (like I did at 21).

Are there any *practical* differences in making this distinction between primary and secondary?

Are they treated differently?

Is one considered GID, and the other something else?

Or...?

~Kate~

Quote from: Kate on July 14, 2007, 01:04:42 PM
Are there any *practical* differences in making this distinction between primary and secondary?

Are they treated differently?

Is one considered GID, and the other something else?

Or...?

~Kate~

Not anymore, but there was a time when the medical community approached each of these terms differently.

tink :icon_chick:

Quote from: Nero on July 14, 2007, 02:49:25 PM

Quote from: Keira on July 14, 2007, 01:00:14 PM
If we put GID discomfort on a spectrum, those with the highest level of discomfort will not be able to even try to adapt (that's even more the case when adaption seems to be the only option available) or suppress it and will seek help as early as possible.

That's me. I could never even function in the female role at all. Everyone around me (especially other females) noticed it, and I was sent to more psychiatrists than I can count. I was too ashamed  and confused to admit what was wrong. I was even institutionalized for months at age 14 (my parents attempt to find the problem).
I knew nothing of ftms, or treatment options, I just tried to assume a male role without passing. I eventually felt so trapped and hopeless, I shot up every few hours to try to deal with being seen as female.
I could not live as female, I didn't know how, trying to observe and behave like other females was not working.

Call it Primary or Secondary, or some other terms altoghether - there is a very significant difference as to the onset and severity of GID.

I used to be all PC and pretend there were no Primary vs Secondary distinctions, but now I've had my belly full of clear secondaries questioning my manhood over silly things like having some feminine traits, sleeping with men, liking my genitalia, etc.

Whenever the subject of childhood GID comes up, I hear the same BS from secondaries - 'Some people are stronger than others, I had a good personality, my folks didn't push me one way or the other, blah, blah, blah, yada, yada, yada, etc, etc, etc,..'

Ok. Then why can't you now just rely on your herculean strength, your stellar personality, etc? Why is your GID now into adulthood, so severe you can longer just 'adapt'?

Why? I'll tell you why. You are only now into adulthood getting a taste of what primary transsexuals go through from birth.
I'm less than trans than you? If you're secondary, you'd best check yourself and not go there, because you don't even know.

I know clear and obvious secondaries in their 20s. I've read passages here from people who are transitioning 40+ who are clear primaries. Primary and Secondary has nothing to do with age of physical transition, but age of onset.
Being selfless, sacrificing your happiness for your family, and holding out as long as you can for their sake (which is a very feminine trait I might add) does not equate to Secondary.

There are TS who fall inbetween categories and that's fine.

Inspired rant over. :icon_raving: Ladies and gentlemen, Elvis has left the building.

You do realize that that I could kiss you now, don't you?  ;D ;)

Quote from: NeroWhy? I'll tell you why. You are only now into adulthood getting a taste of what primary transsexuals go through from birth.
I'm less than trans than you? If you're secondary, you'd best check yourself and not go there, because you don't even know.

Amen!

tink :icon_chick:

"Primary" and "Secondary " as applied to transsexuals are artificial labels of limited use invented by a member of the medical community to categorize us in terms of how old we were when treating our dysphoria became imperative.  The problem with these labels is that their application to a person has nothing to do with anything other than their age.  They neglect all other aspects and influences that may have played a part in our coming to terms with ourselves.

Besides being artificial they impose a hierarchical view of GID which causes a good deal of harm, imo, because some people use them as justification to pronounce themselves "more trans" than others and to pronounce judgment based on that spurious interpretation.

Labels are useful in limited ways but I reject practically all of them except, "human."

hugs & smiles
Emelye

Although I respect your opinion Emelye, I disagree.  There's a clear distinction  in the severity of GID among transsexuals.  This is the reason why I also disagree with the current DSM and HBSOC.  I think that the medical community has done "its best" to lump everyone in the same label, for it is obvious that some (by their own definition) do not fit there.

tink :icon_chick:

Quote from: Keira on July 14, 2007, 01:00:14 PM
If we put GID discomfort on a spectrum, those with the highest level of discomfort will not be able to even try to adapt...

I don't agree. This is why these "spectrums" bother me so much.

It's become almost fashionable to worship self-destructive behaviour such as suicide "attempts" and self-mutilation as indicators of the "depth of GID," but I only see it as a measure of self-destructive behaviour. Why some people end up self-destructive and others don't, I don't know, but I don't believe it's a reliable measure of GID whatsoever.

It's like suggesting that drug addicts and alcoholics suffer moreso than others. But IMHO, they just *react* differently to misfortune in their life. But the curious thing is, I bet they too would tell you that they're pain and life is worse than everyone else, as being victimized seems to be an important aspect of their self-image.

I think this worship of an inability to adapt sets a dangerous precedent, and encourages people towards this sort of behaviour in an attempt to prove to themselves and those around them that they're "real" TSs, justifying what they need to do.

The assumption of this theory seems to be that "high levels of GID" will cause someone to BOTH know they're TS from birth AND not be able to cope at all. But... I've always clearly, unambiguously known I was (or should have been) a girl, and yet I managed to eek out a reasonably enjoyable life. The TSism was always there TOO, torturing me 24/7, but I did what I could to enjoy the life handed to me. There were no suicide "attempts," no self-mutilations.

So which is it?

If my GID was high, that would explain my knowing from birth... but why then wasn't I self-destructive?

If my GID was low, that would explain my coping as best I could... but why did I know from birth I was a girl then?

Isn't it much more likely that the complex dance of variables of both environment AND psyche determine both when we realize who we are, AND how well we cope?

~Kate~

Based on what you have said here many times Kate, I would say that you fit what the DSM used to call "primary transsexualism".  Also, most people are confused about what this really means.  You coud be 100 years old, living your life as your birth sex but totally miserable on the inside.  You'd still be primary.  The terms primary and secondary were based on the level of unhappiness with your birth sex.  People show this unhappiness in so many different ways.  Some do try to mutilate themselves, others try to kill themselves and others like you, it seems, suffer the same agony in silence without lifting a single finger until later when the pain becomes so unbearable that the only solution is to come out and be who you really are. 

Furthermore, the term secondary tended to apply to those people who had a rather paraphillic tendency towards the thought of "becoming" female.

tink :icon_chick:

Quote from: Tink on July 14, 2007, 03:11:36 PM
There's a clear distinction  in the severity of GID among transsexuals.

Is there really a distinction in the severity of GID or is it just that some of us have been able to develop more effective or longer lasting coping strategies and some haven't?

A large portion of the scientific community's living is produced by their efforts at classification.  And classification is useful in many ways but it is limited.  It's when people try to stretch those labels/classifications into areas which they were not really meant to be applied that trouble begins.

Quote from: Tink on July 14, 2007, 03:11:36 PM
I think that the medical community has done "its best" to lump everyone in the same label, for it is obvious that some (by their own definition) do not fit there.

That's why we go to individual or small group therapy to help with our gender issues.  Some labels by necessity are applied broadly but it seems that the more wide the application, the more inaccurate they become.

smiles & hugs
Em

Quote from: Emelye on July 14, 2007, 03:43:35 PM

Is there really a distinction in the severity of GID or is it just that some of us have been able to develop more effective or longer lasting coping strategies and some haven't?

Yes, there is a big difference between a three year old boy who says bluntly "I'm a girl" and a fifty year old who is still coping because he/she is not sure of their gender identity.

tink :icon_chick:

Quote from: Nero on July 14, 2007, 03:54:13 PM

As I previously stated, neither path is more valid than the other, neither person is 'more trans' than another. But, there is a distinct difference which I am no longer willing to pretend doesn't exist.

In other words, you do know in your heart that there is a difference but for X reasons, you don't want to admit it.  Perhaps thinking that this fact makes you "less" of anything.  It is commonly called denial.  ;)  BTW Nero, the *you* is impersonal, so don't eat me alive... ;D :P

tink :icon_chick:

LOL  ;D actually I'm thinking here on my own.  Do you realize that transsexualism is the only medical condition that people argue to belong to?  I mean, you don't see people pulling their hair out and saying "I have a type 5 brain tumor"  "I am more cancerous than you"  On a bright note, this discussion is amusing somehow.  I think all of us are guilty that these terms are seen this way.  Some of us for believing in them, and some of us for letting it happen.

tink :icon_chick:

Quote from: Nero on July 14, 2007, 03:54:13 PM
I'm sick of having my identity questioned by secondaries who had a perfectly normal, uneventful, non-GID disrupted childhood, and a peachy keen adult life up until one day when they finally tasted dyshoria, and couldn't take it.

That's a bit different than what I was referring to.

I realize there are some TSs who didn't have a single GID thought until later in life, who obviously had normal childhoods untroubled by GID.

But there are also people who have *always* struggled with GID, yet who were determined to carve out some sort of happiness from a miserable, seemingly unsolvable situation. I don't think it's fair to penalize the adaptability and creativity of these people as indicators of "less GID," while rewarding self-destructive behaviour as a measurement of "more severe pain." Some primaries managed to avoid becoming self-destructive, and some didn't... but I don't think the ability to cope is anything more than a product of environment, creativity and adaptability.

From the outside, adaptable primaries and secondaries LOOK the same, since both SEEMED to be getting by reasonably well duriing childhood. But in reality, one was in spiritual agony because of the GID, while the other hadn't faced it yet.

On the other hand, I feel really bad for "secondaries," as it often seems like rather than suffer slowly for decades, they save up all the pain and feel it all at once when they DO figure out who they are. Kinda like the difference of watching someone die from a long-term illness versus a sudden, tragic accident. Both are horribly painful, but it's still *different* somehow.

I'm not saying I put much faith in these definitions at all anyway, but hypothetically speaking, IMHO, and all that...

~Kate~

Kate I think you've hit the nail on the nail (good aim?  :D )

Distress is not a sign of how much GID you've got, but it will lead to quicker treatment if you feel it. So, you could be in greater distress with less GID than someone else with a greater level of GID and better capacity to function in spite of it.

I've had to talk down several suicidal person's in my life, some more than once (I don't know why, it landed on me, that's some other question...) and the level of their suffering, was objectively a lot less than mine (less in length and in how it affected theird day to day lives); I had a the minute detail, I knew many them very very well.

Some people are distressed by very little, have constant anxiety about simply leaving the house, while others can go through war, get their arm cut off, see their mother get killed and still be the most adjuste people on the planet during and after (don't ask me how they do it, Its not possible for me to understand). Who suffered most, the person who can't deal with anything, or the war survivor. Its highly possibly its the person who can't deal with anything and that person will be the one going needing medication to move on in life.

We all deal with life's bumps in very different ways which are linked to our environment and how we have internalized it, and events along the road.

Sometimes, circumstances obliges you to be less distress. If there is no option at all, not a single minute one, you have two options, killing yourself or continuing on. For many people, even the most distressed, killing themselves is not an option (so what's left forging ahead!! Do they suffer less, or have less GID because they don't kill themselves or get themselves institutionalized). There is a certain instinct of preservation in most human being, even those under the greatest of stress.

transsexualism is a jarring condition that produces the same syptoms in the individuals involved as seen in any other traumatic or catastrophic event.

Some people have the coping skills to adapt to the situation, while others simply cannot.
This is obvious in the way a person's own GID manifests itself in their life. Is it when they are young, or after they are much older? When a person becomes aware of their GID, can they put off treatment, or do they have to do something right away?

If we are going to differentiate different levels of transsexualism to embellish those differences in coping skills, to deal with an impossible situation, than I think you need more than primary and secondary.

Childhood: the child never attempts to adapt to their assigned birth sex role, and in the correct family setting, transitions by early adulthood. These cases are rare indeed. They need gentle counseling and supportive parents.

Primary: recognizes their own GID, seeks out help, and is able to finish transition by the early thirties, once their program begins. Probably never ingratiates themself with their own sexual peers during that time. Sexual experimentation is brief or non-existant, even if they have a partner. These people require very little in the way of counseling except if they have fallen into prostitution as a means to finance their situation.

Adult: Becomes increasingly uncomfortable in their life role at work and in their private life. Either has begun to amass family and compensatory material possessions, or has become a hermit. In most trauma victims, people tend to either completely withdraw, or overindulge in an attempt to compensate for their loss. This USED to be the classic definition for a TS before the advent of the internet. These individuals manage to balance their work load and their transition schedule, and finish by their mid-forties. These people probably require the most counseling, because they reach a tipping point as to whether they really want to transition and give up their comfortable life, or whether they are uncomfortable enough to find their own life path in middle age.

Secondary: These individuals fall into a pattern of regret like most people their age. They have probably lived in the role of their assigned gender for so long that they have forgotten what it was like as a child. If they slowly cross over gender lines, they will spend considerable amounts of time seeking acceptance in the queer community before moving on to a new life.
Or, they will discover that they cannot and will not give up the material and familial comforts of life they have accumulated. Either way, these individuals have a large pool of regret they  have to deal with along with the normal transition requirements. These people require less counseling than the adult group because most people by this age view transitioning as a fantasy rather than as a reality. The exception being someone that falls into crisis due to other circumstances in their life ~ a catalyst that pushes them toward a transition outcome.

In other words, those with the best coping skills will last the longest as their assigned gender role, and those with the worst, will do the opposite. I am talking about survivability skills here.
I'm talking about the ability of a person to cope with living in the wrong role. If they cannot deal with the demands, they will transition or die.

I just don't think that  a before/after category thing works. What is the age grouping?  20?  30? 35?

If I had to do that, than my definitions would be:

a person that never accepts their assigned gender role at birth, never experiments with sex before transitioning, and never experiences what it feels like to be accepted as the assigned gender role at birth is a primary transsexual.  I have know a few.

Everyone else is a secondary transsexual.

Wow.

I don't know what to say about this because I've seen several people in my own experiences, who would mostly fit in a vague region between 'Primary' and 'Secondary', but not really inside each category. I feel like we are falling into the same trap of assuming essentially a binary dichotomy, when there's a lot of variation in reality. Every person is a bit different.

Personally, while I had inklings in childhood, I felt the dysphoria really hit in high school, where in all the social drama and interactions put my feelings into perspective... so more and more I felt I was just playing the wrong part. Until eventually, I shut down. Really, it seems like most of the people I know (i.e. college-aged) felt it to varying degrees during mid to late childhood, though not really strongly enough to know what it represented (wanting to be a girl), figured it out during adolescence, discovered TSism in the mid/late-teens/early 20s, and are transitioning now during college/post-grad years. Where do we place? "1.5-ary transsexuals"? "Vague middle-grounders"?

Just taking transpeople and dividing them into two groups of primary and secondary seems incredibly arbitrary.

Edit: If any distinction exists, I think Thundra's post just before mine is probably nearest. Either you adapt/try for some (varying) period of time, or you don't at all. I don't know what real difference it makes, but most other suggestions are essentially just posturing ;p

Quote from: Thundra on July 14, 2007, 05:15:17 PM
a person that never accepts their assigned gender role at birth...

I'm not sure I understand what that means? They don't accept their assigned gender ROLE or their assigned gender IDENTITY?

I never had any questions about needing to be a girl, but as a small child what was I supposed to do? I didn't care about clothes, I didn't equate genitals with my identity, I didn't equate girly activities with BEING a girl, and I knew that no matter how much I claimed to be a girl, no one would take me seriously and TREAT me as one. No, I was a born a boy, I was stuck, and I had to live out a life suffering that paradox without a solution.

Quotenever experiments with sex before transitioning...

I'm not sure I get this either... because primaries aren't attracted to women? Or because they don't want to use their assigned equipment for sex?

~Kate~

By that definition, I'm very close to primary, 1 couple relationship and 3 intercourse in 39 years (in the year prior to transition, the bad experience in spite of loving the person there was the last straw!), no ability to truly live a male life all my life and been in depression at various levels since 14 (25 years of depression and moodiness, that's a LONG LONG TIME to be depressed).

But, still I think the term is kind of pulled out of thin air.

I think there's GID at various levels, variable coping skills and the environment (supportive, etc) which all interact to indicate when the person will transition and with what urgency they will want to do it.

It seems the more i read the more i get confused, help me to clarify some concepts please.

From Nero:

QuoteUpset by his or her sex, disturbed in his or her play and school activities

How much?
We could start from one extreme where someone totally hates being of a determined sex, to the other end where someone just believe he's not really masculine/feminine and that it would have been better for him/her to have been born of a different sex.

Also when you describe the secondary case, it seems that the person works perfectly or without any relevant disfunction until the age of 26. Is that really possible? I find it hard to believe that transexualism is something that can in its totally "pop up" only late in life. Maybe i misunderstood are you saying that the secondary before the end of their puberty never:
1) Wished to be of the opposite sex (without actually considering themselves of that sex)
2) thought they were somewhat feminine/masculine despite their natural assigned sex
3) had any case of gender dysphoria
4) manifested their will to change sex

from tink

QuoteFurthermore, the term secondary tended to apply to those people who had a rather paraphillic tendency towards the thought of "becoming" female.

This sound very close to the concept of ->-bleeped-<- except fot the "rather". What i've been asking to myself lately if a paraphilic tendency is enough to bring someone to GID, i'm still debating.

Anyway Tink from what you said so far it seems that you believe that basically the primary says "I am" (woman/man) while the secondary says "I wish to be" (woman/man). Is that correct?

Thank the goddess. it doesn't matter.  All that matters is who one is.  Primary, secondary, smorgasbord.  What is your identity, now, today, this minute, next week, next year? 

Whatever your age, what ever your sexual attraction, who are you? 

No one is any more or less a transsexual because of the age at which he or she realized something wasn't right in genderland or because he or she tried to live a life expected by others. 

I can trace my feelings to age 9, yet I didn't admit to being anything more than a lingerie collector until age 58.  At age 70, I'm 7 years postop.  All that is important is the fact that I am comfortable in my own body.  The old feelings of not being macho enough of not being a successful man are gone.  I am a successful woman, and my body matches my brain. 

Sorry, Ann; sorry, Ray; sorry Michael.  It really was about gender, not about sex.  And no, sorry guys, I am not lying to myself about it.

Primary?  Secondary?  HSTS?  AGTS?  Who cares?  Why argue over labels?  Take what you need and leave the rest.

Work with your therpist; work with your doctors; resolve non-GID issues; live healthy, and save your money as best you can.  Achieve what works for you.  Find happiness.  It's all around us.

Robyn

If GID HIT in adulthood, then they had no need to adapt it earlier!!

I'm talking about many people who transitioned in their 30's who have been tortured from puberty onward, not someone where GID popped out of the toaster all done.

Nero, they do exist, in my support group, 3-4 are like that. Many actually have many psychological issues because they had to cope with this. One was in anger therapy for a year because of that (she had fit of uncontrolable rage at the whole world).

One way I coped was by dissassociating from myself. Basicly seeing my life from the outside, like a movie, not feeling ANYTHING, when I did feel something, it was a deep blues and I soon retreated into my dissociative state. Many trauma victim (and GID is one) have devellopped many coping skills.

Still, no matter how bleak my life was, and I can tell you it was plenty bleak, for whatever reason, I never was suicidal. Don't quite know the reason, there must have been a flicker of hope somewhere inside.

Quote from: Shiranai Hito on July 14, 2007, 05:40:45 PM

Anyway Tink from what you said so far it seems that you believe that basically the primary says "I am" (woman/man) while the secondary says "I wish to be" (woman/man). Is that correct?

Someone here said once:

"how you take comments/opinions is what you TRULY believe in your heart". So I will leave you to answer your own question. ;)

Now, not to change the topic of the thread or anything, but I also find it incredibly fascinating when people talk about their enormous emotional strength and say things like "I am TS but don't plan to ever transition" "I am strong"  really? ha! well, if people are soooooo strong emotionally, they could deal with everything, couldn't they? including transition.

tink :icon_chick:

Quote from: Nero on July 14, 2007, 05:42:07 PM
Posturing my arse! For the zillionth time, this is not about adaptibility. Have we become so PC we won't even admit there are different manifestations and levels of GID? For the millionth time, where the hell is a secondary's phenomenal adaptibility now that they need to transition?

My point is that we're putting down an awful lot of arbitrary lines. What is a secondary? Someone who feels it at age 8 or later? 10 or later? 15 or later? 20 or later? There's a thousand ways to define it, and it's too complicated for that. Can you really make broad sweeping generalizations like that?

I don't fall into the primary or the secondary classification either.


I had a normal childhood, puberty didn't bother me a lot. In fact, I wanted to be taller and I liked the facial hair because I can than finally feel fit in with the boys and they wouldn't hit on me anymore.

The boys called me a girl and they bullied me, but I didn't think I was. I thought i was just being myself, a normal polite boy who was very different from other boys.

Oh , and i would wrap my head with a towl, pretending that I have long hair. But that didn't mean I thought I was a girl.  I've always admired females and I would want to be like them, but I never thought that I was a girl trapped in a boy's body.


Am I a dragqueen? No, I don't care about wearing female clothes. I don't really care about make up either.

I never felt fit in and I was always depressed because I don't have any male friends. I've always liked guys, and I admired girls, but I never thought I could be a girl and I never felt that I was a girl.

I was okay with being a boy, but social interaction made me hate my gender very much because I don't like the male social role and I've always wanted to be the "female" in the "same sex body" relationship. (I've always liked guys)

Does that mean I am a homosexual transsexuals? I don't know. I don't think so.

I just start hating being a guy more and more, but that was only after I turned 19.

I remembered wishing I had a vagina at 13, but that was it, I didn't feel discomfort with my body, but I did wish I had a vagina because I couldn't use my part and I don't want to use my part in any sexual activity.

So am i primary or secondary or a wannabe transsexual? Meh.

Quote from: Nero on July 14, 2007, 05:59:24 PMA primary feels the same intense dysphoria in childhood that a secondary never feels until adulthood.
How come nobody else can see the huge difference?
I'm not saying it's carved in stone. I did say that some TS fall between the two categories.

The reason I just don't see it is because I, and many others, don't really fit either one? I really don't think its a direct dichotomy, with a small middle ground. There's an awful lot of people like me, that I know of. There's a broad spectrum of trans individuals, with a lot of different levels of dysphoria at different times of their lives.

Quote from: NeroHow come nobody else can see the huge difference?

Hmmmmm do you want me to answer that?  >:D  You know why. ;) ;D

tink :icon_chick:

Quote from: Nero on July 14, 2007, 05:59:24 PM
And no, this wouldn't be an issue if some secondaries I know would quit insisting they are primary and shut their mouth about their herculean strength and stellar personalities which prevented them from feeling much dysphoria until well into adulthood.

I don't know if anyone is suggesting that emotional strength or adaptability has anything to do with when one FEELS their GID? I mean... how can anyone struggle to not feel something they don't know is there?

My suggestion was that circumstances, both internal and external, dictate how someone copes with their GID once they know about it, whether that's at birth or when 105...

~Kate~

Quote"how you take comments/opinions is what you TRULY believe in your heart". So I will leave you to answer your own question

It might be as you say, althought i don't know why i'd rather believe this.

The theory of Nero is a totally different story and tends to believe that GID is what really matters.

Having experienced GID in my puberty i should be primary according to Nero, yet i think i pretty much do not satisfy any other requirement.

Quote"I am TS but don't plan to ever transition" "I am strong"  really? ha! well, if people are soooooo strong emotionally, they could deal with everything, couldn't they? including transition.

Do someone that didn't transition qualifies as transexual?
I don't think it's matter of strength anyway. It's just a "give up", nothing more.

Quote from: Shiranai Hito on July 14, 2007, 06:12:04 PM


Do someone that didn't transition qualifies as transexual?
I don't think it's matter of strength anyway. It's just a "give up", nothing more.

Some people tend to believe that it does.  ::)  Anyway I don't want to change the topic of the thread.

tink :icon_chick:

Posted on: July 14, 2007, 06:17:46 PM

---

BTW thank you for mentioning the Barbara Walters special, Nero  :).  Everyone should watch it; I posted it in the Just for us forums.


Posted on: July 14, 2007, 06:47:00 PM

---

Welcome to primary transsexualism ladies and gentlemen.  Hell on earth since I can remember.

Here's the link for the Barbara Walter's Special:

https://www.susans.org/forums/index.php/topic,13483.0.html

Enjoy!

:icon_chick:

Nero, looking at my life according to your criteria, I'm a Chinese dinner. Some from Column A and some from Column B. I don't fit neatly into either.

Quote from: Nero on July 14, 2007, 12:30:53 PM
Primary:
* Recognizes their true gender no later than first grade (age 7 or so). I say this because if they were not aware of something wrong and had no knowledge of their gender before, a classroom situation would surely bring it out. (independent of one's upbringing/doesn't matter whether raised in 'gender neutral' environment or not)

My behavior was cross-gender beginning from my first year of preschool, when I was 4. However, I did not articulate "I'm a girl." I was constantly hassled by everyone (parents, teachers, boys who beat me up) for nonconformity to my assigned gender role from the age of 4 until 8, when I knuckled under.

Quote* Upset by his or her sex, disturbed in his or her play and school activities

I never liked or understood male activities, I preferred to play hopscotch with girls instead of football with boys. I received constant pressure to conform. Unable to be male, and not allowed to join the girls, I became deeply isolated. I felt intense loathing and disgust for my male genitalia.

Quote* As an older child - failure in his or her relations with peers, isolation, confusion, refusal to go to school

Yep, that was me all over. All-boys high school (my parents gave me no choice) was a living hell, I was isolated from everyone, contemplated suicide, and was sent to a psychologist. I was gradually persuaded to behave in ways that didn't get me hated and rejected by everyone.

Quote* Sexual attraction to members of the opposite gender (same sex body) at puberty

I engaged in consensual sexual activity with boys when I was ages 12-13. I even tried to seduce one of them; it was my first time experiencing sexual arousal with another person.

QuoteSecondary:

* No knowledge of true gender in childhood, may not even recognize anything wrong

Not exactly. I never distinctly articulated girlhood, even to myself. Only when going back over the memories of my cross-gender behavior (how I instinctively tried to be a girl) did I fit the puzzle pieces together. I definitely knew something was wrong, but was never able to define or express it, nor did I connect it with gender.

Quote* Puberty is no big deal

I have no memories of puberty per se causing me conscious distress, but I did become a very disturbed child soon after.

Quote* No attempt to appear as or assume the role of the target sex at or before age 26

I was 45 when I came out, and began strongly identifying and presenting as a woman. I had felt desire to be a woman on and off from my early 20s, through my 30s; in my early 40s the desire became consistently stronger and stronger.

So by your criteria, I'm in between. From the perspective of my life, I cannot see the two as separate, distinct categories, but as a continuum.

- IF GID strenght is a spectrum (which seemingly it is, seeing as high variable it is and how it increases with time (to increase, it must be other than binary)).
- Onset beyond a threashold clinical level is variable (childhood to old age)
- How you react to it depends on individual's particular case, environment.

The only one that fits secondary by your definition Nero, is adult onset, whenever that is, with no clinical discomfort prior to that (it had no impact at all on how they saw themselves or how they lived their lives). They plainly assumed a male or female gender role without any reserve.

If I stay with this limited definition, secondaries often are CD's earlier in life.
MTF TS that have strong GID are most often NOT CD's unless they think of transitioning (in my case because I found no relief at all in just dressing, just more anxiety).

If you did not want to change with boys (something we talked earlier here) when you where 10, there's a good chance your GID was not secondary by that definition. Clearly significant GID existed even at that point and possibly this was the only real manifestation of it. Maybe you were not strong, just lucky that gender for you had little importance to your daily life for whatever reason. You were a tomboy, girls accepted you as theirs, you had an androgynous appearance, etc.

Nero, I understand your frustration at judgemental come lately's poopooing you, but their ->-bleeped-<-ness doesn't change the fact that GID is very complex indeed and reducing it to a binary at this point, is premature. Any affirmation about it, even mine,  ;) is way premature; even though any such certainty would sure validate us. Don't mind the moron's TS or otherwise that tell you, you don't deserve to be you. You know how long you suffered to get to this point, how much you are worth. HUG!  Take Care.

Quote from: Nero on July 14, 2007, 08:58:41 PM
Puberty is a major factor. I just don't feel a child has much dysphoria if they're not extremely distressed upon turning into an adult of the opposite gender.

I wonder if puberty is in general more difficult for females, as they REALLY begin to change: breasts, periods, curves... things that are all just impossible to ignore or hide.

Males get facial hair and a deeper voice. Not much fun either, but probably not as humiliating as a female's changes must be.

~Kate~

Quote from: Nero on July 14, 2007, 08:58:41 PM

The white man can't fathom what it's like to be in the black man's shoes, and his attitude is arrogant and condescending.

i also view it as offensive when someone tries to trivialize my feelings and make them sound "secondary".

Quote from: Nero on July 14, 2007, 08:58:41 PM


So true. I've always thought that, but didn't want to dismiss an mtfs suffering as I wasn't in their shoes

puberty is puberty for males, females or whatever, but only a true transsexual who has experienced this turmoil will know.

i wasn't referring to any of your posts nero.  as a matter of fact, i [agree] with everything you've said.  as a primary transsexual myself, i laugh at some of the posts i've read here (not yours).  transsexualism is a serious condition.  you just don't wake up a rainy tuesday & decide to have a sex change.  those people you talk about aren't transsexual on  my book either.  they can argue all they want but i won't see them as ts. 

Quote from: Nero on July 14, 2007, 10:00:04 PM
So true. I've always thought that, but didn't want to dismiss an mtfs suffering as I wasn't in their shoes.

Me neither, and to be fair I should mention that I never got much body hair, muscles or the typical male "build" in puberty, so it wasn't particularly traumatic for me. But for those that did, I can imagine it being quite a nightmare. Same for body dysphoria in general: I don't hate my body with quite the passion many others do, but only because it was never particularly male-looking to me.

But that kinda goes to show the dangers of generalizing "symptoms" and specific discomforts to make these primary and secondary distinctions.

~Kate~

The boys in school called me "girl" and "pu$$y" as they shoved me around. I cut all my phys ed classes in high school because I could not believe I was expected to get naked in front of the boys, I was horrified by that requirement. Puberty was bad for me because the girls quit being my friends and I just wanted to be friends with girls. I suffered so much from GID in childhood and adolescence and adulthood too, but didn't know what GID was or recognize it in myself until my 40s.

That some young kids assert their cross-gender identity early, while I kept mine bottled up, I attribute to outward-directed vs. inward-directed personality traits, so this is not a measure of transsexual authenticity. Some people are highly assertive and outgoing. I was not, I have always been easily intimidated, avoided conflict, and lived very inward and withdrawn. I don't feel I was strong at all. My cousin is very outgoing, not very intellectual or reflective, easily ingratiated himself with girls in childhood, and I was always jealous of him being admitted to female society while I longed to gain admittance but didn't know how. When he grew up, he came out as gay, and this fits the childhood GID pattern well-- most of them grow up to be gay men, not trans. By contrast I was shy, intellectual, thought about stuff too much, and isolated myself because dealing with society was too painful. So how come I'm trans and he ain't?

It bothers me that "secondary" TS have sometimes been stigmatized as not being really TS enough, put in an inferior category, given a poor prognosis for transition. I always thought I'd be classified as secondary simply because of late onset, though in this discussion I see it's more nuanced than that and I'm probably in between.

The main thing I'm satisfied about is, this is not a simple binary. Take that, Bailey.

Quote from: regina on July 15, 2007, 12:29:54 AM
I'm not trivializing ftm transition and what you and others go through, but please don't do that in the other direction because that really stretches credulity. On average, transwomen go through more costly, more painful, more complex transitions than ftms do (except for the very few ftms that go through phalloplasty) and are subject to far more social hostility than ftms. Kindly don't minimize that to fit a neat theory.

My apologies, and you'll notice that both Nero and I backed away a bit from what we originally said and said we don't want to minimize what many M2Fs do go through.

Yes, if I had grown any taller, sprouted hair down my back and chest, grown bulging muscles and a male physique... puberty would have been truly terrible, as I'm sure it was for those who suffered through that sorta thing. As it was, I didn't, so puberty wasn't a huge difference for me aside from a deeper voice and sparse beard. And sexually, I was already getting aroused by accidental physical stimulation (not something I should explain in this section, lol) from a very young age, so puberty didn't even mark the beginning of that embarassment for me.

My only real point here being that how much one hated puberty isn't a reliable indicator of GID discomfort or pain.

~Kate~

Blanchard is a hack who sadly was on the writing committee for the DSM-IV TR

Bailey's book was not only slammed by TS but also nearly everybody in the medical and psychological community who worked on gender identity issues. 

These terms primary and secondary are now widely dismissed. 

The truth is we are still operating under a Blanchard system.  There is a good possibility in the future it will be tossed though.  NOBODY likes it. 

Autogyphelia needs to be tossed in the wastebin.  Period.  In fact anything regarding any Blanchard theory needs to be abandoned.  The man was a hack, if you read more into his Toronto gender clinic you would realize this.  He is easily the most destructive force to TS in the history of the diagnosed disease.  While HB may have not completely understood us, he was on the right track. 

Also do definitions of primary and secondary, especially dating at what point when transitions (which is garbage as well). 

The whole recognizing the true gender no later than age 7 (to be honest most people who write on primary put it before age 13, not 7) needs to be abandoned as well.  Many TS do not understand that real gender consciousness is not cemented until puberty, plain and simple, even the older scientist understood that PUBERTY played more a role in gender awareness than early childhood, most gender variant kids do not end up being TS, PLAIN AND SIMPLE, they end up being gay, the only ones who end up being TS are those who cement at early stages of puberty, and several end up with true gender consciousness when there was gender confusion or being unaware.  Gender consciousness on a real scale, does not happen until then, its the cementing event.    Also who you are attracted to should not play into things at ALL. 

Sorry my little rant.  Age of onset SHOULD NOT be a criteria, and when you divide people with such arbitrary  criteria, you get into the terms of absurdity and the type of things that have hurt many TS.  And honestly its a level of high elitism. 

Sorry I hate the primary and secondary criteria.  I hate the age of onset factors.  Just because it applies to you does not mean it applies to everybody.  Also it demonstrates a high level of elitism.

There is also the fact that there are a large number of TS who do not fall into either of these categories.  I find myself closer to the Benjiman scale (I am asexual for example) V or VI than I do the primary and secondary criteria.  I also have found people that would confuse the hell out of these classifications. 

There was a wonderful pre-dsm-V paper that was written that basically stated the Blanchard and Benjiman type models need to be abandoned because the variations were so wide and that treatment was beneficial one way or the other, and that these classifications served no good in the first place.

I agree with that.

Abandon primary and secondary.  Plain and simple its a crap idea.  It was the smartest thing done in the SoC Sixth Version.

Also Autogyphelia does not exist.  It was something that was based on crap science.

The entire primary and secondary thing is convoluted.  Believe it if you will but I do think less of ANY TS who buys into ANY of Blanchards crap theories, be it autogyphelia, primary and secondary TS, etc.  It demonstrates either elitism, or in many cases FLAT OUT IGNORANCE, of the principles of these ideas and the history of the man behind them.  The man and his ideas have been extremely damaging to the TS community.  The Toronto gender clinic was a house of horrors towards TS.  And he literally needs to be called out for the transmysoginistic hack he was.  Those TS who buy into his theories need to be educated in detail why the man, and ideas of primary and secondary TS, and the criteria they set in place are not only dated, but completely offensive. 

Everybodies experience is different. By discounting the experiences of another person and being elitist.  Also those categories and the criteria are far too narrow, and some (like the age of onset) have very little to do with ones gender identity.  Not everybody who is TS knows is conscious of their gender by age 7.  Sorry, for some of us we knew something was wrong since early in life but could not figure things out till puberty.  That is just the way it was.

Also in many peoples cases they hid.  They did not act out.

Sorry. About the rant, this primary and secondary thing upsets me more than anything else, and I can't believe there are TS so ignorant of the history and the terms, and why they are so offensive that they buy into it just because they fit the terms perfectly.  There is no primary and secondary TS, sorry, some people fit neither term.  There is also no such thing as autogyphelia.  Abandon that idea, its HIGHLY offensive.

Seriously, that is one of my biggest problems with this board, some people are holding onto dated and offensive ideas, if you even mentioned on another TS board you would get general outrage, and for good reason, certain other TS boards are better educated on this issue and the history (try mentioning this on trueselves for example, you will get attacked by nearly ever girl on that board).

The modern thought amoung most gender specialist in the US is these terms are CRAP, antiquitated, offensive and need to be abandoned.   

Although, I've noted that in general a binary classification, or any classification of TS, is bound to leave many outside any classification, it is intriguing that some don't have any GID at all (I'm not talking repressed GID here), until it pops up later from seamingly nowhere.

From a scientific point of view, when things happen like that, there must be some factor involved. What is it? Why was GID latent. As I said, intriguing.
It does not make these TS less valid, but it does make them very different from most. In a sense, they live a different trauma, its like being a man all your life certain of your identity and then waking up with a body that suddenly feels alien to you (instant puberty?).

Quote from: Amy T. on July 15, 2007, 01:05:57 AM
most gender variant kids do not end up being TS, PLAIN AND SIMPLE, they end up being gay...

Agreed, as I've noticed (IMHO) that it seems effeminate (which I consider different than feminine) behaviour is more likely hard-wired into gays than TSs.

Quotethe only ones who end up being TS are those who cement at early stages of puberty...

I disagree. I absolutely, clearly, umambiguously *always* knew I needed to be a girl as far back as my memories go, which is to around 3 or 4. Puberty didn't cement anything for me. It was old news by then.

The weird thing is at that young age I had *nothing* to validate or support my feelings. I wasn't particularly feminine (or masculine really), I didn't hate my genitals, I never thought I WAS a girl... as I knew I was physically a boy. Whatever my GID is, it stands alone, independent of any evidence or symptoms, and was just always THERE... it was never a "conclusion" I came to through reverse-engineering of my "discomfort" or anything.

If anything, it's THAT distinction that I'd make between primaries and secondaries... though I REALLY wish we could find terms that were less scale-oriented. And in the end, we seem to arrive at the same place, so I don't know why it matters anyway. I picture GID like a seed: in some people, it's already sprouted by birth.. and in others it just takes time to germinate.

QuoteAlso Autogyphelia does not exist.

The phenomena of feeling aroused when one imagines themselves a woman certainly exists, but his conclusions as to WHY are kinda nuts. Fantasizing about having sex with a guy as a genetic female certainly turns me on like nothing else. But why wouldn't it if I'm really a heterosexual female in my mind?

Quotethis primary and secondary thing upsets me more than anything else, and I can't believe there are TS so ignorant of the history and the terms, and why they are so offensive that they buy into it just because they fit the terms perfectly.

People will be people. Some need that sorta thing to justify their identity, some don't. It's not just with TSism, you see it everywhere with "real" christians, "real" americans, "real" republicans, etc.

Frustrating yes, but sometimes you just gotta shrug and let them have their ego candy.

~Kate~

But, Nero, a classification system that excludes most, how good can it be?
And in the end, does it really matter unless we're actually grading people on pain suffered? Which I would never want to do, because I don't even want to recall the painfull events in my life.

Everybody with GID deserves to be happy in their own skin; I'll ammend this to being something that everyone deserves.

Nero, those that torment you are jerks, that they are TS is just incidental, please do not let them get to you; they could be alien platypus's from the planet "look at me" and they would act the same. When you let people get to you, its not them who suffers, its you; they don't care.

Nero.
No offense.  Its alot easier societally to transition from FtM, and generally speaking alot easier growing up.  Most transmen I know recognize this, but they are in communities with larger trans populations.  Being butch in a girls world does not carry the same consequences of being effeminate in a boys world. 

Also do not discount that there is a high level of PHYSICAL abuse that several MtF face growing up, the ones who could not conform no matter what.

I was constantly picked on and beat up when I was kid, because while I was confused about my own gender I was extremely effeminate in several ways. 

As much as FtMs complain about female gender conformity and being ignored by  girls for being a tomboy.  I have yet to meet one who who can match the horror stories of MtFs had to go through during childhood.  Being even a little bit effeminate in a boys world is a straight trip to physical hell. 

I had to put up through this my entire childhood.  It went beyond hating haircuts for me.  The toys and clothing of being a boy were not that bad, but the hell was directly related to the entire fact if you went outside the gender spectrum in any way, you were forced to deal with physical hell.  I was still a gender variant as a kid, really confused more than anything, because of that my behaviors and emotional variations were punished with constant physical and verbal torment.  I have heard FtMs complain and I have heard MtFs complain.  Being tortured physically from ages 5-13 is what I had to deal with. Being punished physically by my parents for how I acted didn't help either.  I could go on and on and on.


Oddly enough it was when I started to express myself more and embrace my gender identity even a tiny bit more in HS that things improved a little bit. 

Also I can get into how its easier to transition and how there is not the level of hatred towards transmen than transwomen.   As it was stated we are more likely to be subjects of hate crimes, more likely to be harassed, and more likely to be the subject of ridicule.   I highly suggest you pick up Whipping Girl by Julia Serano.  Generally speaking there is a devaluing of femininity in this culture once you get into the world of adults.  I could go on how in even the queer "community" we are devalued and receive alot of crap, while transmen are generally accepted by most in lesbian culture, so they are at least generally accepted in one community. Transwomen...well we have no real community and we are generally an isolated lot.   

Even with regards to not passing its not as bad.  Even with regards to safety being regarded as a "butch women" does not carry the same risks of being identified as a transwoman or MtF transsexual, or being seen as "a man in a dress".  Passing for most transwomen carries a burden of safety that keeps most transwomen isolated and actually necessitates the level of surgery we undergo.

I could go on.  But the reason why many transwomen have issues with transitioning often does stem from a history of peer abuse that most transmen never encounter. 

Quote from: Nero on July 15, 2007, 01:48:06 AM

Quote from: Kate on July 15, 2007, 01:39:32 AMI picture GID like a seed: in some people, it's already sprouted by birth.. and in others it just takes time to germinate.

Exactly and there is a difference between the two. Why are people so offended by that fact?

Because some of the "always knew" people often insinuate that the "figured it out later" people aren't *real* TSs like they are?

~Kate~

Quote from: Kate on July 15, 2007, 02:05:27 AM

Quote from: Nero on July 15, 2007, 01:48:06 AM

Quote from: Kate on July 15, 2007, 01:39:32 AMI picture GID like a seed: in some people, it's already sprouted by birth.. and in others it just takes time to germinate.

Exactly and there is a difference between the two. Why are people so offended by that fact?

Because some of the "always knew" people often insinuate that the "figured it out later" people aren't *real* TSs like they are?

~Kate~

Exactly and they like to make these clear determinations and classifications, when the reality is its the same conditions,  there is a stink of elitism and exclusivity that is offensive.  They place a high importance on onset, when it gets down to it onset is not important AT ALL in modern clinical thinking.  Most therapists and gender specialist can care less about onset, its only important really to understanding the patient. 

I could go on, the difference really matters very little.  Yet the always knew people thinks onset means more than it actually does.  Everybody is a little differant, and by stressing onset and these primary/secondary constructs they are buying into concepts that don't matter.

And the truth is there is more than "two differant types" this effects everybody in different ways and using onset as a criteria for anything is completely devaluing that individuals history and experience.  There are alot of shades of grey that primary and secondary concepts do not cover. 

Like I said.  I think the modern ICD-10 definition is probably the best one for TS.  It is plain, it is clear, and it is simple and it really does not conform to the convoluted concepts of primary and secondary and other Blanchard style concepts.  The definition is also all inclusive and does not place absurd importance of onset.  Its also the one that is probably most considerate that everybodies personal history is UNIQUE. 

Because the reality is consciousness about gender is far from hard and fast.  Because everybody has different set of experiences putting something in these narrow Blanchard definitions just leads to a devaluing of the individual. 

Quote from: Amy T. on July 15, 2007, 02:14:01 AM
Exactly and they like to make these clear determinations and classifications, when the reality is its the same conditions,  there is a stink of elitism and exclusivity that is offensive. 

And as an "always knew," I'll admit it's even tempting for me to fall into that attitude, as I find myself thinking, "how could anyone not realize such a fundamental truth from the start?"

Then I remember how my sexuality "evolved." I was basically just seriously confused when growing up about who I was attracted to and what I needed. In hindsight, it's sort of a "duh!" thing, but at the time it was buried under so much other junk it was just impossible to see it clearly. It was only later, when I really started to untangle the mess trying to cope with GID had made, that I "figured out" what I needed. And yet, I bet there are people reading this right now thinking, "yea, RIGHT, like that's something you can not know from the beginning!"

So I can imagine GID itself playing out the same way in many people. Even if I am just a secondary heterosexual ;)

~Kate~

None of us were in anyone else's shoes so we can't truly know what they experienced. Primary, secondary, M2F, F2M, etc, perhaps we could all agree on one thing, that growing up gender variant was pure hell.

What level of hell? 1st, 2nd, 7th? Hey, regardless of what level of hell, it's @#$%^&* hot down there! ;) :P

zythyra

QuoteThe phenomena of feeling aroused when one imagines themselves a woman certainly exists, but his conclusions as to WHY are kinda nuts. Fantasizing about having sex with a guy as a genetic female certainly turns me on like nothing else. But why wouldn't it if I'm really a heterosexual female in my mind?

Kate, the more i read about you the more i feel surprised how your story and background are similar to mine.

And at the same time the more i read about what Nero had to live with, or what Tink suffered in her past i really feel there is a major difference to my case. So i can't help but endorse their perspective and recognize that a distinction should be made.

However i wouldn't really think the key factor has anything to do with the time GID manifests, what really seem to be different to me for primary are the following points.

1) A clear gender identity in childhood (which is opposed to the genetic sex).

I think that for a child having such a strong and clear gender identity is something really unusual and amazing, expecially considering how even in adulthood many people still are confused. Even if we accept the theory of "a girl trapped in a boy's body" and viceversa, i don't think everyone would go as far as to constantly claim to be of the opposite sex. Shy and remissive personalities would just shut in themselves, forcing themsleves to adapt, and constantly debating about their true gender identity, more bent to believe what others tell to them rather to believe on what they truly feel.

2) The total (or almost total) inability to adapt to the genetic sex role (may be that because someone actually feels to be incapable or because someone shows a very strong will to don't adapt).

The fact that many transexuals managed to live for a long time in their natural assigned sex, while being accepted from society, due to the fact they are well capable to conceal their true identity, shows a certain degree of adaptability. There might be a very wide spectrum of different ways to adapt. The "zombie mode" described by Keira is an example, but there might be some other ways with a higher degree a social functionality. In this case someone might even live with the belief that he/she can somewhat function in the role that society impose to him/her, even so not in the best way, and in a sort of miserable life.
Unlikewise those that consider themselves to be primary never thought they could function accordingly with their karyotype, most of them never accepted the idea of being anything else but what their gender identity tells them to be. I'm thinking here about Tink's frequent statements "i've always been a girl" and Kate's "I never thought i WAS a girl".

These are the differences that i can clearly see, despite any other classifications about primary and seconday listed so far.

For me personally, I knew I felt different from other boys at around age 5ish but I didn't think "I am a girl."  I knew something was not right even at that age, but it took until I was 11 or so before I actually knew so to speak. 

As much as you are ranting it all seems very tame.  I had to deal with peer sexual abuse during several points in my childhood, dating from grammar school to middle school.  There was several instances that if it were not for teachers or coaches I would have been raped, but it didn't matter it already screwed me up.  As much as you went through, it seems relatively tame.  I was literally beat with whips, chains, branches and belts by my peers on several occasions. When people passed me they shoved me into lockers, pinned me down, took punches at me. Somebody pulled a gun out at me twice at age 13.  And it was not until a kid broke an arm on my forehead was I ever left alone before my 14th birthday, and that entire summer I did not step out of my house (in fact I rarely stepped out of my house period).  This goes beyond all the language I had to endure on a daily basis.  The very fact I survived middle school and was never suicidal, is amazing. 

The truth is I started HS out fresh, it seemed like paradise for me because I escaped the physical abuse, which honestly was daily torture.  The verbal taunts which happened on occasion did not phase me, because compared to everything else I went through it was amazing I survived.

As much as people say that "unless you walked in my shoes", the truth is, my childhood was hell.  I have talked to people who thought there childhood was hell, they end up thinking things were not as bad as they thought while I give a four hour rundown of what my daily life was like and some of the worst things that happened.  Even than its the tip of the iceberg. 

I was not a perfect kid by any means, but I did not deserve the level and extent of abuse I got I concentrated more on my studies with all the abuse and when I got to an academically competitive high school with a strong creative arts environment it paid off.   My parents wondered why I refused to go out until they figured out what was really going on, which they were outraged at, but by then it was too late.


Also it really does bother me that people hang onto these definitions.  Because the categories are too narrow for an issue that is significantly more broad.  Both primary and secondary have been used to deny people treatment and the narrow categorization may fit some, but what of the others who do not fit either definition.  I am sorry, but these definitions and classifications are highly flawed, and luckily most therapists and gender specialists these days see it the same way. 

Also I knew from age four I was different, but I was not conscious of the reasons why. Its pretty obvious I was treated differantly by other kids as well.  I knew there was something wrong with me being a boy, but could not figure out what. 

That is why I stress putting so much faith in the onset of gender consciousness, which the always knew people do, is extremely flawed.  You are hanging onto antiquated concepts of primary and secondary that most gender specialists have  since had the intelligence to abandon, I think it is time you gain that same enlightenment. 


^{edit - removed quote and reference to deleted posts that my friend wrote while I was out.}

I believe the controversy these labels produce is very good evidence of the inapplicability to our community.  It's the inherent hierarchy that seems to do the most damage.

When I mention the ability to develop coping strategies I did NOT mean to imply strength or the lack of it.  Please do not misconstrue.

Some of us had the words to define ourselves at an early age, I didn't.  I strongly suspect that I was thoroughly indoctrinated into the idea that I have a penis therefore I am a boy - no ifs ands or buts - and I became convinced until a very long time after than t this was true, even though I knew I was not like the other boys.  Some very early memories and inconsistencies, which my mom still refuses to address, make me think this way.

I usually refrain form threads that argue labels and definitions.  If I've learned anything is that labels are usually more damaging than helpful when we appy them to people other than ourselves.

hugs & smiles
Emelye

QuoteIf secondaries have this amazing herculean strength, then why do they become so desperate when GID hits in adulthood?

Answer to the first question in my opinion:

It's not a matter of strength. It is a coping skill, not necessarily a good thing. Trauma does weird things to people. The best analogy I can come up with is someone that is sexually assaulted. A person that suffers continual abuse often develops "the ability" (makes me cringe) to shut themselves off and endure the pain and suffering in silence, usually without complaint.

I have seen this same reaction in many late-onset transtioning persons. You can view it as an ability, a gift or a dysfunkshun depending on where you are viewing the situation from.

The second point:

Mid-life crisis, or review. We all do it when we hit middle age, regardless of gender. Men are usually berated for reacting emotionally during this time, or making a lot of changes suddenly.
I think that many people fall into this trap of plodding thru their life, and then one day they wake up, look back and go, WTF happened?

Sometimes, quite often, something will happen in their life or in someone else's that touches them and wakes them from the slumber. Could be near-death experience, illness, a death in the family, loss of a relationship. Something that shakes up their world and their thinking. We all tend to begin to slumber thru the monotony of life at some point.

It's really the same forces at play in the queer community. People realize suddenly that their whole life is a lie. And then everyone gets upset when they shake things up, because so many other people have become intertwined and dependent on their life. But they don't really exist.
They are a phantom.

Which leads me to the conclusion, that just as the average age of transition has lowered from about 30 to 35 down closer to 20 to 25, that someday there won't be many secondary transsexuals. As more and more come out as queer earlier in life, so too will more and more transitioning people come out earlier and enjoy fuller and richer lives. We are all losing our fear, and becoming both more visible and more accepted.

There will come a time, when someone mentions someone was born transsexed, that no one will even blink. It will just become another facet of people like how tall you are, or what color is one's hair. You are all at the forefront of a revolution and most of you don't even realize it.

QuoteBut, Nero, a classification system that excludes most, how good can it be?
And in the end, does it really matter unless we're actually grading people on pain suffered? Which I would never want to do, because I don't even want to recall the painfull events in my life.

I'll second that. I was being flippant in my earlier post, but if you are going to draw a distinction - a hard line in the sand as it were - than you have to do it at puberty. Anyone that enters puberty and goes thru the "normal" physiological and psychological changes as well as the welling up of socioeconomic forces is going to have to deal with a certain level of GID at some point.

Just because a person does not verbalize or react to an internal hurt does not mean that they are not freaking %$#@&*^ out! It means they have developed an ability to function while being &^%$#^ up. That is what a dysfunction is! There are many, many people in the world that cannot deal with anything in their own lives on a daily basis, but they can pull themselves out of bed and march off to work like a drone every morning of their lives. Then they go home and collapse like a house of cards.

People that transition are no different. Some people hide for years and experience regret.
Others get up off their ass and help themselves. Not only is it impossible to measure a relative level of discomfort, it serves no purpose.

Yeah, I know you are bitter. Lots of us are bitter, no one more so than me. But ranting about how people do not recognize your or anyone else's pain solves nothing. Trying to seperate or distance yourself from other people solves nothing. Labelling does nothing but lift and seperate.  ;)

Some clown in a suit decided that this is way it's gonna be. Some people will get labelled primary and some secondary. It's arbitrary!  Most people don't fit neatly into either grouping.
If anything, it should only be used in a clinical sense to determine who is at greatest risk for harming themselves. And why do I feel a new debate coming on?

All of this angst over labelling is rather sophomoric IMHO. Why am I not surprised?

Another thrilling Sunday afternoon at Susan's alternative high school. Now serving bitter angst and cold doses of reality in the cafe.

The thing is primary and secondary is not even used in the clinical sense anymore.  Most people who specialize in gender identity issues have abandoned the terms because they found them to be inappropriate and offensive and criteria in the classifications  to be highly offensive (especially the age of onset and sexual orientation elements).

Most clinicians now completely ignore the DSM-IV, and any Blanchard designed terminology.  Sexual orientation matters very little.  They see the crap classifications for what they are: highly destructive and when it gets down to it meant to deny treatment (which by the way is exactly what Blanchard used the terms for in his gender clinic, along with autogyphelia). 

If you did the research on these terms and actually dug into the modern articles on the problems and how inaccurate these terms are, you would discover why any qualified gender specialist does not use them anymore.

In fact I would put this board near the bottom in terms of education on this issue and trueselves near the top.  Of course trueselves actually has transwomen who are doctors and therapist who actually are well educated on the history of Blanchard and these classsifications and have written numerous articles on the problems and the history of the Toronto gender clinic where these problems emerged. 

I could go on, but there is no such thing as a primary or secondary transsexual.  There never really was.  There is a transsexual, and thats it. 

Quote from: regina on July 15, 2007, 01:09:20 PM

Quote from: Nero on July 15, 2007, 02:25:04 AM
what the heck ever! I am not most ftms. You spend one hour in my shoes as a child, and then maybe we'll talk. >:(

I'm not going to play 'my life was worse than yours...' you're the one who did say you always suspected puberty for ftms was more traumatic than for mtfs. Obviously, a lot of that statement comes from your own life. I would never put a spin on your life because you're the one who's lived it. But let's not pretend you didn't say something when you did.

All I know is what I've experienced as a rather femme child and boy and what I saw around me. Whether you ever were identified as a tomboy or not, ON AVERAGE, the space to be a tomboy gives natal-females a place to express masculinity. Yes, that sometimes changes when they're older, but as adults they still can dress totally male, have a male haircut and engage in as many 'masculine' pursuits as they wish and society isn't going to bat an eyelash. There are a large number of straight women who dress totally butch (masculine clothes & hair), especially in rural areas. Even in the queer communities, ftms are so often given a free pass that mtfs don't get. It's not easy on either side, but let's not pretend it's equal either.

I've been an elementary school teacher and I've seen it daily in the classroom and playground, tomboys or even outwardly butch/masculine girls have an accepted place at school (and that doesn't mean they don't get any mean comments or ostracizing behavior)— feminine boys do not. In a third-grade class I taught last year was an Asian natal-girl who dressed completely male, had a boy's haircut and only played sports with boys. She was totally accepted in class. Not only are femme boys not accepted by other students (except some girls) but the teachers and school administration are totally not supportive of these children. In that same school was a boy who is quite femmy, didn't want to play sports and only played with girls. I was upset to see the principal had no intention of dealing with the teasing and social pressure this boy was facing. His parents (also immigrant an Asian family) seemed more embarrassed by him instead of dealing with this issues.

I'm sure most people who were at all out or obviously gender variant have horror stories about adolescence, but that doesn't change the huge difference in violence and even job discrimination that exists between ftms and mtfs. Almost all of the arrests and violence involving incidents using public restrooms involve mtfs (a recent exception was one that happened to a butch woman who is suing). Almost all the murders, assaults, and even verbal abuse happens to mtfs. This is why passing is a big issue in this community, and minimizing how it became important negates an important history of abuse.

I don't like the term passing, nor do I appreciate the mean pecking order it creates in trans communities, but I totally understand how it can liberate trans people from insulting judgment and assumptions as well as the immediate impact of violence in their daily lives. It does free up people from their anxieties about these issues, and allows them to live more 'authentic' lives as the women and men we are. Why is that such a bad thing?

Gina M.

I know some female to male university professors, I have never seen a male to female transsexual professor teaching at my university.

It's a man world, and people who are *becoming* men have an easier time finding a better job than male to female transsexuals, that is just my opinon though, I can be totally wrong.

 
They basically told the school to control the issue best you could or find yourself on the wrong end of a lawsuit.  The problem by than they saw as the other kids.   Basically my parents said the problem is with the school and the kids, figure out a way to fix the problem as much as possible.   Luckily the threat of a lawsuit kept them in line, and actually lead to the expulsion and suspensions of some of the worst offenders, but this was by the time I was nearly out of middle school. 

Adults did notice it was going on.   The difference is when it started to get real bad and when my parents finally caught on they started to threaten legal action to the schools and to the parents of the other kids once they started to listen through my cries.  It is the only thing they finally did, and for all the crap I went through recently it is the one thing I am thankful they did. 

My point being as bad as you think you had it there will always be somebody who had it worse.  If there is any problem I see here is your parents nor the school know how to take appropriate action.  Things change very quickly when you get a lawyer involved. 

Generally speaking Nero you seem to be the exception to the rule for most transmen.  I am not saying that childhood was a cakewalk for them, but the truth be told, in many cases it is easier for them with regards to childhood.

In fact the MtFs who repress things and conform, and who can, do so because they know the dangers of not doing so. 

^{edit - removed reference to deleted posts my friend wrote while I was out.}  

Amy,

Where just discussing issues here,
We are not establishing medical dogma.
The replies here certainly have a varied slant.

To "educate" those that have a contrary point of view,
you have to see from their point of view first, find out
why they believe that this theory describee them.
Sensitivity is key to the gentle art of education,  persuasion.

Many boards have homogeneous crowds of highly educated people. Are their opinions unimpeachable? I don't think so; but they do have a higher view of themselves... Got a master in biz, an engineering bacc., so that makes my words gold... NOT!!! There's very little new info coming in on GID and what they do, I also do...  Is offer a better packaged opinion.

Many TS, are not university graduate, or even high school graduates (those generally don't post on any board, so we never hear what they believe, they feel); should we hold them them to a higher standard than doctoral graduates who also can't agree at all on these issues.

I think this board has a better transversal representation
of the general TS community of any out there. But, still its not perfect by a longshot.

Can we please stop with the competitive ->-bleeped-<-ty childhood thing?

This thread could be interesting but every other post I read the first couple of lines I just think "TLDR" Too long, Didn't read.


What it comes down to is the "->-bleeped-<- hierarchy" and where you lie on it and once you actually transition and start to get on with your life then it ceases to matter how high you rank because you yourself have all the validation you need which is implicit in your life not sucking.

Quote from: Mawd on July 15, 2007, 04:33:05 PM
What it comes down to is the "->-bleeped-<- hierarchy" and where you lie on it and once you actually transition and start to get on with your life then it ceases to matter how high you rank because you yourself have all the validation you need which is implicit in your life not sucking.

LOL, I love it ;)

Someone once said:

Quote2. Focus on what you NEED, not what you ARE. Ignore the threads on who is a real woman or not, if only real TSs hate their genitals and want SRS... skip the COGIATA and other tests to "prove" you're female inside or whatever. Let the other people fight and attack one another with their insecurities, you can't stop them... and just quietly slip out of that noisy room and go do what needs to be done. You need to justify nothing whatsoever to anyone, especially yourself.

;)

~Kate~

is rejection from peers really relevant in regard of this topic? what if someone is lucky enough to find himself/herself in a better environment? Not all the schools in this world are as bad as the one you described.

QuoteWhat it comes down to is the "->-bleeped-<- hierarchy"

Maybe we should just stop seeing it as a "->-bleeped-<- hierarchy", anyone of us has a different story, and anyone of us is for many factors similar to each other yet different for some others. Having experienced more pain doesn't make you better, having experienced pain first doesn't make you better, having a homesexual or heterosexual orientation doesn't make someone less or more true in regard of transexualism, and there's no strenght in adaptability as much as it's true that a slab of clay isn't stronger than a plate of steel. Different? Yes. Better? No.

just my two cents...

*giggling devilishly*  Well, I think each of us know what we are and what we call it, being primary, secondary, better, worse, one, two, under, over, first, second or what have you.  I know what I am and I'm sure you do know who you are too, I hope.

Each and every one of us knows what our childhoods were, what we experienced, and what we did not experience.  We can rant, cry, and whine all we want but deep down we know where we all stand.  Personally, trying to convince people of what you were or weren't is a complete waste of time and energy.  In my case, I am NOT the one who transitioned when I was sixty or seventy, I am NOT the one who is constantly making nonsense threads about the definitions of terms which should be universally known and understood by those who supposedly "suffer" from them.  I am NOT the one who is constantly arguing the validity of criteria for diagnosis.  I am NOT the one who has an agenda and want to impose my "fantastic" beliefs/experiences/feelings to eveyone else.  I know what I am and so do you. 


tink :icon_chick:

Primary?  Secondary?  I think you will find many of the "older" transitioning people (or what some are calling Secondary) were born before the computer age.

Show me where the information was available for those of us born in the 30's, 40's or even the 50's.  It certainly wasn't something you would find at the library.

In my opinion (and mine only) I think you will find less and less people transitioning in their 40's or 50's, now that information is available and it is being talked about "somewhat" openly.  I can certainly say that if I knew what this condition was and what to do about it in my teens, I would have transitioned RIGHT THEN.

Living through school when you don't fit in can be terrible (I would use another word, but someone might think I am swearing) I learned how to disappear into the walls, to not be seen, to be invisible to those around me.

I am not always good at expressing myself, so I hope I am clear in my meaning.

Sarah L.

Quote from: Nerolol you know I was totally agreeing with you before this post. First off - I never said that my 'pain' or whatever makes me better than anyone else.
If you were following this thread, you would know that I only recounted an example of my 'pain and suffering' or whatever, because some stated that 'ftms don't suffer'. I don't take kindly to having a significant experience in my life discounted or belittled, and I highly doubt you would either.

Don't misunderstand me, i was not questioning that. i was trying to bring back the topic about the definitions of primary and secondary, didn't mean to be insensitive in any way.

Quote from: NeroThere is a difference between a transsexual child who could not adapt or assimilate into their birth gender and one who did with ease. I'm sorry if people have a problem with that, but that's my opinion.

I would totally agree if you'd say: "There is a difference between a transsexual child who could not adapt or assimilate into their birth gender and one who somewhat managed to do."
I hardly believe there is such a thing as a transexual (late or early) that had a perfectly normal childhood, i might be wrong. Your puberty was a hell, hands down, but that doesn't mean mine was a cakewalk.

QuoteI never ever said that one was more valid than the other, just different. I've encountered arrogance from those who functioned in their birth sex, and I'm sick of it. If you could assimilate into your birth sex with no problem, you simply did not experience GID as early or as severely as a primary. That's my opinion and I'm sticking to it. It has nothing to do with environment.

You know i was actually referring to the one that see the distinctions between primary and secondary as threatening which seems that are mostly the ones that according to your theory would be secondary cases. at the point you could add that "All primary believe in secondary and primary transexualism" "secondary don't". I guess that nobody likes the idea of being labeled "second" in any way. So i was like saying, ok let's just try to look at it without any bias please.
For what concern those arrogant people, i don't really know who you are talking about, but i guess you shouldn't really care about what they say if they really are arrogant. Let them say.

Quote from: Nero on July 15, 2007, 04:51:22 PM
And incidentally, Amy, failure to assimilate into birth sex in childhood, and rejection from peers is listed under primary. And I've stated a zillion times in this thread before your posts the huge difference between a primary who walked through hell during childhood and a secondary who sailed through it.
So I don't know why you've got your panties in a wad over anything I've said.

Posted on: July 15, 2007, 04:41:14 PM

---

Quote from: Amy T. on July 15, 2007, 04:16:36 PM
Generally speaking Nero you seem to be the exception to the rule for most transmen.  I am not saying that childhood was a cakewalk for them, but the truth be told, in many cases it is easier for them with regards to childhood.

In fact the MtFs who repress things and conform, and who can, do so because they know the dangers of not doing so.   

Maybe you're right on that one. I've never heard another ftm mention a hard time assimilating. It just still stings very badly when people assume I've had it easy. This did have a huge negative effect on my education and future, and I'm often told it's all my own fault. Before all this I was a straight A student, the top of my class, and loved school. Oh god, I'm crying now. I'm sorry, I didn't mean to belittle anyone else's experiences. This just still hurts very much.

Nero, I did not mean to take you had it easy.  Like I said, I really should have not been so combative in the previous threads.  I am really sorry about that, I did not mean to open old wounds.  Alot of us had it tougher than others.  I still very fortunate because I was able to sail through high school without to many problems (oddly enough through not conforming to gender norms) and get a really good education beyond that.

Life has been really tough for you, and honestly I know how that feels.  I am sorry for being so combative, and mean and dismissive.  I kind of crossed a line I shouldn't of.
 

Someone here said that we, as a community are diverse, and I couldn't agree more with that statement.  Our motivations, reasons, feelings, and what have you are totally different from everyone else's.  We are not the same and will never be.  People who think otherwise are not being realistic. 

Now, does this fact make us better, worse, number one, number two, number three million?  Only *we* can decide that for ourselves.  How *we* see or consider ourselves shows on these posts/threads.  No one can make *us* feel inferior if *we* don't let them.  It takes *our* own permission to let people make *us* feel the way we do.

tink :icon_chick:

QuoteAnd my question remains, why do people feel this need to define themselves as 'primary?' What does it provide them with—comfort, status, increased self-awareness, biological imperative, clarification, or justification?

WARNING MY OPINION ONLY: the only real reason I've seen that people need to define themselves as 'primary' is to separate themselves from people they view as 'secondary.' It's a form of internalized transphobia. As in 'I am not a part of the hoi polloi of ->-bleeped-<-s... the great unpassable, the ones who aren't really what they say they are.' And there are transitioners who just can't let that go (as demonstrated by this thread). No matter how many denials I hear about the 'secondary' label not containing judgment and condemnation, I see people using it with those connotations over and over again.

Personally, it makes me feel very disconnected from whatever trans community there is.

I'd like to see what Nero has to answer about this, however i can see a few other options.

First off Nero repeatedly mentioned some TS that actually claims to be superior for being able to cope with their ->-bleeped-<- untill late, which seems to be the main cause of his anger. So from one side those people refuse the idea of two different kind of transexuals but then believes to be somewhat superior and that negates the previous statement. Again i have no clue about who they are, but certainly i cannot condone such a way of thinking from anyone.

Second. let's put it this way. What would you say if someone called you a ->-bleeped-<-, and even after you explain to him that you are actually a transexual he would dismiss you with a "same thing, whatever".
I guess you'd feel offended in your identity but that doesn't mean at all that you believe to be superior to a ->-bleeped-<-.

I'm not saying that primary and secondary absolutely exists, we are discussing it, why not?

Note that there are already two different way of transexualism that are well accepted in this forum. Nobody denies that there are FtM transexuals and MtF transexuals, and while we recognize there are many things in common, there is certainly something different.

EDIT: Nero beat me in answering while i was typing...

The amount of peer pressure and problems is not related how bad the GID is, but how good one is at lying/hiding/social things.

Being very different and showing it to everyone are two different things. Some people can trick people and use a completely bogus role they know to be a lie. Of course this means psychological problems later on, but it means typically less abuse in childhood/teenage even with the same GID.

Different people have different kinds of GID and suffering. But trying to force those into two boxes seems silly.

I want to thank and honor both Nero and Amy for their very valuable contributions to this thread. I'm deeply sorry for having brought up traumatic memories, for having induced them to quarrel, and I ask forgiveness of both. If you have to get mad, don't get mad at each other, get mad at me, I guess I was stupid for even starting this. I've learned a lot from both of you and you've both equally deepened my understanding of this difficult issue.

Nero's analysis helped me to understand my own personal history better and where I fit in relation to this question. Namely, that I don't fit into the classification at all. I totally agree with everyone who's said if the awareness, information, resources and support were available to me as a teenager, I would have gone for it right then and there.

Amy has argued very convincingly for the uselessness and harm of the primary/secondary dichotomy, and in my mind this issue has finally been put to rest. As I noted above, it bothered me because of how it was used to divide us into an elite and an underclass. I certainly hope no professional caregivers or gatekeepers are still using it!

If I'd known it would bring on a bitter quarrel, I would never have started the thread. I raised the question in the first place because I was hoping to confirm that the primary/secondary dichotomy is fully obsolete and discarded. I'm seeking to put one of my own personal traumas to rest. My mother has been rejecting me ever since I came out. She pulled a Lloyd Bentsen on me by saying "I have worked with gays and transsexuals in my professional career, and you're not one of them." In her mind, "real transsexuals" must be limited to the stereotypical primaries or the Blanchardian category of HSTS and everyone else is phony or deluded. She has been trying to guilt me into giving it up. My wife used a similar criticism that I'm not like the extreme girly boys she saw growing up, therefore I can't be trans. Both of them have been drawing the boundaries of who's allowed to be trans as narrowly as possible in order to exclude me and persist in denial.

If it were anyone else's ignorance, I wouldn't care in the slightest. But my Mom is not just anybody, my relationship with her matters too much, and even though she tried to sever me from her emotionally, my primal linkage to mother was never broken. It just bothers me a lot that my Mom thinks there can be only one possible description of transsexualism, when the reality is so diverse. I'm examining this issue to put it to rest, because she wrongly classified me as secondary and then erroneously negated this supposed secondary as not really trans. I wrote for her a long list of facts to the contrary, going back to my preschool days, demonstrating how my lifelong cross-gender behavior spoke for itself loud and clear, even if my voice was silenced.

I think the difference between those who act out and declare their gender crossing in childhood vs. those who hide it is explained by a difference in personality traits (extroverted/introverted, assertive/intimidated) rather than by a supposed hierarchy of transsexual authenticity. My response to adversity was always withdrawal and hiding. Although I instinctively felt I belonged on the girls' side--and my behavior going back to preschool bears this out--although I've known all through my life that maleness was drastically wrong for me-- I was too afraid to challenge authority figures, sensing there was no support for me to be found anywhere, and that if I ever dared to speak out openly against my gender role, there would be hell to pay. So I got into the habit of hiding (even from myself), believing I had no options. I've had to go back into the worst pain of my past to rescue that scared little girl hiding deep in the dark closet.

Posted on: July 15, 2007, 10:18:31 PM

---

Coincidentally, I was just reading Laura Seabrook's Hypergraphia on sexuality and gender (http://www.webcomicsnation.com/lauraseabrook/sexandgender/series.php?view=archive&chapter=21167&mpe=1&fromwhich=13&direction=f), and she said it well: "Being trans is just another example of a bipolar dichotomy. Two extremes are considered 'opposites' and everything else either ignored or explained as a variation. What this hides is that one of the extremes is always a 'privileged' position."

She illustrated this with a sketch of a circle split into halves. The top half labeled "primary, privileged" and the bottom half "secondary, repressed." Around the circumference are the words "minimalised" and "excluded."

How apt... her critique (after Derrida) applies perfectly to this primary/secondary issue we've been discussing. The dichotomy that's been used to divide us has made one of the extremes into a privileged position. I wanted to examine this issue to bring out clearly what oppressive BS it is to divide us like that, the better to get free of it, to break its hold over us.

Quote from: Hypatia on July 13, 2007, 07:40:24 AM
What's with the classification of transsexuals into "primary" and "secondary"? I've seen these terms in medical and psych journals. What are the implications for our lives?

The classificaton of transsexuals goes beyond primary and secondary.

http://www.tsroadmap.com/mental/categories.html

http://www.genderpsychology.org/transsexual/primary.html

old fashioned terminology or not applicable to some?  Every condition possess different levels of intensity.  Don't see why transsexuality has to be the exception to the rule.  I'm not like someone who started a crossgender journey when they were 40 for nameless reasons.  You can call it bigotry and you're free to guess what you wish. But I'm not like them and they aren't like me.  It's a no-brainer concept that has nothing to do with discrimination but how well we adapt or fail to adapt to our environment and what sorround us.  I've been accused of elitism before.  Dunno what to think but it isn't true.  Why shoud I be put in the same box with someone that doesn't even know who they are? I have nothing in common with them.  I cant share anything with them and viceversa.  Similar situations in support groups for "transsexual" peeps where everybody id themselves as transsexual but are there warming up the seats & disconnected from reality & talking tripe.  We've got GID but it isn't the same for everybody. 

Something like this:

QuoteSecondary Transsexualism


The transvestic and homosexual variations of secondary transsex­ualism as formulated by Person and Ovesey (1974a,b) have been dis­cussed in Chapter 2. Others have reported similar behavior patterns although using different terms to characterize this. For example, the secondary transsexual is conceptualized by Wise and Meyer (1980) as an aging ->-bleeped-<- with a fetishistic cross-dressing history. However, this individual is believed to show massive regression and loss of defenses following a major life crisis. The result is not a spontaneous occurrence of transsexualism, but rather, a request for sex reassignment based on late-developing feelings of gender dysphoria. Considerable overlap is postulated spanning the developmental personality features and the gender identity of fetishistic ->-bleeped-<-s and transsexuals, both pri­mary and secondary. Wise and Meyer (1980) reason that their aging ->-bleeped-<-s (secondary transsexuals in our terminology) are a group that "bridges" the fetishistic cross dressers and the primary transsex­uals. These ->-bleeped-<-s typically had a strong masculine-role history despite long-held ruminations concerning transsexualism. Of the 20 cases they report, all had strong fetishistic histories and none had a homosexual background. This is not inconsistent with Person and Ovesey (1974b) who saw the homosexual transsexual applicants as yet another distinctive group. Wise and Meyer give emphasis to the role of major life changes and stressors as causal factors in the emergence of these late-occurring transsexual applicants. A report generally support­ing the distinctions necessitated by differences in sexual orientation, fetishism, and gender identity has been provided by Freund et al. (1982).



It is not rare for preoperative transsexuals to abandon their quest for reassignment; it is not well-established that such cases are more likely to involve secondary transsexuals, but this is what we would predict. Shore (1984) reports the case of a young man who was positive he wanted sexual reassignment, was favorably evaluated for surgery, and was on his way to the hospital when he learned the hospital had changed their policy and now prohibited sex reassignment surgery. This man, soon thereafter, changed his entire life-style and reportedly gave up his sex reassignment plans.

http://www.geocities.com/just_nobody_1970/docs/Primary.html

Posted on: July 16, 2007, 12:53:59 AM

---

QuoteThis distinction might be useful for your debate because secondary transsexuals report greater rates of regret and less social adjustment than primary transsexuals do (sorry, I can't recall a good reference at the moment). There was once a major study saying SRS wasn't effective (Meyer and Reter, Arch. Sex. Behav. 9: 451-456) but it's *so* methodologically flawed. You can read a reply in IJT, which is available on-line: Fleming M, Steinman C, Bocknek G (1980), Methodological Problems in Assessing. Sex-Reassignment Surgery: http://www.symposion.com/ijt/ijtc0401.htm . There's also some feminist literature opposing SRS (most notably by Janice Raymond) but that line of debate probably isn't so relevant to a psychology class.

I just classified myself as a third column and called life on the phone...
Its coming, I know it is... Just after Godot serves me a drink...
(lit ref for those who care about these things)

Living is the only cure for all this madness,
no matter what label we stamp in our furrowed forehead.

That I was able to "deal" with GID for 30 years and live to regret being that dumb,
seemingly primes me for the B list, pushed aside by those young starlets, oh the shame, oh the humiliation...

Yeah, when I crack like this, its because the debate has become mightily circular  :eusa_wall:
I'm leaving the room now for some strong.... Huh tea... :icon_drunk: ... And chew on a few dozen  :icon_chillpill:
(they are addictive). You guys better have
concluded something by the time I get back here in 3-4 years or I swear I'll drive a pencil through my head  :icon_writers_block: . You don't want me to hurt myself huh guys, gals... Uh, do you...  :icon_bunch:

:police: Dragged off to the loony bin, otherwise called bed...  :icon_crazy:

Quote from: regina on July 16, 2007, 12:49:09 AM
let's not sugar coat it or couch it in other terms. I'm not interested in more theories and explainations, or 'we're all in this together' shmoozing, I want you to come clear how you really feel about this.

I've always *assumed*, I don't KNOW, but ASSUMED that the unspoken (but hinted at in demeaning ways) insinuation by some is that primaries are the only REAL transsexuals, and everyone else is either a transvestic fetishist or crossdresser who took things "too far."

~Kate~

So, what are we doing?  Assigning values to being either primary or secondary (I guess the definition of these terms is still up in the air).  Transsexual, is transsexual, no matter when you discovered or acted upon it.

I hate these elitist definitions.

Sarah L.

Primary?
Secondary?

Worthless terms in my opinion.

In my case I am a girl stuffed in boy skin. Call that what you will.

QuoteFor example, the secondary transsexual is conceptualized by Wise and Meyer (1980) as an aging ->-bleeped-<- with a fetishistic cross-dressing history. However, this individual is believed to show massive regression and loss of defenses following a major life crisis. The result is not a spontaneous occurrence of transsexualism, but rather, a request for sex reassignment based on late-developing feelings of gender dysphoria.

Wait, I'm lost... isn't "late-developing feelings of gender dysphoria" the same thing as "a spontaneous occurrence of transsexualism?"

QuoteThese ->-bleeped-<-s typically had a strong masculine-role history despite long-held ruminations concerning transsexualism

Lost again... if these people had "long-held ruminations concerning transsexualism," doesn't that mean they're transsexuals? TVs by definition don't ponder changing their sex all their life.

~Kate~

Ok, I'll be good.  Keep my fingers off the keyboard.

Sarah L.

Quote from: Nero on July 16, 2007, 10:35:33 AM
Now maybe the Primary/Secondary labels should be abandoned because of the negative stigma and the early/late transitioner implications which are by no means fair, nor are the hetero/homosexual implications fair, but there HAS to be some distinction between me and 'John Gotti' over here!

Now that I will go along with Nero.

Sarah L.

Quote from: Nero on July 16, 2007, 10:35:33 AM
Now maybe the Primary/Secondary labels should be abandoned because of the negative stigma and the early/late transitioner implications which are by no means fair, nor are the hetero/homosexual implications fair, but there HAS to be some distinction between me and 'John Gotti' over here!

Well, I'd guess that someone who never had a GID thought at all until later in life is going to have a harder time shedding their socialized behaviour patterns?

The "Always Knowns," even if they managed to live a reasonable life in the role of their birth sex, STILL were well-aware of their instinctive behaviour - even if it was being intentionally suppressed.

~Kate~

I find it a little troubling that these studies place so much credence on what children feel/think during their formative years, these are all simply assumptions based on facts drawn from interviews with TS who state that "I've always felt that there was something different about me, even as a child..." and similar statements, like even as a child I knew I was a girl, or I always wanted to be with the boys, etc. etc.  These stories are from transitioned or transitioning adults not from children.  I would really like to see a factual study where infants have been monitored from birth, discovered to be TS and then followed up producing valid clinical data.

I'm just really glad that I'm just a woman.

Steph

QuoteOh Neeeerrro,  umm, if someone could assimilate into their birth sex, then why are they transitioning? Is it a fantasy or fetish (or a sexual orientation as Blanchard believes)? What's your take on it?

This is a very nice question, and it's something that "normal" people probably will be never able to understand.

"You were able to be a boy so far, i never even thought you were feminine or gay, what's the problem in going on like that?"

"You like girls, why you want to be a girl? Shouldn't be normal for someone who likes girl to be a man?"

"Why can't you just accept yourself for what you are?"

"You did a great job so far, keep up with the good work" (priceless)

"It's not like you get everything you want from life, you should just accept what life gives to you"


How would you answer? I think there's really little chance to make them understand, it's hard to explain.

QuoteI find it a little troubling that these studies place so much credence on what children feel/think during their formative years, these are all simply assumptions based on facts drawn from interviews with TS who state that "I've always felt that there was something different about me, even as a child..." and similar statements, like even as a child I knew I was a girl, or I always wanted to be with the boys, etc. etc.  These stories are from transitioned or transitioning adults not from children.  I would really like to see a factual study where infants have been monitored from birth, discovered to be TS and then followed up producing valid clinical data.

Wait wait... i'm pretty sure that GID has been diagnosed in children, the DSM IV even lists the differences between GID in childhood and GID in puberty and adulthood. I don't think that can be questioned.

Quote from: Nero on July 16, 2007, 11:13:31 AM
I'm really hoping to come up with some better labels, seeing as I don't agree with some of the Primary/Secondary criteria. As I've discussed in previous threads, I don't see a difference between a young TS with access to all info, support, and treatment options, and a mature TS who had no access to all these luxuries in youth. That notion is totally unfair. I also don't agree with the hetero/homosexual Primary/Secondary criteria.

The 'secondaries' I'm talking about are mostly in my age group. And I now realize that nobody is getting my point, only seeing all the baggage these terms carry.

This is what I said earlier in this thread, those of us who are older (I'm 62) didn't have access to information, doctors and others just said we were "sick" or "crazy" (I heard those so many times from therapists when I was young).  Ok, yes, I knew things were wrong from early childhood.  I won't go into the problems I had or things that happened to me, I didn't even know there were others like me until I was in my 30's.

Transitioning later in life does Not make me a "secondary".  Enough said, I will try to back off now.

Sarah L.

I thought primary and secondery classified when one realised one was a member of the oposite sex? not when one did something about it? if one realises young, and does till later, surely thats still primary?
i thought it was and age of realisation thing?

Nero: that sort of person sounds funny, can we put them in a cage and torment them?
thats female caracature, not a female.

i guess im primary by both deffinitions. ill shut up

Gina this might be kind out off the topic but you are bringing up an issue that's really important for me, i need to understand. The following question can be answered from anyone that transitioned very late, so somewhat is connected with the concept of secondary (wether you think it's a relevant concept or not).

You never transitioned untill very late, why? You said you knew some transexuals so it's not like you didn't know about it. Is it really that you never thought about becoming one? What stopped you from doing that? You were scared? You wanted to but for many reasons you told yourself you couldn't? Or maybe you never really thought you wanted to? Did you think you could live with it without ever transitioning? Did you think you weren't actually like the other transexuals you knew and so maybe your path was different?

Okay, since you asked, I will be more than happy to respond to your questions, Regina.

Quote from: regina on July 16, 2007, 12:49:09 AM
so how do you feel those people will compare to you a few years post-transition?
Will they be less authentic in their genders and bodies? Will they be 'tweeners?' Will they be less passable?

And before I answer, this is my opinion, and my opinion only. I think that there are variations of the intensity of GID, being primary, secondary or what have you.  The thing is that when I go back in time and look at how my life developed since early childhood, I can tell, for sure, that it is completely different from that of someone who transitioned later on in life.  Why? because I avoided the common traps they fell into (i.e, denial , marriage, male presentation and the ability to CHOOSE to put off transiton for whatever reasons) When I look at these differences, it is clear, to me, that I transitioned young because I felt more strongly about being a woman than older transitioners did/do.  I didn't have A CHOICE.  I transitioned because that was what I had to do.  For me it was a matter of life and death.  Being who I am was more important than everything older transitioners have lived for (i.e, jobs, careers, school, children, family, spouses, society, pressure, and whatever else there is for an excuse). My priority was to be who I was, the rest (everything others have lived to build during their lives as males) was secondary.  Why? because I had no choice.  It was simply the way I felt.  My dysphoria was too much for me to bear.  I had to break free; otherwise, I would have died.

Quote from: regina on July 16, 2007, 12:49:09 AM

Will outsiders be able to tell a clear difference?   Will you have very different ways of connecting to other primaries vs. secondaries?

Well, There are certainly degrees of success pertaining to transsexualism.  The younger you transition (most primaries transition at an early age) the more successful you are in adapting yourself in society as your true gender, and developing skills such as voice, female presentation and communication that go in accordance to the gender you identify as.  I have met a few late transitioners who really didn't give a flying monkey about anything that pertained to female presentation.  "I am a woman but I don't need to work on my voice, demeanor or posture.  Society owes me big time for being transsexual" That kind of attitude. Get the picture? 

Quote from: regina on July 16, 2007, 12:49:09 AM

Are you able to tell your primary brothers & sisters in an instant... if so, how?

I actually can.  It is funny but true.  Nero mentioned the alert system he has, LOL  :D.  Well, it is the "famous vibe" we have talked about so many times on these forums.  That invisible energy that never fails combined with how the person communicates, expresses herself/himself in threads, posts, during stress, etc, etc, etc.  Some people call it a "vibe".  I tend to call it an "energy".  It just appears out of nowhere and somehow, before that person gives you too many details about his/her life, you just know that he/she has been where you have.  There's an automatic connection between that person and you, a wordless language that only you and that person knows.  :) ;)


I hope I have answered your questions to your satisfaction.  I know you didn't want to hear about more links, but I have to provide some for those members who may be interested in reading them.  ;)


Sex Orientation Scale (S.O.S.) (http://www.symposion.com/ijt/benjamin/chap_02table.htm)

QuoteAre the research finding about all transsexuals or just some?
Some researchers and transsexuals propose there are many different "types" of transsexuals. This raises a questions: Are the neurological findings about all transsexuals or just some 'types'?

One distinction is between transsexual men (Female-to-Male) and transsexual woman (Male-to-Female). The theoretical reasons BSTc was proposed as a possible TS difference imply we would find similar results for transsexual men. However, this study only involved transsexual woman. We should be cautious about making the generalization to transsexual men without the empirical evidence. A nice replication and extension of this finding would be to study the BSTc region of both transsexual men and woman; I hope neuroscientists undertake that study. For the remaining two catgorical distinctions I am limiting my discussion to only transsexual woman.

A second distinction is age of onset, the categories are 'primary' and 'secondary' transsexuals. The defining difference is the age when a transsexual requests a sex change: 'primary' transsexuals usually request a sex change in their early to mid twenties and 'secondary' transsexuals request surgery from forty years old and onward. As groups, they differ in sexual orientation (more 'primary' transsexuals are straight in their target sex) and their gender expression (MtF primary transsexuals tend to be more feminine). However, please be aware that these differences are statistical like sex differences in height. Men are taller than woman but that doesn't mean any particular man is taller than any particular woman. Is the brain difference only a difference for primary or only for secondary transsexuals? No. If you look at the table below, you will see that three transsexuals in the study are primary and two are secondary transsexuals (there is no datat reported for one brain).

The partial article above was extracted from this link:

http://www.genderpsychology.org/psychology/BSTc.html

********************************************************************

Harry Benjamin Standards of Care (http://www.genderpsychology.org/transsexual/hbsoc_2001.html)

DSM-IV (http://www.genderpsychology.org/transsexual/dsm_iv.html)

ICD-10 Gender Disorders (http://www.genderpsychology.org/transsexual/icd_10.html)

Harry Benjamin Disorientation Scale (http://www.genderpsychology.org/transsexual/benjamin_gd.html)

Watson's Gender Disorientation Scale (http://www.genderpsychology.org/transsexual/watson.html)


Treatment of young MTF transsexuals (http://transwoman.tripod.com/young.htm)

Transsexual Children (http://www.lauras-playground.com/transgender_transsexual_children.htm)


I could do some extra research and I am sure I will find more stuff.  I'm good at research.  ;)

tink :icon_chick:

Quote from: regina on July 16, 2007, 09:10:30 PM

Tink, thanks for the response. A few questions... given that you meet a 'secondary' transitioner who does, in fact,  give a flying monkey about their presentation, I'd be interested if you compared that person with yourself as a primary.

Regina, just to keep things into perspective here, I am talking about the people I have met personally.  Especifically there were three people who, in fact, didn't give a flying monkey about how they presented themselves in society but did not waste any time crying and whining about how unfairly society treated them.  Anyway, let's see......differences I have noticed among those people and I:

*  Despite the fact they transitoned many years ago, they still showed strong masculine patterns in their behavior, voice, and overall appearance.  One of them was, in fact, post-operative, but behavior wise, she couldn't get rid of her masculine mannerisms.  I don't know if this had to do with the fact that she had served in the US Naval Forces or what but anyway those were the main differences.

*  Lack of style in general.  They would wear attire which wasn't age appropriate,  too over the top for their age.

*  As far as makeup, well, I don't know.  I mean, you would figure that someone who transitioned five years ago would  know at least the basics of makeup application, but it wasn't so.  I honestly thought they looked better without makeup.

*  Speech patterns, the vocabulary in general hadn't been softened despite all those years in transition.  In other words, they were clockable, readable on the spot.

Quote from: regina on July 16, 2007, 09:10:30 PM
You're right, Tink, I'm NOT terribly interested in more links.

I understand.  However, as I said, this thread is for everyone in general (not just the ones who are participating in this discussion), and some people may find these links to be beneficial, so I will keep on posting them when I can. :)

Quote from: ReginaThat's a little vague and pie-in-the-sky-ish hun, but I do get we're talking about an intangible quality. I ask because I've met some very early transitioners who, 25 years on, had a rather bitter, defensive vibe about the world, but I definitely understand that there's a difference between someone who's lived as a woman (much less a trans one) for 25 years and someone who's lived as a woman fulltime for 3 years and what they've experienced.

Well, you asked for my opinion, and you got it.  You are free to agree or disagree with it but I stand by what I said.




tink :icon_chick:



P.S.  You are quite welcome by the way.

I'm going to pose a question.  I don't expect a solid answer, because the science, as far as I know, isn't there yet.  Maybe some of you will have interesting speculations, though.

It's widely thought, although not strongly supported yet (the BSTc studies had a very small sample size, and I believe another study indicated that taking hormones changes the structure of that area) that transsexuality will eventually be traced to clear differences in brain structure (i.e., that MtFs have in some way a typically female brain structure, and that FtMs have in some way a typically male brain structure.)  Is there anyone here who believes that this is the case, and also believes that there's some kind of distinction between "primary" and "secondary" (or whatever terms you use) transsexuals?  If so -- do you think there is a difference, on the neurological level, between them?  What could it be, if, as Nero has contended, they end up in the same place, just with a later onset for "secondary" transsexuals?

I'd especially be interested to know what you think about this, Nero -- assuming, of course, that you agree with the premises.

For the record, I'm not convinced that there is such a distinction between "primaries" and "secondaries," but that's not what I'm getting at here.  I'm investigating the implications of that distinction.

Quote from: Child of the LightNero has contended, they end up in the same place, just with a later onset for "secondary" transsexuals?

Is this actually true? Honestly I am not sure if we end up in the same place.  We may go through the same process of gender reassignment (i.e, therapy, hormones, RLE, and SRS) but does this mean that we are in the same place "psychologically" when we complete SRS?  I am not sure.  Some articles in the links I have provided state that there are greater rates of regret and less social ajustment among secondary transsexuals.  This will indicate that we don't end up in the same place even after complete gender reassignment has been performed.  My two cents.


tink :icon_chick:

Quote from: Tink on July 17, 2007, 12:26:46 AM

Quote from: Child of the LightNero has contended, they end up in the same place, just with a later onset for "secondary" transsexuals?

Is this actually true? Honestly I am not sure if we end up in the same place.  We may go through the same process of gender reassignment (i.e, therapy, hormones, RLE, and SRS) but does this mean that we are in the same place "emotionally" when we complete SRS?  I am not sure.  Some articles in the links I have provided state that there are greater rates of regret and less social ajustment among secondary transsexuals.  This will indicate that we don't end up in the same place even after complete gender reassignment has been performed.  My two cents.


tink :icon_chick:

I don't know which links you mean, so you probably posted them elsewhere (or I missed them in this thread -- I read through it somewhat hastily.)  Would you repost them here or send me a PM?

Quote from: regina on July 17, 2007, 12:20:27 AM
They viewed themselves as 'primary' and totally female. But when I heard what they were into, I couldn't connect with it... they liked sci fi (I hate it), fantasy games (loathe them), Battlestar Galactica (never cared to see it), cars (??), into goth metal, computers and programming, samurai sword stuff (!)... you get the picture. And with that was endless discussion of theories.

At first I just thought it was a generational thing, but at that same time, I was in a program to get my teaching credential. In my cohort group of 40 were 2 males (I would be classified as one of those two) and 38 women... many of them younger (22-34). I became buds with a lot of those women, at least while we were in the program and, time and time again I noticed, they WEREN'T into the stuff these young transwomen were into. They read women's fiction, liked very different music, were into certain tv shows (Sex and the City). We liked a lot of the same movies. I went to dance performances with a couple of them. I felt at home. And they discussed experiences, not theories.

See I used to talk about experiences on trans forums but they people got jealous and I got aggro for rubbing their face in it.

The thing is that if you're dealing with being TS every waking day basically from birth and you can't blend in as your birth sex then you can't just sit around twiddling your thumbs you find something to escape into and that's all too often sci-fi/games/geeky crap. I remember as a kid calling up my friends just to chat for a few hours and having them not want to play along, I remember being rejected because I didn't want to play violent games in the playground and I remember most of all even having the girls bully me into a social reclusive state and in that situation there's only one way to go these days and that's with the geeks which make up a significant proportion of schools these days what with being the internet age and all.

I never was that interested in geeky stuff it's just what I fell into after my school life imploded, I got good at computers because there was simply nothing else to do apart from read, which I did allot of.

These days the geeky knowledge is still floating around my head and yeah if my favourite episode of DS9 comes up I'll watch it, hell so will my own sister, however I like many many many other "primary" transsexuals are able to move on from it while not actively purging it from our lifes, to do that would be self destructive and unhealthy.


(disclaimer: I'm not even that big of a geek, I talk more in a general sense than in self defence)

Regina,
I picked up on the interest thing as well.  I don't get it personally. 

I have a geeky side (my GG roommate does to) but many of them its overwhelming.  I don't really talk about my geeky side either.  It kind of freaks me out at times how strongly acculturated they are, its like they never had female friends.  Its almost the geeky male acculturation is pretty overwhelming.  I am not going to deny them their gender identity, but yikes. 

Interest wise.  My biggest interests are beauty music, twee pop, and DIY craft fairs.  I also have a high appreciation for literature, social history (I was basically a womens history major in college), fine arts, and cinema (foreign, classic, arts and indie).  I feel like I am speaking a foreign language sometimes with these girls.  I usually have an easier time talking to non-transwomen. 

The difference is as it was pointed out to me, is that I have been social in a subcultural setting since I was in high school, where  somehow being a gender variant became an asset and I was able to tap into the artistic crowd.  Basically,  I avoided social isolation and male acculturation.  Instead I was acculturated with queers, artists and bohemians...which well...offer more options.  Basically...I was lucky, which explains why I sometimes have a huge disconnect with most transgirls, both older and younger.  I could not begin to transition until recently because of my career and family, but I was able to at least  never fell into male culture as hard.  (I never fit into being male, but found a place where gender variance was accepted culturally.)  I have acculturation advantages...people never took me fully as male to begin with, but I had the advantage of a subcultural identity...as a musician, especially a songwriter...I was allowed flexibility to be myself a bit more and did not have the pressures of social conformity. 

My interests in fine arts and twee music and crafts, etc. kind of reflect this subculutral acculturation where it was perfectly okay to be femme, cute, or girly.  There is a difference of acculturation and changing how you are acculturated is the hardest part to transitioning, even for younger transkids. Many avoid subcultural leanings, I have only met one who was similar to me.   Because acculturation is a hard thing to drop, you get rather attached to your interests.   My interests by in large lean femme, save for a few exceptions I rather not admit. 

(Okay I admit I like battlestar galactica, but most other sci-fi bores me to death.) 

So what you're saying is that ->-bleeped-<-s lie to validate themselves?


No ->-bleeped-<- sherlock.

QuoteA TS who assimilates and is accepted as a normal member of their birth sex until they wake up one day in their 20s, can't take it, and become suicidal over dysphoria is NOT Primary. This is not an early vs late transitioner issue.

One symptom of post traumatic stress would be to repress feelings. I had a conversation with my therapist about this some years ago, she said that as trans people, many of us had experienced PTSD. It is indeed possible for someone to deeply repress their trans feelings for YEARS, and then wake up one day to suddenly realize who they are.

zythyra

Quote from: Nero on July 17, 2007, 05:31:21 AM
They try to compete with other TS to win the 'most masculine/feminine before HRT' cup.

Examples of this phenomenon:

* pre-HRT overweight mtf insisting she has suddenly developed gynecomastia

* ftm with 5 hairs on his chin citing this as proof he's intersexed

* mtf with sparse body hair citing this as proof of her femininity

* mtfs with large, broad upper bodies claiming to have a female build

* 5' 70lb ftm citing his tiny curveless frame as undeniable proof he's male

* mtfs with hands 5x the size of mine insisting they have 'girl hands'

* ftm who made an unattractive girl citing this as proof of his identity

* mtfs debating over who has the most prominent brow ridge

* tiny ftm develops slight arm muscles after a year of weight lifting and cites this as evidence of his 'non diagnosed' intersex condition

*  ftm claiming the sparse few hairs on his stomach is a happy trail when it's actually very common for females his ethnicity

* mtf insisting her organ is in reality something other than a penis

ROFL!!!  ;D ;D :D :D  OMG it is 6:11 a.m. here in Utopia.  I have to change my blouse.  I spilled my coffee all over it while reading this part of your post, Nero.  What a hoot!  I shouldn't be here in the mornings before my caffeine shot...LOL  ;D

I have to go to work.  Thank you for the laugh....*giggling*  I will never get over this, to tell you the truth.  It is going to be a good day indeed.  A day that starts with a laugh and a cup of coffee on your new blouse can't be bad, can it?

Quote*  ftm with 5 hairs on his chin citing this as proof he's intersexed
* mtf insisting her organ is in reality something other than a penis

I am literally choking on my coffee  :D  ;D....what a hoot!  Enjoy your day everyone....

tink :icon_chick:

Quote from: Nero on July 17, 2007, 07:59:22 AM

Quote from: Mawd on July 17, 2007, 07:51:43 AM
So what you're saying is that ->-bleeped-<-s lie to validate themselves?

Not all. Certain ->-bleeped-<-s. With me, what you see is what you get. I know what I am, I know what I'm not. I can't understand people who can't just say 'this is me, you either like it or you don't.'

Certain in my experience equals most.

Uhmm i've been saying so far that we shouldn't look at the matter in terms of better/worse, just objectively find out the differences. However it seems clear to me that after all Nero believes that in the secondary cases there are some inherent qualities that are somewhat lame and laughable.

OK, I'm back from the undead, 2-3 years passed rapidly  ;)

Nero, what happens when you NEVER adapt to your birth DNA bound sex? But somehow just trudge along into oblivion (my famous Zombie mode).

- I never had a girlfriend or any sexuality of any kind until the year before transition (lone girlfriend). Fantasised of being the women in a relationship always from puberty on, even with my lone girlfriend... (that was the last straw!!)
- Had 1 real male friend and 4 female friends in 40 years.
- Was in various stage of anxiety followed by despondency and depression since puberty, on and off meds ever since, severely messing my career and school life despite having supposedly a 150 IQ (I don't feel like it many times, believe me).
- Made much money, but with no dreams of a building any future, never bought any investment with it, just freely spent it on crap I thought I needed to be happy. So, in spite of the high salaries, I've got no assets and much debts at 40.
- I was diagnosed as having NO DEFINED PERSONALITY by psychologists in the gender program when I was 25; said they very rarely saw that and wanted to study me... I was so offended, that I dropped out of the gender program in my 20's and went further into zombieland.
- I was so uncomfortable with my image that I never looked into mirrors from puberty onward, barely washed myself or my hair, my shoes fell appart, my clothes were too big and rumpled most of the time.
- Tweezed my hair out from 20-24, then started electrolysis even though it took all my money to do so.


As you see, I wouldn't call that well adapted EVER, yet for some period of it, I lived in such a way that from the exterior, seemed to be adapted to my birth sex (when I was living the high life in California and was dying inside...).

Quote from: Mawd on July 17, 2007, 03:24:43 AMThe thing is that if you're dealing with being TS every waking day basically from birth and you can't blend in as your birth sex then you can't just sit around twiddling your thumbs you find something to escape into and that's all too often sci-fi/games/geeky crap. I remember as a kid calling up my friends just to chat for a few hours and having them not want to play along, I remember being rejected because I didn't want to play violent games in the playground

You could be describing my childhood exactly: I went through the same social isolation because I hated violent boy-games, and adults forced me out of female society, so I became isolated. This was in the 1960s, before computer games, so I became a science geek. I went to the library as often as possible and read books in preference to doing anything else. I also stole all my sister's books about girls, establishing a lifelong habit of reading women's literature. I even unofficially attended my sister's Girl Scout meetings when they were held in our house, having read the manual.

When science geekery lost its appeal, I went for classical music and achieved a high level of proficiency in piano, won awards, taught myself several other instruments, and wanted to major in music--but my parents discouraged me -- while my sister went on to a very successful career in classical music, because for a girl that was considered acceptable. Bitter now? Nah.

Gina, I can relate well to your experience. I became a dance enthusiast on my own, in college, never having gotten any encouragement for it when I was living at home (though my sisters did). I went and took ballet and other dance classes, and in fact it was restarting dance lessons 3 years ago that helped precipitate my coming out. I always enjoyed yoga classes and dance classes because they were predominantly or entirely women and that's where I felt comfortable, they spoke the language I understood. I became a feminist even though people sometimes accused me I went for feminism only as a pretext to hang out with women. Feminism was a great way to immerse myself in an all-female milieu. I also cared about the issues, it wasn't a pretext, women's points of view always intuitively made sense to me just as male stuff didn't. For my career, I chose library science which was great because I mostly worked with women.

Heh, Gina, you reminded me of a certain other TG online community where the MTFs all talked about their motorcycles, I felt left out. I dislike motorcycles but they were wild about them, the technical specs, gadgetry, etc. They accused me of not being a real TS because I only talked about girly stuff. It was like frickin gender dysphoria all over again. Talk about aggro. You said it, babe.

I'm also a late transitioner, which is why I suspect the primary/secondary dichotomy of being irrelevant. How did I hide from my gender dysphoria all those years with crossdressing only very infrequently? I avoided other people and spent long hours in libraries immersed in intellectual stuff. I was so isolated I generally had few or no friends. When I did go for social activities, I chose only female ones where possible (which weren't always open to me). The only way I was able to fully rejoin the human race was through coming out as a woman and embracing neo-Paganism, which happened simultaneously.

One thought has been clarified through all this discussion:

Many of us, myself included, look like we're going out of our way to ostentatiously emphasize how girly we always were. As in "the lady doth protest too much." No, it isn't protesting too much, it needs to be made explicit because my family closed their eyes to my femininity and refused to acknowledge it. If they hadn't imprisoned me in a male gender role through their denial, I wouldn't need to talk about it, it's self-evident. They've put me in a double bind: If I don't make it explicit, they pretend they don't see it. If I shove it in their face because of frustration at their denial, they claim I'm faking it (for some inexplicable reason). I hope everyone here understands, I'm not arguing with any of you here, I'm arguing with my family, mainly my Mom, somehow I can't rest until my Mom accepts me as I am. She seems determined not to see the real me, this is a serious hangup for me.

If only Mom would acknowledge my femininity, I would feel so much more at peace. She's the whole origin of my womanhood, my original role model. It hurts so much to have my relationship with her broken down because of coming out as TS.

QuoteI agree with what you're saying, Zythyra. I did not mean to imply that Secondaries don't have trans feelings. I did exactly what you're saying - the onset of puberty sent me into deep denial from age 11-18. You can't just bear the knowledge that you're a boy turning into a woman. However, I could never hide the fact that I was anything but a girl, to anyone even though I was in such deep denial I assumed I was a girl.
My not being conscious of being male during those years didn't make other people unconscious of it. My assuming I was a girl didn't make me accepted as one. Your true nature shines through, the truth is blatantly obvious to others even if you don't know it.

Nero,

I didn't perceive any negative implications by what you said. There is so much negative baggage with these terms, and hierarchical attitudes resulting from their usage is among the reasons I dislike the primary and secondary classifications. No question regarding varying degrees of intensity of GID that different people feel.

I was also in deep denial for much of my life, even from childhood though, other kids knew who I was and persecuted me as sissy, ->-bleeped-<-, girl, etc. In addition I'm a survivor of rape at age 16, so the pstd was an issue when I was in therapy. I'd basically numbed down my emotions.

I like your quote about our true nature shining through, what a world it would be if we'd been celebrated for that light our whole lives instead of persecuted and hated.

zythyra

PS, you gotta ditch these trans "friends" who are dissing you for who you are. :icon_hug:

Quote from: zythyra on July 17, 2007, 08:01:01 AMOne symptom of post traumatic stress would be to repress feelings. I had a conversation with my therapist about this some years ago, she said that as trans people, many of us had experienced PTSD. It is indeed possible for someone to deeply repress their trans feelings for YEARS, and then wake up one day to suddenly realize who they are.

zythyra

Right on, sister. I wish this was better understood. At least I wish my mother understood it. She knows damn well the traumas I went through in childhood.

Posted on: July 17, 2007, 10:36:05 AM

---

Quote from: Nero on July 17, 2007, 10:25:22 AM
I agree with what you're saying, Zythyra. I did not mean to imply that Secondaries don't have trans feelings. I did exactly what you're saying - the onset of puberty sent me into deep denial from age 11-18. You can't just bear the knowledge that you're a boy turning into a woman. However, I could never hide the fact that I was anything but a girl, to anyone even though I was in such deep denial I assumed I was a girl.
My not being conscious of being male during those years didn't make other people unconscious of it. My assuming I was a girl didn't make me accepted as one. Your true nature shines through, the truth is blatantly obvious to others even if you don't know it.

So that's why they always called me "girl" in school.

I can relate well to this, Nero... I consistently failed at male socialization throughout my life, except in arty subcultures like music where gender rules were openly flexible.

Only two times have I voluntarily chosen all-male settings: one of them was the Scouts, where I began having sex with boys and then got raped, and the other was a group studied by a woman scholar as, interestingly, a program that feminized men.

Quote from: NeroDid you not read my disclaimer? I'm not saying that all secondaries are like that. Every single observation on some secondaries I've made in this entire thread, is all stuff I've actually heard secondaries I know say 100x over.
Not a bit of it is exaggerated

I did read it.
However it doesn't change the meaning of what you said. If you really believe that those behaviour patterns could be equally found in primary or secondary then you wouldn't need to mention secondary at all, and your disclaimer would have been different something like "i've seen this only in secondary but well it has nothing to do with that because some primary might also be like this".

But that's not what you said. while you certainly did say that not all secondary fall in that description, you certainly made it clear that if someone behave like that, it's most probably a secondary not a primary, which is still a discriminating factor.

I quote one of your statements:

QuoteAny 'man' who can rant for a straight hour about the 'patriarchy' is NOT primary no matter what criteria he fits.

So basically you are saying that while you cannot tell who is primary, you can however tell who is NOT primary whenever that person shows some "symptomps" (the one you listed) that are not exactly flattering.

Hey to avoid any misunderstandment, i'm not feeling offended. You said before you were sick about being politically correct, so just say what you think, i'm interested in your sincere opinion, not the acceptable version.

Several have given answers to this question, myself included, but for one reason or another you keep coming back to the same question. 

So, I have a question for you Regina;  How would (or what is) you answer this question?

Sarah L.

Quote from: regina on July 17, 2007, 09:31:01 AM

I know (am acquainted with) three women from another internet forum (two of whom I've also met). They all transitioned before 20 and have been transitioned for 30 years or more. All of them insist they're online to help newbies, which is great. Unfortunately, what I've seen instead is they're all still fighting their own battles about being trans. They are obsessed with their own passability (which, in one case is naturally very good, in another case very good after a recent trip to Dr. O and in another case not nearly as good as it was when she was young). They are all obsessed with why they are trans (and two are still going over the DES business). Two have been married for periods of time (but are now divorced).  Two of them seem to hang with a unusually large number of transwomen (one's in a long relationship with another long-term transitioning transwoman after being in relationships with men). One of them only hangs with men. All of them seem to be in a prolonged cycle of reprocessing their lives, their transitions, and how impossible it was for them to live as males (again, they all transitioned before becoming adult males).

What I have learned from these women (not so much from what they've said, but the subjects they choose to talk  about and how they selectively share their lives) is they all have quite a bit of shame about who they are, that they still don't feel 'real' no matter how much they insist they are (because they're obsessed with talking about this subject).

You know Gina, I have to agree with what you say here.  My "alert system" is going off as well.  I'm not quite clear about something though.  Why would anyone who transitioned during their late teens visit Dr. O or Dr. Z?   Most of the people (I know) who transitioned early in life (late teens and early twenties) are almost impossible to clock as TS.  It seems, to me, that these women you talk about suffer from some kind of body dysmorphic disorder if they are constantly seeking opportunities to surgically enhance their features.  To be honest I have met a few of them as well, "my breasts are larger than yours so I am "more" of a woman than you" kind of thing.

Now, there's nothing wrong with having transsexual friends, but if someone who transitioned young is "always" hanging out with trans people, I have to wonder why this is.  Does this person feel more at ease with trans folks? or is this person not comfortable enough to socialize with cisgender people yet?

Regarding passability, there comes a time in the life of a TS (me as an example) when this is not such a big issue anymore.  I know I pass 100% of the time.  I realized this many years ago and closed that chapter of my struggle so to speak.  Been there, done that, and now, I don't even think about it.  As with any other cisgender woman, I like going to the hair dresser on a regular basis;  I love having my nails done bi-weekly; I also enjoy dressing well when opportunities present (i.e, a social gathering, a family reunion, an important meeting at work, etc).  However, at home, I am all shorts and t-shirts, very old (actually ancient) slippers, and naturally I don't wear makeup.  If I have to go to the grocery store, the post office or open the door for the UPS guy, this is what they see, a plain Tink without any makeup and all the adornments that others are so fond of wearing.  This is why I think that there are some unresolved issues with these women you talk about, but like I usually say, whatever!

Quote from: Nero on July 17, 2007, 01:32:19 PM

I'm going to be a little blunt if you'll permit me:

I've actually had clowns (some of whom frequent this board) tell me I'm not trans.
For silly reasons like:

a. I have medical issues which prevent me from being on testosterone at this time.

b. I have no desire for a cock, and wouldn't trade my [meow] for the world.

c. I have some effeminate mannerisms and phrases.

d. I'm bisexual.

Nero, if you allow me, you shouldn't be listening to this rubbish.  Obviously these people you talk about are stupid  (yes, whoever you are, you heard me correctly, you are STUPID)

I would like to know who these people are, for I want to tell them a few things myself.

Anyway, I think I am going to rest from this thread now.  ;) ;D

tink :icon_chick:

P.S.  Yeah, I left work a bit early today, for I had some errands to run... :P

QuoteHowever - I was dressing as a man in my teens, then living as a non-passable male called 'Joe'.
The difference is I've already lived a man's life - the type of man's life I doubt many post-transition ftms will experience. I was accepted and treated as an equal by other men - and these were no pansy boys, but hardcore ex-cons with gallons of machismo and testosterone flowing through their veins. Living in the world of men, bonding with men, 'being' a man (albeit unpassable), is worth far more than all the facial hair, all the body hair, all the musculature, all these things that ftms obsess over.
One sign you're not being treated as female: You're deep in conversation with some guys, and one of the wives enters and a respectful hush falls over the room.

Having a guy who acts like a girl tell me I'm not trans is laughable.

Back on topic:
I don't know how to make this any more clear. Transitioning at 20 years old does not a primary make.

Primary = childhood (usually birth) onset

Secondary = adulthood onset

That's why doll. That's all there is to it.

Well, that is certainly one POV N.

However. You just described a goodly part of my life too dude. I'm old school, and to be perfectly honest with you, you sound more like a throwback than a person that transitions.

Back in the day my friend, there was no top surgery let alone bottom surgery. Plenty of women identified as female and as a man in the sociological sense. Plenty of women dressed as men, had relationships with women, and were the man in that relationship. While some wanted a dick, or to have their tits whacked off, not all did. I have plenty of friends right now, my age or older that still feel this way and practice that lifestyle. I don't pass as a guy except when I want to, and I am still accepted and have bonded with plenty of guys just as you have described.

So, from my POV, attitude alone does not a transman make.

Another point you made is that there must have been primaries back in the 1800's or whenever. But I am not so sure of that either. I think a lot of this stuff is being created as we go along. I'm sure that there are a lot of people that have transitioned even to the point of surgery, that would have never even thought about being the different gender were it not for the advent of modern science, and the medical establishment setting up their surgical merry go round. While there have always been folk that desired to live in the opposite gender role, the vast majority would remain their birth sex even if given the choice to have a surgical outcome.

I think what you are arguing is kinda what I put forward earlier. That a primary can only be applied to someone that never acclimated to, nor accepted their biologically linked gender role from birth. That makes sense if you are going to differentiate using a binary system of demarcation. However, I think a binary system is a mistake and only continues the mistakes that were made towards this community previously.

I keep going back and asking myself -- why does it matter? Same problems for the most part. Slight modifications in treatment regime. Everybody gets herded (moo!) toward the same outcome. So, other than validating the people that feel they are primaries v. secondaries, why worry about it? It's like a non-issue to me. The more I consider it, the more I realize that I'm wasting my energy even talking about it.

Put a fork in me already.

Quote from: Nero on July 17, 2007, 01:32:19 PM
Primary = childhood (usually birth) onset

Secondary = adulthood onset

I've done alot of reflecting on my life over the last few years.  And here are the basic facts.  I knew I wanted to be a girl before I was 8, probably age 7 or less.  But right about then my brother was committed to a mental hospital, and I learned how to repress it real fast so that wouldn't happen to me.  I had to wait another 40 years before I let it back out of the bottle.  My body is not erotic to me, and I like sex with men as much as I like it with women.  What am I?  And does it really matter?

Thank you for giving your response Regina and I do understand what your saying.

Sarah L.

hrm, so primary and secondery have behavioural charactersitics as well as just when they discover thier gid?
im so confused  :-\

Quote from: NeroThat post was intended to be humorous. Many of the members here have heard all the things I listed a million times over, hence the joke. It was not intended to be a representation of Secondaries and their behaviours by any means.
My sincere apologies. I didn't mean to offend.

Oh all right i have misunderstood you, sorry. no offense taken, thank you for the clarification  ;)

reading that, im so confused...

but are you saying secondery is more of a consious choice, whereas primary is tortrous realisation?
and this is all ageless?

Quote from: Rachael on July 17, 2007, 08:14:28 PM
reading that, im so confused...

but are you saying secondery is more of a consious choice, whereas primary is tortrous realisation?
and this is all ageless?

This is why I initially said this:

Quote from: Tink on July 16, 2007, 07:43:02 PM
when I go back in time and look at how my life developed since early childhood, I can tell, for sure, that it is completely different from that of someone who transitioned later on in life.  Why? because I avoided the common traps they fell into (i.e, denial , marriage, male presentation and the ability to CHOOSE to put off transiton for whatever reasons) When I look at these differences, it is clear, to me, that I transitioned young because I felt more strongly about being a woman than older transitioners did/do.  I didn't have A CHOICE.  I transitioned because that was what I had to do.  For me it was a matter of life and death.  Being who I am was more important than everything older transitioners have lived for (i.e, jobs, careers, school, children, family, spouses, society, pressure, and whatever else there is for an excuse). My priority was to be who I was, the rest (everything others have lived to build during their lives as males) was secondary.  Why? because I had no choice.  It was simply the way I felt.  My dysphoria was too much for me to bear.  I had to break free; otherwise, I would have died.

;)


tink :icon_chick:

So it seems that to be a secondary would mean that either:

a) One has the ability to put other things ahead of transition
b) While their dysphoria exists, it is to a lesser degree and thus easier to suppress

I'll admit that I would fall under this category.  It took me a while to realize why I was unhappy being a male.  I went to a Catholic school and had it drilled into me that accepting any lifestyle in the LGBT community made one a religious deviant.  I was forced to accept this and it made me feel that I was wrong to not live up to the call to be a man.  So for a while I suppressed my unhappiness and became like a machine.  I got angry when I saw someone admitting their identification as a woman because it was like they were doing what I wouldn't let myself do.  But now I guess I can admit it and at 20 years old I guess it would place me into the category of Secondary. 

I have yet to take any steps because I am trying to be practical and finish out college before accumulating even more debt.  Its not like I have any choice other than to postpone it though...

i agree with Tink, i couldnt put it off, or wait, and the idea of being a husband or father repulses me... the only way i will marry is a wife,and be a parent as a mother. I could simply not live as a boy, and i had to be myself, or die trying. so there is a difference i feel between groups, as id never be able to stop, heck, my parents threw me out of the house, and im living alone now, working, studying, trying to make a life for myself AND transitioning... if i could put it off i would, i honestly would, but i cant.
if that makes me something differnet whatever. it doesnt effect my life in any way, im just as screwed, and suffer just as much.

Which goes back to my original post that we are all indeed very different and I am perfectly fine with that.  Can others say the same thing?

Quote from: ReginaSorry, Tink, but despite your sunny wood sprite thingy, your post and outlook have a lot of hostility and were quite hurtful.

Ahhh but Regina you asked me to give you an honest opinion, and I did give you an honest response from the bottom of my heart.  Sorry if you found it hurtful, but it is what I believe.

There's a thread in the philosophy forum titled "Why asked a question if you don't want to hear the answer?"  :-\

tink :icon_chick:

Quote from: Hypatia on July 17, 2007, 10:50:04 AM

Right on, sister. I wish this was better understood. At least I wish my mother understood it. She knows damn well the traumas I went through in childhood.

Posted on: July 17, 2007, 10:36:05 AM

---

So that's why they always called me "girl" in school.

I can relate well to this, Nero... I consistently failed at male socialization throughout my life, except in arty subcultures like music where gender rules were openly flexible.

Only two times have I voluntarily chosen all-male settings: one of them was the Scouts, where I began having sex with boys and then got raped, and the other was a group studied by a woman scholar as, interestingly, a program that feminized men.

Yes Hypatia, I believe PTSD is a much bigger issue in the trans world than most realize. In threads like this, it's obvious that many of us had extremely traumatic childhoods because of who we are. I also found a sense of community in the artistic/music subculture, one of the few places where gender roles weren't as rigidly enforced. I'm sorry to hear of your rape experience, I've unfortunately been there as well.  :icon_hug:

zythyra

Posted on: July 17, 2007, 10:18:46 PM

---

Quote from: regina on July 17, 2007, 03:32:12 PM

Fundamentally, in my heart, I don't believe in primary/secondary. That's how I answer it. But I don't want to downplay or dismiss what other people are experiencing. Yes, I have met many transwomen who I, point blank, could not respond to as women (a lot of the sci fi, computer game playin', car-lovin', tekkie/trekkie ones). I get they have gender issues every bit as serious as mine that gave them just as much pain, but as to the logical conclusion that... well, if you're not a man you must be a woman... no, I don't buy that. I believe in spectrums because all these issues are so complex, there are so many variables and there is so much clouding up people's perceptions of themselves and others (I'm at the top of that list). Does that make any sense, Sarah? Tell me if I'm totally full of it.

Gina, I agree, it's not as simple as primary/secondary, there's a much bigger spectrum of experience to consider. We all have assumptions that we've internalized from the binary culture; if one is not a man, then they must be a woman (or visa versa). It took a lot of soul searching for me to realize I had other options, of being neither, both or other gender.

zythyra

Tsk Tsk Oh Regina, I respect your opinion but I don't agree with it.  I think I also have the right to do that, don't I? 

Quote from: ReginaThis is a thread about something that some of us find real, and unique and highly personal to themselves

Exactly, for some of us GID is very real.  I couldn't agree more with your statement.

tink :icon_chick:

QuoteAddressing this part first. It's not only unflattering, but men do not use words like 'patriarchy' and 'misogyny' as part of their daily vocabulary. It's one thing for a man to support the feminist movement, quite another to be a militant man-hating, man-bashing feminist as some ftms are. It's just extremely difficult for me to see them as men. Sorry.

Nero, dude.  First you blast me for insulting you for giving my POV on this thread. It came from me using a sweeping generalization for sure, based on begaviour. Frankly, during the length of this thread and trying to follow it over the last several days, I have lost track of exactly what you are tryiong to say - what point you are trying to get across. To tell you trhe truth, I thought I was agreing with you. Now I have to go back and reread the thread to see whre you are coming from.

But the quote above, and several others you have made, I have found to be rather insulting.
Stating something as generally sweeping as: "men do not use words like 'patriarchy' and 'misogyny' as part of their daily vocabulary." is much worse in my opinion than anything I stated. It seems like you taken it upon yourself to define what real men do and do not say. I am taking it with a grain of salt, because it seems like you have an axe to grind with the feminist population, and I want no part of anyone's internalized hatred toward a specific group. I already dealt with my own generalized anger toward the male population.

I generally hate everyone, but I try to do it on a person by person basis, not based on what sex or gender they are.   :icon_chainsaw:

I am going to go back and re-read the thread, but my gut instinct is telling me that this is another one of those threads on Susan's that seek to do nothing but validate by being accutely exclusionary. If I deem that to be the case, than I won't be back on this one and you can rant all you like to anyone that wants to listen.

Quote from: regina on July 17, 2007, 09:47:23 PM

Quote from: Tink on July 17, 2007, 08:21:24 PMI didn't have A CHOICE.  I transitioned because that was what I had to do.  For me it was a matter of life and death.  Being who I am was more important than everything older transitioners have lived for (i.e, jobs, careers, school, children, family, spouses, society, pressure, and whatever else there is for an excuse). My priority was to be who I was, the rest (everything others have lived to build during their lives as males) was secondary.  Why? because I had no choice.  It was simply the way I felt.  My dysphoria was too much for me to bear.  I had to break free; otherwise, I would have died.[/b]

I have a real problem with this analysis. A lot of things happen in life that take us in different directions. Someone in the family dies, a trauma occurs, some children are more bound to the immediate urgent needs of their parents, whatever. And very often, what happens in our lives cannot be called a "choice" it just happens and you do your best to deal with it. You pull yourself together and you go on and try to live. And sometimes, after the dust clears, you look around and find yourself in a totally different place than you could ever have humanly expected. Moreover, we grow up in different times and different environments with different starting points physically and financially. I said it in an earlier post, one aspect to early transitioners I find in nearly every personal history I've heard is that they were of a size and general look that it wasn't that hard for them to go forward and transition. They didn't face severe physical incongruity and that's just not starting from the same place from someone who did have that to deal with. Was this because they were so meant to be female and others weren't or they were so more completely estrogenized in the womb... whatever, none of us know that anyway. But I doubt it.

You say you had no choice, and I can believe that because it happened to you. But you didn't live the lives of people who didn't transition when they were young, did you? You say you knew what you had to do, but until you're in someone else's shoes, you don't really know what you'd do, it's all conjecture.

And that's what this is, it's all conjecture when you speak for people whose lives were different than yours. You say they had a choice to transition when you don't even know the circumstances of their lives. What I take away from this is that you have a lot of issues with later transitioners that you're not especially up front about. Sorry, Tink, but despite your sunny wood sprite thingy, your post and outlook have a lot of hostility and were quite hurtful.

Gina M.

Posted on: July 17, 2007, 09:42:19 PM

---

Quote from: Rachael on July 17, 2007, 09:12:42 PM
i agree with Tink, i couldnt put it off, or wait, and the idea of being a husband or father repulses me... the only way i will marry is a wife,and be a parent as a mother. I could simply not live as a boy, and i had to be myself, or die trying. so there is a difference i feel between groups, as id never be able to stop, heck, my parents threw me out of the house, and im living alone now, working, studying, trying to make a life for myself AND transitioning... if i could put it off i would, i honestly would, but i cant.
if that makes me something differnet whatever. it doesnt effect my life in any way, im just as screwed, and suffer just as much.

Sorry Rachael, I appreciate your intense dysphoria, but you're living in an age where you can go on the Internet and find out how to do it. There are white, middle class young people learning things like this everyday from the privacy of their own bedrooms. You can go to a health center in many parts of the country and find sympathetic medical personnel. You can go to support groups. That isn't the same as someone who transitioned 30 years ago, who dealt with a complete lack of information except on the street and through often illegal hormones and surgeries. I understand your need to transition young and I'm thankful you have that option, but please don't think that entitles you to make judgments  about people who grew up in a different world and time.

ciao,
Gina M.

Im sorry Gina, but we live today, we dont live 30 years ago, i wasnt around then, and we are talking NOW... and i can garuntee that now all trans people will transition in thier teens, and no middle aged people will transition. This isnt just societys fault, but some dysphorias can develop in time, and mental breakdowns can generate dysphorias that arnt even just gender related. its fairly narrow minded to say you couldnt transition young 30 years ago. one could,the curcumstances were just much harder, and im not deneying this. But Dont you dare assume that this is easy now... there arnt support groups everywhere, i cant access hormones for 8 or so years if i followed the NHS,  or surgery, i AM taking ileagal hormones, to keep me alive, and i dont need you to tell me how easy kids have it these days...

Quote"men do not use words like 'patriarchy' and 'misogyny' as part of their daily vocabulary."

Sure we do, when we're trying to bag a babe in Birkenstocks ;)

*runs and hides*

Dennis

/me bags dennis and runs away.

Quote from: Tink on July 16, 2007, 07:43:02 PM
Why? because I avoided the common traps they fell into (i.e, denial , marriage, male presentation and the ability to CHOOSE to put off transiton for whatever reasons) When I look at these differences, it is clear, to me, that I transitioned young because I felt more strongly about being a woman than older transitioners did/do.  I didn't have A CHOICE.  I transitioned because that was what I had to do.  For me it was a matter of life and death. 

You have made a rather large assumption.  I never chose to put off transition.  I was terrorised into waiting.  I waited because that was what I had to do.  For me it was a matter of life and death.  Since nobody seems to have read this, it bears repeating:

Quote from: Lisbeth on July 17, 2007, 03:51:12 PM
I knew I wanted to be a girl before I was 8, probably age 7 or less.  But right about then my brother was committed to a mental hospital, and I learned how to repress it real fast so that wouldn't happen to me.  I had to wait another 40 years before I let it back out of the bottle. 

Quote from: Lisbeth on July 18, 2007, 09:54:17 AM

Quote from: Tink on July 16, 2007, 07:43:02 PM
Why? because I avoided the common traps they fell into (i.e, denial , marriage, male presentation and the ability to CHOOSE to put off transiton for whatever reasons) When I look at these differences, it is clear, to me, that I transitioned young because I felt more strongly about being a woman than older transitioners did/do.  I didn't have A CHOICE.  I transitioned because that was what I had to do.  For me it was a matter of life and death. 

You have made a rather large assumption.  I never chose to put off transition.  I was terrorised into waiting.  I waited because that was what I had to do.  For me it was a matter of life and death.  Since nobody seems to have read this, it bears repeating:

Quote from: Lisbeth on July 17, 2007, 03:51:12 PM
I knew I wanted to be a girl before I was 8, probably age 7 or less.  But right about then my brother was committed to a mental hospital, and I learned how to repress it real fast so that wouldn't happen to me.  I had to wait another 40 years before I let it back out of the bottle. 

if one can repress the feelings, are they that strong?

Quote from: regina on July 17, 2007, 11:08:52 PM
What I wish is that, rather than everybody explaining why they feel a certain way (explanations and theories and quotes) people would just say the reality of what they feel (not just their theories) and, especially, how those feelings affect how they relate to others, themselves and the world.

I think these are the most "female" words in this entire thread.

must words be gendered?

Quote from: Rachael on July 18, 2007, 09:56:54 AM
if one can repress the feelings, are they that strong?

So you're saying that if my feelings were strong (i.e. "real"), I should have acknowledged them and embraced the idea that I would be sent to the psych ward?  That's an aweful lot to expect of an eight year old. 

BTW, I don't need your validation of who I am, so don't expect further response from me.

discussing whos more dysphoric doesnt get us to the root of what primary and secondery actually means...

whats a real transexual or a fake one?
are some transexuals made of pappier mache and washingup liquid bottles?


OMG BLUEPETER ->-bleeped-<-S! RUN!

Quote from: Rachael on July 18, 2007, 11:15:06 AM
whats a real transexual or a fake one?
are some transexuals made of pappier mache and washingup liquid bottles?


OMG BLUEPETER ->-bleeped-<-S! RUN!

LOL.

If I'm to be a fake, I definitely want to be made of papier mache.  I love papier mache!

Here is a page that gives "one" definition of Primary and Secondary.

http://www.genderpsychology.org/transsexual/primary.html

Sarah L.

I think this is all irrelevant as I'm clearly ->-bleeped-<-r than thou.


Why does this even matter? if someone transitions and is happy with it then good for them, I don't see why you should all judge them unless it's for a valid reason like being batsh*t crazy which is down to the individual.

I really don't like seeing a group branded as being a bunch of loonies even if statistically speaking they are more likely to be mental, it's just an unhealthy mentality to make it "them and us" with any group, we're all just people when it comes down to it.

I agree Mawd, it is irrelevant, but the topic just seems to keep going and going.

Certain terms or words just seem overly important and personal to us.

No matter the definition, the word, etc., I am a woman.


Sarah L.

Quoteif one can repress the feelings, are they that strong?

Yes! I've read psychological case histories, and it's truly amazing the abuse and trauma that some people have lived through, with no conscious recollection of it whatsoever. The human mind has its ways of coping, although sooner or later, stuff is going to come up from the sub conscious, and when it does, look out! Whoooooosh!

zythyra

And here is a third story.

As a baby - don't know as noone has told about it.

As a child identifies clearly not-male, but does not think it is possible to be physically female as the physical differences are obvious and there is no magic (and no knowledge about trans-issues). Does not fit in the age group but finds ways to make the adults happy. Being with boys does not work and being with girls is just too painful.

In school opts for an genderless role with no interest in other people. Does well academically and finds ways to avoid gender-specific slots where being female is not tolerated, and is female where it has no devastating consequences. Learns to be a excellent liar and makes and art of conning people.

Puberty hits and results in substance abuse and finding other ways that hurt so GID would not hurt in such an obvious way (abusive relationships etc). The conning skills helps and goes through the rest of school with problematic people not seeing the GID.

As a young adult has a very feminine role and does not present male. After a few years transitions (20-30 years of age).



This seems to fit neither of the classes but is still very real for some people. Thus the binary division seems flawed.

Quote from: Rachael on July 18, 2007, 07:51:32 AM
we live today, we dont live 30 years ago, i wasnt around then, and we are talking NOW... and i can garuntee that now all trans people will transition in thier teens, and no middle aged people will transition. This isnt just societys fault, but some dysphorias can develop in time, and mental breakdowns can generate dysphorias that arnt even just gender related. its fairly narrow minded to say you couldnt transition young 30 years ago. one could,the curcumstances were just much harder, and im not deneying this. But Dont you dare assume that this is easy now... there arnt support groups everywhere, i cant access hormones for 8 or so years if i followed the NHS,  or surgery, i AM taking ileagal hormones, to keep me alive, and i dont need you to tell me how easy kids have it these days...

Seconded!  It isn't any easier now than it was 50 years ago.   Everyone seems to be fond of the word "assumption" lately.  Well, making an assumption that a young transsexual person has it soooooo easy nowadays is beyond preposterous.  I wonder if those of you who seem to think this way are watching the news, are familiar with transgender kids, or are aware of the statistics of suicide amongst transgender teens.

Quote from: Lisbeth on July 18, 2007, 10:15:03 AM
So you're saying that if my feelings were strong (i.e. "real"), I should have acknowledged them and embraced the idea that I would be sent to the psych ward?  That's an aweful lot to expect of an eight year old. 

What about a six year old in a psych ward, Lisbeth?  Would you like to hear that little boy's story?



BTW Rachael, I'm made of feuilles d'or! ;)

tink :icon_chick:

Quote from: taru on July 18, 2007, 05:25:15 PM
And here is a third story.

As a baby - don't know as noone has told about it.

As a child identifies clearly not-male, but does not think it is possible to be physically female as the physical differences are obvious and there is no magic (and no knowledge about trans-issues). Does not fit in the age group but finds ways to make the adults happy. Being with boys does not work and being with girls is just too painful.

In school opts for an genderless role with no interest in other people. Does well academically and finds ways to avoid gender-specific slots where being female is not tolerated, and is female where it has no devastating consequences. Learns to be a excellent liar and makes and art of conning people.

Puberty hits and results in substance abuse and finding other ways that hurt so GID would not hurt in such an obvious way (abusive relationships etc). The conning skills helps and goes through the rest of school with problematic people not seeing the GID.

As a young adult has a very feminine role and does not present male. After a few years transitions (20-30 years of age).



This seems to fit neither of the classes but is still very real for some people. Thus the binary division seems flawed.

Bingo.

'cept i transitioned at 18

The problem with refusing to wear pant thing is that you have to realize that pants are actually not a women's thing. what if your mother wears them all the time, works, is the one driving the car (not your dad), is the assertive one, etc. What if your parents and everyone around you defy female stereotypes and you watch 2-3 hours of very selective TV a week (most of those being sesame street when I was young), how on earth could being put in pants ever traumatize you then.

My mother always bought me very nice clothes, good material, with little vests and much colors (it was the 70's); no one else dressed like that. The fashion for men's hair was long and I had long hair (shoulder length) from age 2 to age 8; Was consistently taken for a girl during the whole period. If I can get my scanner to work and find a decent one, I may post it. I was the typical tomboy, if your a girl and are a tomboy, why would you feel bad about wearing pants or doing more active activities, with one of my friend, a girl too, 1 used to build snow forts in the winter and we'd stage epic battles. She went into fashion design later, not a very tomboy activity, but she's got such spunk!

I started to notice gender when I first saw the Sound of music on TV, I was about 7 (1974) and somehow (we got our first black and white TV in 1970!), I really identitifed with Liesl and the rest of the girls, especially the 16 going on seventeen song.

The same year, my sister was born, and that jolted me, told me of the existence of gender and different paths!!

Still, I was a tomboy, and even though I got steadily bullied from 7 onward, I wasn't sure why, even though epiteth relating to being gay abounded in my direction (since this was preburty, I suppose it was because I was always with the girls in class and after class.  Again, I didn't really feel different from the girls even if I didn't wear skirts, many of them didn't wear skirts at my school and had active activities. I was first in gymnastics, beeting all the girls, for several years (I was always good in all sports, beating males, females, aliens :-).

It was only at puberty when I was totally left behind by my friends who left tomboyhood, leaving me alone and dawning on all the implications and my fate!!

QuoteI think this is all irrelevant as I'm clearly ->-bleeped-<-r than thou.

Cute!   :laugh:

Quotehttp://www.genderpsychology.org/transsexual/primary.html

This was a load of claptrap too.

I can see the P'soV being exchanged here, and I agree with some of it, but I still take issure with this either or reasoning. Categories rarely work for people, because people are complex.

Most people are an amalgam of Mary-Elizabeth, not Mary or Elizabeth as cited in this thread.

Quote from: taru on July 18, 2007, 05:25:15 PM
And here is a third story.

As a baby - don't know as noone has told about it.

As a child identifies clearly not-male, but does not think it is possible to be physically female as the physical differences are obvious and there is no magic (and no knowledge about trans-issues). Does not fit in the age group but finds ways to make the adults happy. Being with boys does not work and being with girls is just too painful.

In school opts for an genderless role with no interest in other people. Does well academically and finds ways to avoid gender-specific slots where being female is not tolerated, and is female where it has no devastating consequences. Learns to be a excellent liar and makes and art of conning people.

Puberty hits and results in substance abuse and finding other ways that hurt so GID would not hurt in such an obvious way (abusive relationships etc). The conning skills helps and goes through the rest of school with problematic people not seeing the GID.

As a young adult has a very feminine role and does not present male. After a few years transitions (20-30 years of age).



This seems to fit neither of the classes but is still very real for some people. Thus the binary division seems flawed.

This is very close to my story, thanks for bringing this case up  :)

I have HUGE issues with those storylines because like I said, neither really reflect what I and many others went through.  They are also way too stereotypical.  It is very similar to the DSM storylines which are insulting in most cases. 

For example my storyline:

Ages 3-10
Intense feeling of alienation.  Cannot relate to other boys and is often the target of abuse from other boys.  Emotionally fragile, frequently cries.  Socially isolated.  Feels disconnected from being both male and sometimes human.  Intense disconnect from gender.  Prefers to spend time isolated.  Effiminate behaviors are persistent, but no CD or stated desire to be female, but clear disconnect from male gender.  Frequently daydreams of being a girl.  Subconscious and conscious disconnect.  Exhibits both male and female gender behaviors in play.  Adults persistently perplexed and reactionary towards social problems and behavior.  No real childhood.  Considered to have issues. Gender variant-nondescript.  Often states "I do not know what I am" or thoughts that they are an alien or fairy or ghost. Barriers everywhere psychologically.   

Ages 11-13

Gender consciousness emerges as desiring to be female, not expressed out of fear.  Explicitly states a disconnect from men.  Hates being male.  Target of persistent physical and verbal abuse.  Effiminate behaviors increase.  Hides feelings and desires for fear of further abuse.  Begins dressing in womens clothing regularly in secret. 

Ages 14-22
Still expresses a disconnect from males. Gender identity is female.  Seen as "not a guy" by friends.  Adopts an effeminate/androgynous appearance (jewelry, makeup, whatever can get away with) publicly.  Dresses in feminine attire whenever possible.  Adopting socially as a gender variant.  Makes friends both male and female, however is rarely treated as male.  Sexual and gender identity issues apparent.  Anxiety issues are persistent.  First considerations of gender transition, however fear of social isolation, parental rejection and distrust of psychological field prevents action, in addition to extreme family problems.  Begins making plans for transition later in life and considers it at points in early twenties.  Focuses on education and arts to distract from anxiety and depression.  Consistent problems with intimate relationships with both men and wrong, relationships feel "all wrong".  Has no defined sexual orientation.  Regularly taken as female in everyday life from non-acquaintances.   

Ages 22-27

Multiple breakdowns.  Intense anxiety and occasional depression.  Does not adapt to male gender role despite appearance.  Job performance and graduate school performance is effected. Very little motivation, has persistent issues with sleep.  Has extreme disconnect, often feels like a ghost.  Frequent dressing in female clothing provides little relief from gender issues.  Relationship issues persist.  Sexual intercourse at 27 ends up feeling extremely wrong confirming earlier beliefs, intense psycho sexual inversion (tries to relieve issues of psychological pain through thinking they are female), sexual relations very limited for short amount of time.  Periods of extended social isolation return.  Does not have issues making friends, however is considered nice, but "essentially not male".  Considers transition multiple times but is frightened away by costs due to lack of consistent employment and law school costs. 

Age 28
Begins to evaluate gender transition and decides to seek therapy, deciding that any more extension of "ghost life" is torture.  Begins gender transition.

Sexuality: Asexual (bisexual tendencies)

Basically this storyline does not fit either the primary and secondary storyline.  Yes there was a period of adaptation between 14-22, but it was being an extremely androgynous gender variant, not male.  It kind of proves how there are issues with these narrow storylines of primary and secondary, there is a good deal that is not covered with many TS, because they fall outside both.   

Quote from: Amy T. on July 19, 2007, 11:30:28 AM
I have HUGE issues with those storylines because like I said, neither really reflect what I and many others went through.  They are also way too stereotypical.  It is very similar to the DSM storylines which are insulting in most cases. 

Basically this storyline does not fit either the primary and secondary storyline.  Yes there was a period of adaptation between 14-22, but it was being an extremely androgynous gender variant, not male.  It kind of proves how there are issues with these narrow storylines of primary and secondary, there is a good deal that is not covered with many TS, because they fall outside both.   

Perhaps we need another classification Tertiary Transsexual, one who does not fit Primary or Secondary?

Or we could just all be transitioners?

Buffy

Actually there was an academic article and study by contributers to the DSM-V that basically SAID that the Primary and secondary classifications should not be used, because there is very rarely anybody who fits the limited definitions and the classifications are woefully inadequate for diagnosis.  They further stated that the classifications served no good and are based on stereotypes and inaccurate previous studies that were based in awful conditions.  It when further and critiqued Blanchard for coming up with the classifications in the first place, along with Blanchards style clinical methods.

Basically we have to look at the man who came up with these classifications.  He is now considered a hack who was extremely damaging to TS in the Medical field, along with his followers (including Anne Lawrence).  They are widely disparaged by gender specialists. 

This is only my opinion, but,...

This topic is only destined to continue going in circles with little or no agreement or settlement between the two sides of the discussion.

Hopefully we can agree to disagree and not hurt anyones feelings.


Sarah L.

wow this is getting heavy, some bubbles are bursting and people dont like it...

i did not go crazy at puberty, i was given no outlet for my femininity, or know what feminity was, just oddness. i was at an all boys school from age 2 till i came to university at 18. i simply knew male, and not male.i didnt know that girls didnt have penises till i was mid teens.... as for the puberty issue, i was largely spared of traumatic things like muscle, facial hair and penis/ testicle growth to an extent. it felt odd, true, but i didnt know there were differences, as i never MET a girl that wasnt related to me, aisde from teachers that wasnt my mother... i knew since ever i wasnt a boy, but not that i was a girl till mid teens. being a nothing was easy to blend to what i had to, and anyone who knows me, and what i went through with my parents and growing up will understand that i had no ability to be a frilly pink little girl.
what does my phsyc report say? 'Clear Primary transexual, no other signs of mental illness'
so evidently its not as simple as being born screaming 'im a girl'

oh trust me, i had a male body... always had small breasts (acup ish) and bulked up to hide it. and i actually 'tried' at one point to gain muscle...

First of all, to be perfectly honest, I have not kept up on this topic.  However, I did scan it, so I have an idea of where the discussion went.

What is the point of declaring that some people are primary or secondary?  Are you saying that secondary transsexuals don't have a right to transition?  As far as I'm concerned *everybody* has the right to transition and only as far as they want.  That is, as long as the person is realistically prepared to deal with the ramifications of transitioning.  I just don't like people regretting transitioning because they started out with unrealistic expectations and then proselytizing about removal of medical treatment for other transsexuals.

The purpose of the primary/secondary transsexuals (antiquated terms from the 60's and 70's) was to try and define who could and could not transition.  It was completely theoretical and is now disregarded by most competent therapists, because the theories were flawed.  You can classify people as one or the other, but in the end it really has no bearing on anything at all these days other than to try and make others feel bad about themselves by people who happened to fit the archaic definitions.

I give them no credence, so they have zero bearing on me.  When I first started transitioning, all they did was confuse me because I never clearly fit one or the other.  The conclusion I reached is that many people won't cleanly fall into a box due to flawed definitions and they end up creating more confusion than any benefit they may provide.

i dont think anyones deneying right to transition based on anything....


but i dont think primary or secondery suggests any is more suitable, GID at the end of the day can be as torturous, and worse so if it sneaks up on one i suppose...

heh, maybe im just crackers.... and was too downtrodden to know or care...

i totally agree. some folk still want to cling to an ideal that they feel makes them more valid.

I seem to remember you giving your age once and if I was really dedicated, I could try reading through all 5,800+ plus messages and find it.  I am not that dedicated, I am 99% sure I am older than you though.

I do understand what you are trying to convey though and agree with your message.

If I was smart I would just avoid reading this thread but then whoever said I was smart.


Sarah L.

Just for reference, I don't cleanly fit either one myself.  I have some attributes of both of your definitions.

• I didn't attempt to appear as a female in public until I was 28.
• Since I was 5 I tried dressing as a female in private.
• I thought boys and girls were the same until about age 7.
• I was a very emotional child and was constantly getting my sensitive feeling stepped on by boys.
• I knew I was mentally a female by 13, but physically male.
• I expressed this to my wife about it when I was 19 and she was the first person I ever told.
• My parent were extremely religious and influenced me a lot.  I knew the family would never understand.  To this day, they are still the most antagonistic people in my transition, so my fears were well grounded.
• Although I didn't know exactly what I was looking for at the time, I wanted to find some way to be female when I was a teenager.
• I prayed to "grow" a vagina and I even thought that if I put enough mental energy into it, my body might actually grow one.
• I had quite an imagination, so discovering real magic was considered a viable option.
• Was mostly attracted to women growing up.  Once an adult, I also found a few men attractive, but I *never* shared that.  In fact most men repulsed me and the thought of "being" with them scared me enough to continue trying to live in the role I was born into.  The thought of being seen as a gay man scared me badly.
• I did not know transition was possible until I was 28.  I tried doing the only thing I knew how to do until that point--distracting myself.
• I found out about transition because the dysphoria had become so intense, I could not function until I dealt with the problem.
• I am a highly adaptable person and can acclimate to most situations.  That's how I survived the male role, but it definitely wasn't something I liked being in.
• Most of my friends were male.  I did play with my sister and her friends a lot though.
• I had trouble in school, but other problems I had could have contributed to this.
• Although I got along with most people, I had very few close friends.  I spent a lot of time alone by myself.
• I found enough of an equilibrium in the male role to get by, but I never "liked" it.
• I had effeminate behaviors throughout my life, but I didn't get any flak for it.
• I played with both male and female type toys, but still generally preferred male toys.

Yes I had GID, but it didn't become "unrelenting and intense" until I went through puberty, although I did show signs since I was 5.
I was mostly attracted to people the opposite of my birth sex.
I mostly adapted to my birth sex, but I could not hide my true gender expression--at least from peers.
I did not attempt to "assume the role" or take hormones before age 25.

So Nero, just out of curiosity, what would that make me? >:D

Quote from: neroWell, I don't fit the 'classic' definition of a Primary.

eeeeeeeekk Makes sense twelve pages into a topic thread ::)  Reminds of the
East-German lad that after fighting fierlessly for his ideas.  He remembered  he'd helped build the Berlin wall.

Quote from: Nero on July 19, 2007, 07:45:22 PM
Well, I don't fit the 'classic' definition of a Primary.
[...]
I do however fit my own though. ::)

Ohhhh, so we're making up our own definitions now? >:D  Hmmm, well according to my "own criteria", that makes me.....a woman! >:D >:D >:D

wow, what happened to discussing the definitions and thier aplicability? why has this turned into the 'am i a primary plz??????' thread?

It's insanity.

nero: why do you care? do you want a blue peter badge? do you want sympathy? or are you just making excuses when it comes down to it?

/me reattaches mauds leash

Locked for a bit to let tempers cool.

Quote from: Nero on July 20, 2007, 11:24:19 AM

Quote from: Melissa on July 20, 2007, 01:14:38 AM

Quote from: Nero on July 19, 2007, 07:45:22 PM
Well, I don't fit the 'classic' definition of a Primary.
[...]
I do however fit my own though. ::)

Ohhhh, so we're making up our own definitions now? >:D  Hmmm, well according to my "own criteria", that makes me.....a woman! >:D >:D >:D

Not really. All I took out of the 'classic' definition is the hetero requirement.

Mentally, I never "adapted", but I was able to appear as male to most people (with a few exceptions like my ex-stepson who saw right through my facade).  That's what I meant by adapting.  It basically was treading the gender line as close as possible, while still pretending to be male.  Almost all of my activities were gender neutral...well, let's just say I never acted like a typical male, just a very feminine one, which got me by.

Posted on: July 20, 2007, 09:50:28 AM

---

Here's an excellent article regarding the topic of the original post.  Most of what I have mentioned was covered, but it goes into far more detail.  One of the main reasons the terms are not used anymore is because people's opinion of what classifies one as primary and secondary differ so much as Nero has demonstrated in this thread.

http://www.avitale.com/PrimarySecondary.htm

Nero,
If I may?

Quote
C. Barely Secondary YOU

To me, as I was similar to Melissa but less girlie, this is like, as you said,

Quote
some TS who are clearly Secondaries claiming to be more trans than me, more male than me, etc. And claiming to be primary solely based on the fact they're in their 20s. And dismissing what I went through. I just feel like if you were a clear 'girl' up until transition, you've no business going there, you know?

You nor anyone else here know what I went though nor the justification I used for my action, nor and more to the point how bloody much life hurt.


Or in fewer words, being indirectly called "Barely Secondary" HURTS.

...

I would advise that we all remember that very few of us here at this place have had an easy, pleasant life.  In my opinion, in the end classifications mean nothing. I am female born in a boy body, anything else is just needless details.


For what my thoughts are worth,
Sand in the wind...

Nero, I hope you feel better soon; being sick skews everything.  This has been an interesting if somewhat stressful thread to read; your threads are always that way, and I for one appreciate that.

Big ol' boy hug.......

Rob

Nero, im on your side here...  i think people are getting too pissy about words... and they should look inside them to see what at the end of the day, a few words on the internet mean and if thier really so traumatiseingly offensive...

And with that last post this topic is locked.  "ONLY" Susan or Admins will unlock it.

Steph