Susan's Place Transgender Resources

Just curious if the movement for acceptability would be far faster if we considered our selves as a third gender rather then bumping heads with the majorities view of what defines male and female. with a third gender definition the term "passing " would be completely eliminated. Strict laws could be enacted specifically for the protection  of this form of gender expression. A third gender classification would be viewed more in terms of biology rather some sexual choice. People can wrap there heads around a third gender term rather than trying to understand some  choice to be another sex. I personally prefer being just a transgender , but not a third gender . third gender sounds more like a mutation. Just curious if progress towards acceptability can be accomplished more rapidly by a different classification.

At first thought, my instinct is to say no, it wouldn't.

Setting aside the practical hurdles of actually passing such a law defining us in that way, I think such a legal definition would do more harm than good. Even if it's legally okay, socially things would be really rocky.

A third gender focuses too much on what makes us different, rather than what we actually share with the more "classical" genders. For people who already struggle to understand us (when they even try), I think this would only encourage more division, more segregation, and therefore less acceptance.

Quote from: stephaniec on July 30, 2014, 02:50:15 PM
Just curious if the movement for acceptability would be far faster if we considered our selves as a third gender rather then bumping heads with the majorities view of what defines male and female. with a third gender definition the term "passing " would be completely eliminated. Strict laws could be enacted specifically for the protection  of this form of gender expression. A third gender classification would be viewed more in terms of biology rather some sexual choice. People can wrap there heads around a third gender term rather than trying to understand some  choice to be another sex. I personally prefer being just a transgender , but not a third gender . third gender sounds more like a mutation. Just curious if progress towards acceptability can be accomplished more rapidly by a different classification.

Personally I think a third and fourth gender, MTF and FTM would be a good idea. Sure it would cause separation but if it was totally accepted that there were two more genders that are variances but are separate and valid than just male and female alone.

Quote from: Jess42 on July 30, 2014, 03:20:53 PM
Personally I think a third and fourth gender, MTF and FTM would be a good idea. Sure it would cause separation but if it was totally accepted that there were two more genders that are variances but are separate and valid than just male and female alone.

That feels like a really optimistic view, to me. Historically, any legal distinctions used to categorize people have not ended well in Western culture, though usually it's more of a racial definition. Sure, it would make a formal recognition that "yes, these people exist" (which we already have), but it doesn't do much to make the classified group considered "valid." It usually seems like the opposite, actually. Any group being legally defined as different from mainstream society has found themselves more easily discriminated against because of it.

The examples are endless. There's extreme cases like the Romany and Jews of medieval Europe. Sure, they legally existed, but the legal classification was to restrict a lot of things they could do, not to validate them. Also coming to mind are US laws from  the 19th century regarding Chinese immigrants, or asians in general. In the 20th century, distinctions against black people, and in Nazi Germany, the Jews are notable examples. Yes, these are extreme cases, but I can't recall any example of a legal classification of any group of people having been actually used for benevolent goals, whatever the motivations behind their origins may have been, or were said to be.

To cite Brown vs. Board of Education, "Separate is inherently unequal." I believe this applies, even in a nonphysical sense like describing people. To classify someone is to say they are less equal, less the same than the group you're dividing them from, else why the distinction? How would encouraging that promote equality?

How many people would actually feel amenable to imposing this distinction on themselves, given the choice? Even if it's not so extreme as the examples I mentioned, like if the cost is as benign as being forever marked as different, you would never quite legally be the person you want to be. If that were so, how many trans* people would never seek treatment at all?

as an option for those who identify that way, it would be fine. But a lot of us still identify as male or female, not as a 3rd gender and I would have a concern that we would all be forced into that box legally if it isn't done right.

Quote from: Jera on July 30, 2014, 04:10:53 PM
That feels like a really optimistic view, to me. Historically, any legal distinctions used to categorize people have not ended well in Western culture, though usually it's more of a racial definition. Sure, it would make a formal recognition that "yes, these people exist" (which we already have), but it doesn't do much to make the classified group considered "valid." It usually seems like the opposite, actually. Any group being legally defined as different from mainstream society has found themselves more easily discriminated against because of it.

The examples are endless. There's extreme cases like the Romany and Jews of medieval Europe. Sure, they legally existed, but the legal classification was to restrict a lot of things they could do, not to validate them. Also coming to mind are US laws from  the 19th century regarding Chinese immigrants, or asians in general. In the 20th century, distinctions against black people, and in Nazi Germany, the Jews are notable examples. Yes, these are extreme cases, but I can't recall any example of a legal classification of any group of people having been actually used for benevolent goals, whatever the motivations behind their origins may have been, or were said to be.

To cite Brown vs. Board of Education, "Separate is inherently unequal." I believe this applies, even in a nonphysical sense like describing people. To classify someone is to say they are less equal, less the same than the group you're dividing them from, else why the distinction? How would encouraging that promote equality?

How many people would actually feel amenable to imposing this distinction on themselves, given the choice? Even if it's not so extreme as the examples I mentioned, like if the cost is as benign as being forever marked as different, you would never quite legally be the person you want to be. If that were so, how many trans* people would never seek treatment at all?

This this, agree completely. Labels don't do the people labelled any favors, they just serve to give the majority benefits and privileges, while minorities are still discriminated against.

Quote from: Auroramarianna on July 30, 2014, 04:20:45 PM
This this, agree completely. Labels don't do the people labelled any favors, they just serve to give the majority benefits and privileges, while minorities are still discriminated against.

the problem is we're labeled any way we go. The only people who have any sort of chance of living without labels are those who are 100 % invisible. That % of tans people is realistically incredibly small and even smaller when someone squeals  . The rad-fem won't even except the perfect ones. People live with labels everyday of their lives. I am besides transgender an Irish Catholic- English Caucasian . At one time the Irish  Catholic label meant persecusion    in Northern Ireland . The thing is that the trans community would be free of the insidious label of "passing" or not "passing"  you'd be trans like you'd be an Irish Catholic or a Russian Caucasian . Admittedly society has a lot of maturing to do before every label that exists is irrelevant I might not be making sense , but I try

no, I don't think that it would help or 'be easier' for anyone who is transsexual.  It may help the gender queer / fluid folks, but then again, look at all the good having an I option did for intersexed people...

I think a far easier solution to the same problem would be to abolish the legal gendering system entirely.  It's built on an oppressive, two tiered system, and it serves literally no other service.  Going off of what Jera said, I think it's also important to consider that designating women as the "other" has resulted in systematic oppression.  I challenge all of you to find one good thing that's come of segregating our world into two distinct of the categories on the basis of a personally significant but otherwise completely arbitrary distinction. 

Even our current system is "separate but equal"-we will never have equality until we rid ourselves of this system.

Sorry, but I transitioned to be a woman, not just a 3rd separate transgender classification. It would be nice to have a choice to choose genderless on ID forms to help out the genderqueer/androgyne/agender/intersex subset, but trans women and trans men don't need their own classification, they're just women/men.

Our culture's problem isn't labels, it's that we insist on using those labels to box people in to expected behaviors, expected boxes of self-expression, and expected appearance standards. Any label is always just a best-fit. The problem is that too many people don't realize that, they just take it as an absolute binary.

Quote from: Carrie Liz on July 30, 2014, 05:29:55 PM
Sorry, but I transitioned to be a woman, not just a 3rd separate transgender classification. It would be nice to have a choice to choose genderless on ID forms to help out the genderqueer/androgyne/agender/intersex subset, but trans women and trans men don't need their own classification, they're just women/men.

Our culture's problem isn't labels, it's that we insist on using those labels to box people in to expected behaviors, expected boxes of self-expression, and expected appearance standards. Any label is always just a best-fit. The problem is that too many people don't realize that, they just take it as an absolute binary.

So, playing the devil. is it possible ever to be seen as men and woman when there is a gradient of "pass" or" not pass".

Quote from: stephaniec on July 30, 2014, 05:35:52 PM
So, playing the devil. is it possible ever to be seen as men and woman when there is a gradient of "pass" or" not pass".

I personally find a reality where I'd never be accepted as female no matter what, because I'd always be a different gender than female, WAY harder to deal with.

All we need to do is un-villify gender-nonconformity, make it acceptable to wear whatever clothes one wants and express oneself as they see fit, and that would eliminate ALL of our problems. Because "passing" would no longer matter so damned much. If you didn't "pass," nobody would care, you're still equally human. And that's more than achievable without reclassifying trans people as a separate sex.

Also, let's expand this possible reclassification so that it benefits cis people too. Reclassifying trans people as a different sex helps no one. It makes gender-nonconforming people into a different group... "those people," allowing us to be set aside and ignored and seen as weirdos still. Decriminalizing gender-nonconformity, on the other hand, helps EVERYONE, cis, trans, or otherwise. Because it gets rid of those tight little boxes that cause social distress for so many people in the first place. We could be free to express ourselves as we see fit while still being seen as rational functional human beings, and likewise those who express gender-nonconformity without being trans are helped because now they can do those things without being accused of being trans or of being gay.

I have a few friends online who are out and proud. They seem just as happy as someone who is in stealth.

Honestly I think it depends on the person and it should since it is a personal choice.

My hope is to be out and proud, since getting tired of hiding it.  ;D

Quote from: Carrie Liz on July 30, 2014, 05:42:29 PM
I personally find a reality where I'd never be accepted as female no matter what, because I'd always be a different gender than female, WAY harder to deal with.

All we need to do is un-villify gender-nonconformity, make it acceptable to wear whatever clothes one wants and express oneself as they see fit, and that would eliminate ALL of our problems. Because "passing" would no longer matter so damned much. If you didn't "pass," nobody would care, you're still equally human.

Well that would completely negate the problem where people were totally accepting of one another , Oh ! wait a minute didn't some body a couple thousand years ago say that.

Quote from: androgynouspainter26 on July 30, 2014, 05:26:07 PM
I think a far easier solution to the same problem would be to abolish the legal gendering system entirely.  It's built on an oppressive, two tiered system, and it serves literally no other service.  Going off of what Jera said, I think it's also important to consider that designating women as the "other" has resulted in systematic oppression.  I challenge all of you to find one good thing that's come of segregating our world into two distinct of the categories on the basis of a personally significant but otherwise completely arbitrary distinction. 

Even our current system is "separate but equal"-we will never have equality until we rid ourselves of this system.

Agree!

We live with a caste system that puts men and women into different casts and holds one higher than the other.  Anything we can do to get rid of this nonsense would be great for humanity.  Unfortunately, there would still need to be something to keep the sex distinction for those hook up apps, maybe some kind of hanky code?  (J/K on the last bit) :)

Except I don't want to be trans. I want to be a girl. I would even take periods and potential of pregnancy if the gender fairy offered it to me.

The only thing that would help would be mandatory unisex bathrooms replacing segregated bathrooms. Even that would only go so far.

Very interesting question.  I just learned of Cathy Brennan and the whole rad-fem issue with us last night.  Startling to say the least.  They would certainly be happier with it, but definitely not content.  I actually think it might be easier for some regular cispeople to wrap their heads around.  To be honest, i have fully accepted that i am trans, but i cannot convincingly tell myself that I am a woman. I'm sure there are a lot of cispeople that might feel the same way.  Not that anyone should ever live their lives as less to make other people feel better.  Just sayin'

Quote from: Jaime R D on July 30, 2014, 04:13:46 PM
as an option for those who identify that way, it would be fine. But a lot of us still identify as male or female, not as a 3rd gender and I would have a concern that we would all be forced into that box legally if it isn't done right.

Damn right ^^^ +1

I was born female, never doubt it, I am female, and I will die a female !

I see the concept of "third gender" as bad as the ethnic/race classifications, just a tool to classify and oppress...

Quote from: peky on July 30, 2014, 07:24:11 PM
Damn right ^^^ +1

I was born female, never doubt it, I am female, and I will die a female !

I see the concept of "third gender" as bad as the ethnic/race classifications, just a tool to classify and oppress...

Personally, pass or no pass, srs or not srs, I do not feel any different than any other female

Quote from: peky on July 30, 2014, 07:30:24 PM
Personally, pass or no pass, srs or not srs, I do not feel any different than any other female

well , having my brain being female all my like answers all the questions of why I am what I am.

Quote from: stephaniec on July 30, 2014, 07:37:55 PM
well , having my brain being female all my like answers all the questions of why I am what I am.

we are what we are because a biological accident!

An accident that did not happen in our brain but rather to the rest of our body, in other words it is our body that is not congruent with our brain....

I agree with those suggesting it could merely serve to firmly entrench the othering of trans people and would perpetuate existent bigotry. Personally, I can't even see it as a reasonable stepping stone since I worry a legal third gender for all trans people would make future campaigning even harder via giving cis people something prominent and definitive to point at as being enough to placate us.

Also, I could imagine it being harder to get a third gender option accepted in the first place since I'd suggest the erasure and unique harms suffered by non-binary people demonstrate that the binary can eventually somewhat handle a minority of people shifting from one position to the other but cannot readily handle things that blatantly attack its fundamental legitimacy. The binary seems to hate transgression of any kind but I can't imagine the fervour with which it'd attack something that so blatantly threatens its survival as a concept.

Being labelled 'trans' rather than 'woman' would also be very harmful personally since it would just give people an authoritative tool to deny my womanhood if they so desire.  I'd rather 'transgender' remain a process that I'm doing and not something opponents can use to legitimately exclude me.

As for 'passing,' I regret I can't see why having a legal third gender helps eliminate concerns about that except in very selective scenarios. I don't see how it would tackle the origin of the problem in a way that alternative approaches wouldn't manage too. In my mind, the fundamental cause of the pain is gender as it presently exists so I would rather focus on the root. There's been a lot of progress towards breaking down the restrictiveness of gender so I'd like to dedicate my time to continuing that effort in whatever tiny way I can in the hope humanity will one day see all gender expressions, identities, etc as equal and as a varying or fixed component of how each person engages with the world as they choose.

Finally, I think I should note that what I've written above pertains to my view on gender and a third gender legal status as it exists in many Western nations rather than anywhere else.

Like it or not though, we are not exactly like cis-women.  Birth biology aside....our life experiences, development, socialization and identity are still very different from theirs. I can understand their pause in accepting us as one of their own.  God bless the ones that do though.

Personally, I feel the option should be there for a third gender, but for those of us that wish to go stealth, i feel it's a little unfair to just out us. Though  Icould see this having some rather severe repercussions.

The system works as it is, if it aint broke, dont fix it,

Quote from: Kylie on July 31, 2014, 01:47:22 AMLike it or not though, we are not exactly like cis-women.

I wouldn't disagree but I would stress that there isn't a singular type of cis woman too. I'd argue differences from one cis woman to another or from one cis woman to a trans woman are entirely dependent on context. In a significant number of cases, the difference between the two cis women is greater than the difference between the trans woman and the cis woman because we have to account for factors like race, religion, income, education, disability, sexuality, locale, etc. For me, this means the difference between a given trans woman and a cis woman isn't sufficient to warrant a separate third gender in the same way that there's no reason for distinct legal separation between cis women based on collections of other extremely important details.

QuoteBirth biology aside....our life experiences, development, socialization and identity are still very different from theirs.

Again, I think it's important to stress context and to generally avoid generalising such fundamental aspects of life experience on behalf of other trans women. I acknowledge that my experience with those things isn't the same as other trans women, many of whom did have experiences that are not 'very different' from many cis women and girls at all.

well, There wouldn't be this problem if society could totally accept diversity . If the collective world societies were advanced enough to accept people the way they are, these kind of problems of labeling and segregation wouldn't occur. we've probably got a ways to go to get to the best possible world. the problem is what's the best way to get there. Or does society really want to get there. there is no doubt that being trans has some high hurdles to overcome. How do we solve the problem of being seen as just another aspect of a "normal" society where we can be as free as anyone else. we all can't be invisible

@Lonicera - i totally understand where you are coming from, and trust me, that is the way i wish it was, but i also see the other side as well.  It is a difficult proposition because either way, you risk invalidating one groups identity. Some people don't care, but then for others, it speaks directly to the essence of who they are and if they don't have that recognition, they don't have anything.

Quote from: stephaniec on July 31, 2014, 01:03:32 PMHow do we solve the problem of being seen as just another aspect of a "normal" society where we can be as free as anyone else. we all can't be invisible

True dat!

Uhhh, yeah. For all of those that disagree with a third gender, there are cultures still today that recognize a third gender. Just google third gender and then cultures. Also it seems like it's not a brand new concept either. It seems to be way more common than not. It is a Samoan tradition, the Hindu god/godess Shiva, native american cultures recognized a third gender. So it may not be such a really bad thing it just seems like it is not really embraced in modern more "intellegent" cultures.

I think India just passed a law about third  gender classification. I'm not necessarily espousing this ,but just trying to figure things out

I find the idea of a single, third gender to be a bit problematic. I don't, as a trans guy, think I belong to the same gender as trans women, so right there, three isn't enough. Once you allow that you need two, where do you stop? What about people who don't identify with just one gender, or with none?

A more practical goal, IMO, is to work toward making gender irrelevant for legal purposes. In today's society, the only thing I can think of for which gender status has actual legal consequences (at least in the US) is registering for the draft. In every other area, men and women are equal under the law, so why is the distinction necessary? (I'd argue that it would more equitable in any case to require everyone, or better yet no one, to register for Selective Service.)

If legal requirements for gender identification were removed, it would leave everyone free to identify as they wish -- or not.

Quote from: Jess42 on July 31, 2014, 01:54:00 PM
Uhhh, yeah. For all of those that disagree with a third gender, there are cultures still today that recognize a third gender. Just google third gender and then cultures. Also it seems like it's not a brand new concept either. It seems to be way more common than not. It is a Samoan tradition, the Hindu god/godess Shiva, native american cultures recognized a third gender. So it may not be such a really bad thing it just seems like it is not really embraced in modern more "intellegent" cultures.

Exactly and some cultures actually had four genders which allowed for MtF and FtM genders. It wasn't until colonization took place that the two gender system was "forced" upon the world.

Of course they didn't have SRS back then but the 3 - 4 genders were and still are a natural part of the human family.

The reason why Taiwan has so many SRS surgeons is because it was never colonized and the third gender has always existed there.

I am female but I personally consider myself third gendered or "Two Spirited" as my transition is also part of my spiritual journey so I plan to be open about my trans status. Having said that I support 100% anyone who wants to go stealth.

Quote from: Angelia_Michelle on July 31, 2014, 02:20:52 PM
Exactly and some cultures actually had four genders which allowed for MtF and FtM genders. It wasn't until colonization took place that the two gender system was "forced" upon the world.

Of course they didn't have SRS back then but the 3 - 4 genders were and still are a natural part of the human family.

The reason why Taiwan has so many SRS surgeons is because it was never colonized and the third gender has always existed there.

I am female but I personally consider myself third gendered or "Two Spirited" as my transition is also part of my spiritual journey so I plan to be open about my trans status. Having said that I support 100% anyone who wants to go stealth.

well, I think Ideally if society could advance enough everyone will be stealth because will all be part of the whole it won't be an issue. It would be like having blonde instead of brunette hair

South east Asian culture has ancient roots to perceiving trans as a third gender, and in that region it still exists today.

Oh dear, I hope people don't mind this post but I don't think my single sentence earlier did a good enough job of emphasising that my perspective on matters relates solely to prevalent white supremacist ideas of gender in places like Western Europe. I apologise for that profusely and hope the clarification doesn't just add further harm to anyone. I just don't think a single legal status for all trans people can be transposed into Western society easily and prefer to pursue other options. I would never knowingly seek to imply that it's the only legitimate path for humanity or that other cultures must comply with it too.

Quote from: stephaniec on July 31, 2014, 02:55:41 PM
well, I think Ideally if society could advance enough everyone will be stealth because will all be part of the whole it won't be an issue. It would be like having blonde instead of brunette hair

I totally agree. Hopefully we'll get there someday.

Quote from: Lonicera on July 31, 2014, 04:30:02 PM
Oh dear, I hope people don't mind this post but I don't think my single sentence earlier did a good enough job of emphasising that my perspective on matters relates solely to prevalent white supremacist ideas of gender in places like Western Europe. I apologise for that profusely and hope the clarification doesn't just add further harm to anyone. I just don't think a single legal status for all trans people can be transposed into Western society easily and prefer to pursue other options. I would never knowingly seek to imply that it's the only legitimate path for humanity or that other cultures must comply with it too.

I think you're right about that. It would be very difficult to achieve in western society and may never happen. The good thing is that strides are being made from an equality standpoint and hopefully, like stephaniec alluded to, we'll advance as a society to the point that it won't really matter anymore.

I'm feeling the lack of acceptance is not the same here in Australia.. In the 4 years since I came out, I've never faced any of the hate that is talked about here on Susan's and in the media..

On that note, I don't think a 3rd (or 4th) gender is the answer as it would only serve to 'other' trans people and take away from those that do have a good fit to the binary. In fact, I can see that adding to the list of gender would simply add opportunities for discrimination.

Quote from: Lonicera on July 31, 2014, 04:30:02 PM
Oh dear, I hope people don't mind this post but I don't think my single sentence earlier did a good enough job of emphasising that my perspective on matters relates solely to prevalent white supremacist ideas of gender in places like Western Europe. I apologise for that profusely and hope the clarification doesn't just add further harm to anyone. I just don't think a single legal status for all trans people can be transposed into Western society easily and prefer to pursue other options. I would never knowingly seek to imply that it's the only legitimate path for humanity or that other cultures must comply with it too.

I didn't feel that way about your post at all, and I don't see anything that you need to apologize for.

"I might not be making sense , but I try"

I think that you are making sense.  You have posed a valid question which has engendered many informative responses.  I believe that  3rd gender would work well for many in the trans* community, giving them the equal rights and protections already afforded the cis-population.

It seems unreasonable to create the distinction between cis and trans*, and then insist that the distinction does not exist.

Quote from: Susan522 on July 31, 2014, 10:50:53 PM
"I might not be making sense , but I try"

I think that you are making sense.  You have posed a valid question which has engendered many informative responses.  I believe that  3rd gender would work well for many in the trans* community, giving them the equal rights and protections already afforded the cis-population.

It seems unreasonable to create the distinction between cis and trans*, and then insist that the distinction does not exist.

seems to be a quite logical statement

Quote from: Susan522 on July 31, 2014, 10:50:53 PM

It seems unreasonable to create the distinction between cis and trans*, and then insist that the distinction does not exist.

That is a difference that wasn't 'created', it happened by default, and I for one do not want attention brought to it.

I claim neither, I just am.

Quote from: LordKAT on August 01, 2014, 05:16:28 AM

That is a difference that wasn't 'created', it happened by default, and I for one do not want attention brought to it.

I claim neither, I just am.

to be honest I don't know what I am at this moment. I lived my life being viewed and talked to as a male, but my insides were the square peg being hammered into the round hole. Now I've found the release of HRT , but I still have a massive history dragging behind me. Honestly , I am, but I don't know what the hell that is anymore.

You are the one and only uniquely you. That is enough.

No matter what anyone might wish or want 40 years of experience has shown me that anyone who doesn't fit in the categories of "normal male" and "normal female" physically or psychologically will always be considered 'a third sex' by the cis population. It might just be easier if we had a "both/neither" category for those who do not meet the traditional definition of male or female, either physically (Intersex) or psychologically.

Quote from: LordKAT on August 01, 2014, 06:41:48 AM
You are the one and only uniquely you. That is enough.

well, I definitely can understand that

Quote from: Northern Jane on August 01, 2014, 06:43:27 AM
No matter what anyone might wish or want 40 years of experience has shown me that anyone who doesn't fit in the categories of "normal male" and "normal female" physically or psychologically will always be considered 'a third sex' by the cis population. It might just be easier if we had a "both/neither" category for those who do not meet the traditional definition of male or female, either physically (Intersex) or psychologically.

Like the Beatles Polythene Pam " so good looking she looks like a man"

This is a very interesting thread for me because I've been giving a lot of thought to this question lately.  Unfortunately, I'm not sure that I can state my views coherently here because I'm not sure that my views actually make sense.  But here goes anyway.

I think it's a mistake in a way for us transpeople, when we're talking to the general (cisgender) public, to say, "I'm a woman," or "I'm a man", as the case may be.  The reason is that a cisgender person's concepts of "woman" and "man" are "cisgender woman" and "cisgender man".  They can't help but think that way because those concepts are formed by their own experience, which is cisgender.

Therefore, when someone like Chelsea Manning says, "I'm a woman," they think that's crazy because everybody in the world knows what sort of genitalia Manning has.  Many cispeople define a woman as having female genitalia, full stop.  If you haven't got female genitalia, you're not a woman.  In their minds, it's as simple as that.  That's why they see us as delusional: they think that transpeople are men who believe they're women or women who believe they're men.

They fail to make the distinction between sex and gender because those two things are inextricably linked in their minds.  Because their sex and gender match, they can't see that they're actually two different things.

Therefore, in explaining ->-bleeped-<- to cisgender people, I think we need to emphasize that we are in fact different from them.  Having male genitalia doesn't make you a man like all others—i.e., a cisgender man.  It's your psychology, your gender, that makes you different from cisgender men.  That is, I feel that in explaining ->-bleeped-<- to cispeople, we need to emphasize that we're a different category of people altogether.

But this leaves us in a predicament.  Transwomen want to be accepted as women and transmen want to be accepted as men, and if we insist that we're a different category, then we can't really claim to be women and men like all others.  It is a psychological imperative for lots of us (not all of us) to be accepted as women and men like all others.  And the point that some people are making on this thread, the notion that it is dangerous for us to accept a different label from cispeople, I think is valid.  If we're seen as "other", then it's quite likely we'll be treated as "other".

So I don't really know how to resolve this dilemma.  And I also believe that no matter what we want, we are always going to be perceived as different.  The trans experience is different from the cis experience.  We have to take a different road than cispeople towards achieving womanhood or manhood, and I believe that society will always see that difference.

But I think in a way it won't necessarily prevent us from being accepted as women and men.  Perhaps we'll be seen as subsets of women and men, and perhaps that's the best we'll ever be able to achieve.  I really don't know.

But I also think that in a way this whole discussion we're having may be academic.  Cispeople fall into two groups—those who won't hassle us and those who will.  No matter how we present ourselves to trans-haters, they're not going to accept us because they hate us so much.  And I don't believe that those who will accept us really care much about academic discussions about what ->-bleeped-<- is.  They don't really care what we are.  They're willing to accept us simply because they want to go about their own business and their own lives with as little worry as possible.

Another reason I think this discussion may be academic is that we have no control over what people think.  We can take a certain approach to ->-bleeped-<-, but we can't force anybody to see us as we wish to be seen.  They'll either accept us or they won't, and if they do, perhaps it's not terribly important to us what they think.  If their attitude is, "OK, you can be a woman", even if they don't really see us that way in their hearts, then I think we may have to accept that as the best we can get.

I think your totally right the way human beings and society that comprises our social reality form the framework of our daily existence and allow us to interact with each other will continually  present difficulties in the form of people who will not accept us for whatever reason. Bullying and gangs have been around for along time and society is unable to solve these problems. If everyone could be invisible there would be no problem , but that sadly is not the reality. I wish I had the answers, but I don't . I deal with my personal need to transition and hope for the best. The only way since we all can't be invisible is for society to evolve some how. I know through out grade school I was bullied for being a cry baby. How do you change society so no one fears . How do you educate all humans to accept diversity. even if a third gender classification was realistic their would still be the haters. a lot of transgender  have been murdered so far this summer and we're only starting august. society just needs to advance to a better plane.  ->-bleeped-<- is part of our human condition and it not going away. It always going to be a problem as long as we're viewed as different, so how do we get that kind of change. I haven't the slightest idea.

I don't like the idea of a 3rd gender.  I think the only thing it would make it easier to do, is to segregate and differentiate us from what the world would consider normal people.  I think instead of the 3rd gender being truly recognized as a gender, it would have the inadvertent effect of labeling us as a 'freak' and create more problems and discrimination.  It would be easier - for people who already discriminate against us and don't recognize us our preferred gender.  It would effectively be a legalized 'it' pronoun for them to refer to us.  Since most of us seek to fit in, as opposed to standing out, I don't feel that it's beneficial to us. 

Quote from: KatelynRain on August 01, 2014, 04:17:45 PM
I don't like the idea of a 3rd gender.  I think the only thing it would make it easier to do, is to segregate and differentiate us from what the world would consider normal people.  I think instead of the 3rd gender being truly recognized as a gender, it would have the inadvertent effect of labeling us as a 'freak' and create more problems and discrimination.  It would be easier - for people who already discriminate against us and don't recognize us our preferred gender.  It would effectively be a legalized 'it' pronoun for them to refer to us.  Since most of us seek to fit in, as opposed to standing out, I don't feel that it's beneficial to us.

yea , your probably right

Nope not at all. Would make more of a mess of things that are already a mess.

WPATH SOC works if you are GD.

Need to show society that we are humans. Same as they are. Nothing more, nothing less.

Quote from: Foxglove on August 01, 2014, 03:07:05 PMPerhaps we'll be seen as subsets of women and men, and perhaps that's the best we'll ever be able to achieve.  I really don't know.

I apologise if I'm misunderstanding this but I think what you've outlined here is what I'd prefer. Specifically, I'd like to see the notion that there's a homogeneous set of people that are 'women' and a homogeneous set that are 'men' deconstructed. In reality, the unique nature of each person's life and body means they have a definition of gender that is also utterly unique to them. Flowing from that, I'd prefer it if 'transgender' were eventually simply seen as a modifier to gender experience in the same way that disability, race, class etc are considerable modifiers to how people experience their gender in society too.

Quote from: Northern Jane on August 01, 2014, 06:43:27 AM
No matter what anyone might wish or want 40 years of experience has shown me that anyone who doesn't fit in the categories of "normal male" and "normal female" physically or psychologically will always be considered 'a third sex' by the cis population. It might just be easier if we had a "both/neither" category for those who do not meet the traditional definition of male or female, either physically (Intersex) or psychologically.

I agree

Quote from: Foxglove on August 01, 2014, 03:07:05 PM
Perhaps we'll be seen as subsets of women and men, and perhaps that's the best we'll ever be able to achieve. 

Quote from: Lonicera on August 01, 2014, 05:13:55 PM
I apologise if I'm misunderstanding this but I think what you've outlined here is what I'd prefer. Specifically, I'd like to see the notion that there's a homogeneous set of people that are 'women' and a homogeneous set that are 'men' deconstructed. In reality, the unique nature of each person's life and body means they have a definition of gender that is also utterly unique to them. Flowing from that, I'd prefer it if 'transgender' were eventually simply seen as a modifier to gender experience in the same way that disability, race, class etc are considerable modifiers to how people experience their gender in society too.

I wouldn't say that you're misunderstanding me because exactly what I mean when I say "subsets of women and men" I don't really know.  If that's the way people eventually came to view us, I can't say what that would mean exactly.  But I could pretty much go along with the views you're expressing here.

We're involved in a theoretical discussion here, and there's nothing wrong with that because it's a way of looking before you leap.  It's always wise to do that.  But look at the practical side of the question.

Two years ago I was still in the closet but absolutely desperate to get out.  I thought I was going to burst.  My problem was that I live in a very small town.  If I was going to get out, then I would be out, and there would be no chance of going back in.  I'd be out for good.  And I wasn't sure at all how people would react to me.  I was considering the real possibility that I might have to move to another town.

But instead of just suddenly appearing in public in my new identity, I got the idea of letting people know in advance what I was planning to do.  This would allow me to gauge their reaction and change my plans accordingly if need be.  But what was I to tell them?

There was no way I was going to say, "I'm a woman."  Cispeople's notion of a woman is a cisgender woman, and the people of this town have known me for years and so they knew full well that I'm not one of those.  Neither was I going to say, "I'm a transgender woman."  Nobody would understand that, and I'd have to go into some long-winded explanation that nobody would want to listen to.

So what I told people was, "I'm transgender and I'm going to be presenting as a woman."  This is what I told to the people I commonly deal with and who know me well—librarians, post office clerks, shop owners, etc.—and to my utter astonishment, everyone without exception that I spoke to was perfectly accepting and supportive.

Now I didn't particularly like saying that.  It doesn't express what I truly am.  It comes perilously close to saying, "I'm a man in a dress."  Yet people could accept it, and I got out and I've had very few negative experiences in this town over the last two years.  I got acceptance, which is what I wanted.

Now how exactly do the people of this town see me?  I don't know.  They may well think of me as "that fella who likes to dress like a lady".  I'd say they certainly see me as "different".  But they don't treat me badly.

And who's to say that their view of me won't evolve as time goes on?  I see myself as a female soul born into a male body.  Perhaps as time goes on, people might come to see me in something like that way.  "You're really a girl at heart."  There are plenty of transpeople who've reported people saying things like that to them.

In other words, I don't think we have any real control over how people see us.  But as more and more of us get out and start living our lives, it's quite possible that society's view of us will evolve.  I strongly suspect that we're always going to be seen as "different".  But it's not a foregone conclusion that we'll continue to be mistreated for that reason.

After all, black and white people, e.g., see each other as different, but we don't necessarily have to mistreat each other for that reason.  We can treat each other with respect.  There are plenty of trans-haters around these days, but I don't think they're the majority.  I think most people will eventually accept us as people and citizens, regardless of their view of ->-bleeped-<- itself.

I think a big part of the solution is when the majority of the trans population are open to t society to be seen as just normal people living their lives, the doctor , the carpenter , the train engineer , etc. I can't express this enough as to how surprise I was when I first found Susan's, the diversity of the trans population is realy evident on Susan's.

Quote from: mind is quiet now on August 01, 2014, 04:41:36 PM
Nope not at all. Would make more of a mess of things that are already a mess.

WPATH SOC works if you are GD.

Need to show society that we are humans. Same as they are. Nothing more, nothing less.

I agree with your post.  While this has been an interesting discussion I am not interested in another box, I am human and that is the only box I need.  Boxes have already caused far too much damage.

Aisla

" I strongly suspect that we're always going to be seen as "different".  But it's not a foregone conclusion that we'll continue to be mistreated for that reason.


I think that for many 'different' might be part of their reality.  However, I strongly agree that this does not necessarily imply a negative reaction or mistreatment.  I think that perhaps this might highlight the benefits of blending in and striving to fit in.  Obviously this is easier for the young, but even they might give some serious thought to how and where they implement their method of transition.  Sometimes "coming out" to everyone is not the wisest way to roll.