Susan's Place Transgender Resources

What is your opinions on people like the "spiritualist" Holly Boswell or the "activist" Nancy Nangeroni who could afford GRS and choose not too. Phyllis Frye, the Houston attorney, chose not to have GRS and I presume she could afford it several times over.

Thoughts?

Why would they want surgery? They are obviously not TS but simply CD's or maybe TV's.

-={LR}=-

I think that they have a right to do (or not do) what they want with their own bodies without being judged or told by others how to identify because of it.

You can have a transsexual body without having genital reconstruction surgery, Ladyrider.

There are plenty of reasons to criticize both of those women, but the state of their genitals is not one of them.

It is a personal choice even I strongly recomend it all who are really  transsexuals. In case one can afford SRS and does not have medical problems to prevent it and choose not to have it maybe she is more TG than TS.

Quote from: Sabine on May 23, 2009, 08:57:21 AM
How wrong are these wealthy non-ops in the wrong body?  What's the difference between a wealthy non-op & a 24-hour cross dresser?  None.  And motives to transition?  Fetishistic reasons most likely.  Somebody that values his penis & doesn't want to get rid of it isn't transsexual by definition.

There's this little known concept called 'gender identity', sounds like you haven't heard of it.  Having your crotch reconfigured inside out doesn't magically grant you womanhood.  Ooh and you think you get to decide other people's pronouns and motivations for transition too.  Niiiiice.

Quote from: DarkLady on May 23, 2009, 08:48:01 AM
It is a personal choice even I strongly recomend [sic] it [to] all who are really  transsexuals.

It's "a personal choice," but if other trans women don't make the choice you decide is the correct one, then their identities are invalid?

If I don't get an expensive (really I can't even imagine being able to afford it at this point), only semi-sensate, ugly neovagina, I'm not a "real" transsexual?

I'm sure that there are a number of things that I could lord over you to prove that I'm "trannier than thou," but my confidence in my own identity isn't based on making other people feel like >-bleeped-< about theirs.

I do not consider anyone's identity invalid. And there are reasons why TS may want to avoid SRS. But in general transsexuals that are able to go SRS usually do it. It is not baseless that in many places legal recognition is based on SRS. (Even there are other views on this question.)

There are many places to live on the trans continuum. What's right for one person might not be right for another. It would be greatly appreciated if people didn't presume to mislabel other trans people instead of honoring their right to identify as they choose. This is a support site, and labeling non-ops as something other than that isn't supportive.

Z

We (the trans community) need to be careful not to judge others, particularly those in our community.  Labels are interpreted by each individual differently, but we need to be true to ourselves.  Whatever we feel we need to do to confirm our Gender is truly personal.  It doesn't make us more or less of a trans person.

not to judge others, particularly those in our community

CUE: Buddy Holly singing That Will Be the Day.

You know I'd like to suggest that it is right, fitting, and proper to judge things, in so far as you understand that you are not the Lord High Executioner, and your judgments are just that, your judgments.

I'd also suggest that in so long as we as a community can't agree on this, asking the public at large to see the entire spectrum is pretty much a Spanish Pipe Dream.

On another forum I once posted how to tell a TS from a TG - Give them a couple hundred thousand dollars and see how they spend it.  Every TS I know, once they got enough cash in hand, soon scheduled surgery.

The initial post was meant to be funny but there was a lot of truth in it, when you really think about it.

Julie

Assuming they did that, as opposed to like say, buying a house, or getting an education, once they are jobless, homeless, and indigent, are the TGs of the world then supposed to work a bit extra to support them, or have they chosen their fate?

I would schedule top surgery...
After I'd take care of things like housing, food, transportation, etc...
That is, if there was any coin left.
But then, my life is not mine own.. got a wee one to look after.

So what you're saying is that "you have a wee one to look after," so you're going to buy them top surgery for you and then think about "housing, food, and transportation [afterward]... if there was any coin left?"
Really?

Quote from: She-male on May 23, 2009, 10:58:19 AM
So what you're saying is that "you have a wee one to look after," so you're going to buy them top surgery for you and then think about "housing, food, and transportation [afterward]... if there was any coin left?"
Really?

Actually that's the complete opposite of what I said.

Ah. For some reason, i read a "that" between "After" and "I."

Not enough sleep last night :(

The OP suggested that these folks didn't want or didn't intend to have grs.  There is a difference between not wanting and not able to have grs.  And for those who think that genitals don't not make you an man or a woman, I would challenge you to stand naked in a changing room of those who you identify with and ask them what they think.  Oh yes I forgot "It's not what others think, it's what I think", ya right.  Stop kidding yourselves, if you want to keep your male organs then you are obviously not TS, you are something else.

All this baloney about "I can't have GRS because - I'm poor, I have a medical condition, I have a family, I want and education, blah blah blah, is a bunch of nonsense.  Get real, if you are TS you will do it.

If you need to make excuses to validate who you are then who are not who you think you are.

-={LR}=-

So then Ladyrider, all the FtMs are not real according to your values?

Quote from: tekla on May 23, 2009, 12:00:54 PM
So then Ladyrider, all the FtMs are not real according to your values?

Nope I didn't say that at all.  Top surgery for them is every bit as important as bottom surgery for us.  And I would add that if the surgical results for constructing the male penis was more affordable/available etc. most would do it.

-={LR}=-

But they ain't gonna pass your 'locker room' test.

Quote from: tekla on May 23, 2009, 10:19:07 AM
not to judge others, particularly those in our community

CUE: Buddy Holly singing That Will Be the Day.

:laugh: :laugh: :laugh:

So, to be realistic and wanting food on the table more than a surgery is to kid oneself?
Surgery is scary, it's invasive, dangerous, painful, and insanely expensive.
And no, I don't think that contents of underpants is the definitive definition of male vs. female, because if it was then all Transsexuals are "just kidding themselves" when they use those terms to refer to themselves. If you "Need" a penis to be a man, then by that definition, I will never be one. Why? Because there's no surgery available to me that has a result "good enough" for me.

I am not qualified to diagnose GID, or tell who is or is not Transsexual, and with such limited information, no one is.

Quote from: Ladyrider on May 23, 2009, 11:58:06 AMAll this baloney about "I can't have GRS because - I'm poor, I have a medical condition, I have a family, I want and education, blah blah blah, is a bunch of nonsense.  Get real, if you are TS you will do it.

If you need to make excuses to validate who you are then who are not who you think you are.

Your privilege is showing.

Quote from: tekla on May 23, 2009, 12:11:06 PM
But they ain't gonna pass your 'locker room' test.

I used the example for those people who say they are women and want to keep their male genitals.  There is a difference, I'm sure that many if not most, maybe even all FtM would want to have a penis, as much as I wanted to get rid of mine.

-={LR}=-

I want and education

Of course if you had bothered to get one, you might have known enough to write "get an education" not "get and education."

Quote from: She-male on May 23, 2009, 12:20:53 PM
Your privilege is showing.

You're assuming I'm privileged in some way?  You know nothing of my life, maybe I should describe my poor miserable unfortunate circumstances, but I'm sure that would be boring.

-={LR}=-

maybe I should describe my poor miserable unfortunate circumstances

Oh swell, and I'll break out the tiny violin quartet to play 'My Bleeding Heart."

Quote from: tekla on May 23, 2009, 12:23:46 PM
I want and education

Of course if you had bothered to get one, you might have known enough to write "get an education" not "get and education."

Sorry for that tekla, I didn't graduate high school, but I'm sure that folks understood what I meant.  Damn I knew sacrificing my education would catch up with me sooner or later.  Sucks to be me I guess, but I'm incredibly happy.

-={LR}=-

Well, you could've fooled me, saying >-bleeped-< like "money shouldn't be an issue for you or you're not really trans."

That aside, maybe not everyone's identity and self-esteem revolves around what's between their legs.  People are more than just their reproductive organs, you know.

Quote from: tekla on May 23, 2009, 12:26:32 PM
maybe I should describe my poor miserable unfortunate circumstances

Oh swell, and I'll break out the tiny violin quartet to play 'My Bleeding Heart."

Give me a break tekla, sob stories and more sob stories, boo hoo for me.  I'm sure that mine would need a full orchestra.  But then "My Bleeding Heart." performed by a violin quartet (That's 4 violins, right?) would sound quite nice.

-={LR}=-

---

Post Merge: May 23, 2009, 12:38:18 PM

---

Quote from: She-male on May 23, 2009, 12:34:16 PM
Well, you could've fooled me, saying >-bleeped-< like "money shouldn't be an issue for you or you're not really trans."

That aside, maybe not everyone's identity and self-esteem revolves around what's between their legs.  People are more than just their reproductive organs, you know.

I agree, the point made was that those wealthy ones who "Choose" to keep theirs and proclaim they are TS.

-={LR}=-

Quote from: She-male on May 23, 2009, 12:34:16 PM
That aside, maybe not everyone's identity and self-esteem revolves around what's between their legs.  People are more than just their reproductive organs, you know.

QFT.

I can, and have, seen cases where its just not that important.  Either way they have no intention of using that stuff - yes, there are people who are non-sexual, or asexual - so why spend the money and take the risk?

As I've said before, GID runs on a scale, much like cancer.  You might have something that only requires a little scrape in the office, or you might have the kind where you should be planning your funeral.  But, its all cancer.

Your body may cause anxiety and feel very unnatural to you. You may want to feel your body is right and some social situons may be very problematic in case you present other sex and have genitalia of other sex. There could be reasons that transsexual does not go to genital surgery but most transsexuals would go in case they could that is the part of defination of transsexual.

It's getting a bit tense here... :police:

Everyone is entitled to their opinion and just because someone doesn't agree with you doesn't mean it's time to focus on grammar or get offended.

If you are trying to define what is TS and what isn't because you need that as a barometer to help you define yourself, I understand that.  But to pass judgment on someone you don't even know because they don't fit your definition is the same as the mainstream passing judgment on us.  "When you judge another, you do not define them, you define yourself." (Wayne Dyer)

You'd think we'd spend more time supporting one another rather than tearing one another apart.  After all, there's a great big world out there more than willing to beat on any one of us at the drop of a hat.

Julie

Quote from: tekla on May 23, 2009, 12:11:06 PM
But they ain't gonna pass your 'locker room' test.

Not your perception of FTMs, no.  Funny, I read this right before I was going to create a post about passing naked.

Quote from: Ladyrider on May 23, 2009, 11:58:06 AM
The OP suggested that these folks didn't want or didn't intend to have grs.  There is a difference between not wanting and not able to have grs.  And for those who think that genitals don't not make you an man or a woman, I would challenge you to stand naked in a changing room of those who you identify with and ask them what they think.  Oh yes I forgot "It's not what others think, it's what I think", ya right.  Stop kidding yourselves, if you want to keep your male organs then you are obviously not TS, you are something else.

I question the invocation of transphobic social standards as evidence that genitals define your gender.

That is, what you're saying is that who any trans person is and how they live their life is automatically negated by cis people who, historically, do not respect trans people or our lives, who characterize transition as frivolous, freakish, delusional, and so on. Who, if they saw a trans woman who'd had surgery, would probably just assume she's cis because that's how cissexism works, and if they actually knew that said trans person was trans, would still deny that her womanhood is valid.

My last comment, if you're not TS without the surgery (incidentally, I will be having GCS), then having surgery will change one magically into the "other gender".  Glad I found that out.

Quote from: tekla on May 23, 2009, 12:43:17 PM
I can, and have, seen cases where its just not that important.  Either way they have no intention of using that stuff - yes, there are people who are non-sexual, or asexual - so why spend the money and take the risk?

Yes, there are people who would rather spend the money on other things, like an education, a home, supporting a family, donating that money to a worthy cause, etc.  Surgery for a MtF is highly invasive, painful, takes a long time to heal from, and the results are not always guaranteed.  Some people are simply not willing to take that risk, and to say that they are not TS or TG, that they are just crossdressers or men, makes you no different than cisgendered people who want to tear us down.

We shouldn't be fighting amongst ourselves, the battle for gender equality is out there!  Arguing about definitions does nothing to further our movement to bring our community into the fold of acceptance among the general population.  If we argue among ourselves about these petty and trivial definitions (or what have you), then how can we convince the cisgendered population that we are human beings deserving of rights - just as they are?

Quote from: Lisa Harney on May 23, 2009, 06:53:51 PM
I question the invocation of transphobic social standards as evidence that genitals define your gender.

That is, what you're saying is that who any trans person is and how they live their life is automatically negated by cis people who, historically, do not respect trans people or our lives, who characterize transition as frivolous, freakish, delusional, and so on. Who, if they saw a trans woman who'd had surgery, would probably just assume she's cis because that's how cissexism works, and if they actually knew that said trans person was trans, would still deny that her womanhood is valid.

There a quite a few minorities in this world who enjoy the same human rights as everyone else.  That doesn't mean that they are accepted, heck there are celebrities out there who were going great guns until some realized they were black.

Now I'm speaking personally here but it has been my experience that even when my past was revealed I was still accepted and treated just like everyone else and that includes the washroom and the change room, well maybe not by everyone, but a majority.

Hey, like it or not society in general defines gender by genitals and I can't see where TS's would not agree to some degree, however, I can understand where the other members of the TG community would strongly disagree.

-={LR}=-

By and large, trans people don't enjoy the same human rights as everyone else, and whether or not someone's had surgery can be and is used against them to deny services or other needs. I don't see the point of other trans people enforcing this dynamic.

I think that trans people are ourselves pretty definitive evidence that genitals don't define gender. That simply having a penis requires you to be a man and having a vulva requires you to be a woman - that is, that cis assumption that you can look at someone's genitals and know whether that person is a boy or a girl is what is used against trans people - and that we have to break out of that in order to start transition in the first place.

Surgery is not the point where your gender is defined. Your gender was always your gender. Surgery doesn't change it. It never has.

The idea that genitals define gender is a transphobic, oppressive standard that hurts trans and intersex people.

While you have personally met a majority of people who accept you because you've had surgery, this still reinforces the transphobic notion that surgery is required to have a legitimate gender identity.

Also, appealing to society's standards is still wrong because society at large is structured primarily by people who aren't trans, many of whom would probably rather that trans people didn't exist at all.

Of the three people I started with, one stated that when she transitioned in an incredibly conservative time and place, her wife stood by her through everything. Not having surgery was in respect for support in every way. Besides, they probably like the intimacy as it was. Two and three I think consider GRS a desecration of the body and a cop-out to the Gender Police. Also, at least one identifies as a two-spirited person. Every person has their own reason for doing what they did in life. I had GRS mostly for legality issues and in conformity to what I feared was a coming Bush theocracy. I felt I better get my ducks in a row as they say.

Quote from: Zythyra on May 23, 2009, 12:12:35 PM
:laugh: :laugh: :laugh:

Which is why I qualified the statement, that we as part of the trans community.....I'm not naive enough to believe that society on the whole, nor did I imply that.  Incidentally, I love Buddy Holly.

conformity to what I feared was a coming Bush theocracy. I felt I better get my ducks in a row as they say.

Wow, not much faith in America eh?  When we get it wrong, we get it so wrong - its right (or at least, right-wing), but we do try to make it better, as opposed to nations and cultures that just change the history books to conform to the new reality.

Quote from: Ladyrider on May 23, 2009, 11:58:06 AM
The OP suggested that these folks didn't want or didn't intend to have grs.  There is a difference between not wanting and not able to have grs.  And for those who think that genitals don't not make you an man or a woman, I would challenge you to stand naked in a changing room of those who you identify with and ask them what they think.  Oh yes I forgot "It's not what others think, it's what I think", ya right.  Stop kidding yourselves, if you want to keep your male organs then you are obviously not TS, you are something else.

All this baloney about "I can't have GRS because - I'm poor, I have a medical condition, I have a family, I want and education, blah blah blah, is a bunch of nonsense.  Get real, if you are TS you will do it.

If you need to make excuses to validate who you are then who are not who you think you are.

-={LR}=-

I swear I cannot go a week on this forum without someone telling me I'm not transsexual. ;)

To the OP - I think the fact they have money and haven't spent it on surgery shows their priorities for this moment are not for SRS, however, because we are not aware of their other priorities to make a comparison, there isn't much that CAN be said about them.

The diagnosis of gender dysphoria is not predicated on ones genital anatomy.  Indeed, the entire point of such a diagnosis together with formal gender recognition that goes with it (in some locations) is precisely because of the historical singleminded assumption that ones anatomical gender is all there is to it.

My gf is a MtF who describes herself (currently) as "non-op".  She looks like a girl, she psychologically identifies as a girl and, compared to all the cisgendered females I've dated previously, outwardly act and behaves just like a girl too.  Even though I cannot verify her subjective experience, there is absolutely no doubt in my mind that she is truly gender dysphoric.

To suggest that transsexuality is only truly defined by the physical transformation of genital anatomy is something I cannot agree with.  One is transsexual if one endeavours to live in the social, not anatomical, role of the gender with which one identifies.

Quote from: finewine on May 24, 2009, 12:13:05 AM
The diagnosis of gender dysphoria is not predicated on ones genital anatomy.  Indeed, the entire point of such a diagnosis together with formal gender recognition that goes with it (in some locations) is precisely because of the historical singleminded assumption that ones anatomical gender is all there is to it.

My gf is a MtF who describes herself (currently) as "non-op".  She looks like a girl, she psychologically identifies as a girl and, compared to all the cisgendered females I've dated previously, outwardly act and behaves just like a girl too.  Even though I cannot verify her subjective experience, there is absolutely no doubt in my mind that she is truly gender dysphoric.

To suggest that transsexuality is only truly defined by the physical transformation of genital anatomy is something I cannot agree with.  One is transsexual if one endeavours to live in the social, not anatomical, role of the gender with which one identifies.

Your girlfriend is a very lucky girl.  Well said.

Quote from: finewine on May 24, 2009, 12:13:05 AM
The diagnosis of gender dysphoria is not predicated on ones genital anatomy.  Indeed, the entire point of such a diagnosis together with formal gender recognition that goes with it (in some locations) is precisely because of the historical singleminded assumption that ones anatomical gender is all there is to it.

My gf is a MtF who describes herself (currently) as "non-op".  She looks like a girl, she psychologically identifies as a girl and, compared to all the cisgendered females I've dated previously, outwardly act and behaves just like a girl too.  Even though I cannot verify her subjective experience, there is absolutely no doubt in my mind that she is truly gender dysphoric.

To suggest that transsexuality is only truly defined by the physical transformation of genital anatomy is something I cannot agree with.  One is transsexual if one endeavours to live in the social, not anatomical, role of the gender with which one identifies.

And I would agree  - in a perfect world, butcha know, it's not a perfect world and some day down the line the thing between your gf's legs will most definitely become an issue for someone.

-={LR}=-

Frankly my dear I don't give a damn (hey that would make a great line in a film)

Its their life, their money and their choice and they get my respect for that.

Buffy

Quote from: Ladyrider on May 24, 2009, 12:22:15 AM
And I would agree  - in a perfect world, butcha know, it's not a perfect world and some day down the line the thing between your gf's legs will most definitely become an issue for someone.

-={LR}=-

LOL, yeah but really...who that really matters?  :)

She's happy & I'm happy.  Nobody else sees her as anything but a girl, unless they rummage in her underwear which is, currently at least, my exclusive privilege!

That said, I don't mean to dismiss your point at all, LR.  Social stigmas do exist and I don't deny it would cause me career and social problems if her birth gender was disclosed to all and sundry.  When I say it doesn't matter, I mean that as a point of philosophy - should her birth gender be "outed", we'll take it on the chin and move on.

It is nice that she can be happy without SRS.

Ladyrider has an agenda and gets off on the power of judging others.  Just ignore her comments.

The shape of my genitalia has nothing to do with my gender.

Labels are for soup cans.

Who cares who does what with what?

Some are scared about having to do dilation the rest of their lives. Some don't care. Some would rather spend the money on something else. Why can't we just all get along and accept each other as a whole and recognize that they are different and may not think the same way you do?

Just because you are TS does that mean you have to do certain things? Is it so strictly defined that once you skip a step you have to relabel yourself so as not to confuse others?

If you lived as a man and now live as a woman or vice versa I'd say you are T  S/V/G or something. But I don't care what the second part is. Nobody should but that individual themselves. Its a private matter. Literally.

I don't care what the DSM says. I strongly feel my GID problem is NOT a mental problem and should not be in that head shrink book to begin with. So however they want to define it is wrong too. I feel they are wrong about everything. They only person that can possibly hope to understand somebody that has GID, is another person that has it. It doesn't mean because we have this curse we automatically are all the same and fall in the same positions and ideas and are expected to do the same things.

It was good to see the French kicked the transgender out of their psych book. GID is not a mental problem so why the hell are you all arguing about the labels they stick to a wrong diagnosis to begin with?

Money, DSM, and labels be damned, we are all unique.

Quote from: Virginia87106 on May 24, 2009, 09:23:17 AM
Ladyrider has an agenda and gets off on the power of judging others.  Just ignore her comments.

The shape of my genitalia has nothing to do with my gender.

Nope fraid not.  Believe me I have more important things to do than worry about an agenda, I just like to deal with the reality of life and not philosophize about the way things should be.  And no I don't get off on power for I have none, but I do get off on good old raunchy sex.

As for the shape of your genitalia, well of course that's a personal thing and as long as you're content then who cares.  As long as you are happy sweetpea the rest of the world matters not.

-={LR}=-

Believe me I have more important things to do than worry about an agenda

That is either: a) a bald face lie, or b) an incredible statement of intellectual laziness.

All humans have a subjective set of standards, beliefs, and values that guide what they think and the way they process information.  Those standards, beliefs, and values shape the notions that they support or oppose.  There is no such thing as total objectivity all the time, particularly when dealing with interpersonal matters.

To say: I just like to deal with the reality of life and not philosophize, is merely saying, I can't be bothered to think.

Quote from: finewine on May 24, 2009, 12:36:50 AM
She's happy & I'm happy.  Nobody else sees her as anything but a girl, unless they rummage in her underwear which is, currently at least, my exclusive privilege!

That said, I don't mean to dismiss your point at all, LR.  Social stigmas do exist and I don't deny it would cause me career and social problems if her birth gender was disclosed to all and sundry.  When I say it doesn't matter, I mean that as a point of philosophy - should her birth gender be "outed", we'll take it on the chin and move on.

I agree with Arlene, she's lucky to have you as a partner.  If the rest of society were as accepting as you are, we as a community would be in a much better place.

Quote from: Lori on May 24, 2009, 09:45:08 AM
Some are scared about having to do dilation the rest of their lives. Some don't care. Some would rather spend the money on something else. Why can't we just all get along and accept each other as a whole and recognize that they are different and may not think the same way you do?

Here here!  ;D

Quote from: Ladyrider on May 24, 2009, 11:16:21 AM
As for the shape of your genitalia, well of course that's a personal thing and as long as you're content then who cares.  As long as you are happy sweetpea the rest of the world matters not.

Then why does it seem you are so adamant about defining what does and does not make a transsexual?  Correct me if I am wrong, but throughout this whole thread it seems (to me anyway) that you have been holding a grudge against those who have money for SRS, but choose to forgo surgery in favor of other priorities, when you don't even know the other aspects/goals/dreams/desires of the rest of their lives?  Are you not judging those individuals (and by proxy) judging any of us who choose not to have surgery?

QuoteI can't be bothered to think.

Sometimes it shows.

Sometimes it shows.

I think so.

I am proud of the choices I have made in my life. They were/are right for one person, me. No one else. I respect and honor other people's choices to do whatever feels right for them. What I don't respect is hearing people in our community dissing other people's identity, because it doesn't fit their belief of what trans-anything might be.

Some people have said in this thread how it isn't a perfect world, so we have ot accept the way it is. My approach is that I'm doing all I can to leave this world a slightly better place than it was when I was born into this body, especially in regard to making it a safer place for all people to be/express any gender or identity.

Z

Quote from: tekla on May 24, 2009, 11:32:36 AM
Believe me I have more important things to do than worry about an agenda

That is either: a) a bald face lie, or b) an incredible statement of intellectual laziness.

All humans have a subjective set of standards, beliefs, and values that guide what they think and the way they process information.  Those standards, beliefs, and values shape the notions that they support or oppose.  There is no such thing as total objectivity all the time, particularly when dealing with interpersonal matters.

To say: I just like to deal with the reality of life and not philosophize, is merely saying, I can't be bothered to think.

And there you have it...  So I guess that would make me a lying, non thinking, intellectually lazy so and so.  Thanks for pointing that out for me Tekla, I've often wondered what the heck was wrong with me.  See you were right... My not bothering to get an education will be the bane of my existence for sure.  What would I have done without your council.

Nah! that's all such nonsense peanut.  I'm happy just muddling along enjoying life to the fullest.

-={LR}=-

This whole thing would be much easier if we threw out the word transsexual wouldn't it? Having it just seems to make things harder.

All I can see is an argument about the meaning of the word transsexual. It just creates fighting and division because some people want to be distinctive from everyone else and others don't want to be left out. Some people use it to mean what they feel they are and it rubs them the wrong way when people use their identity to mean something else. I hear and awful lot of "They can't be this because I am this and this is the way I feel and they don't feel the same way so you are not allowed to be this". I've probably done it myself.

End of the day we are all just men, or woman, or non-binaries, or -null gendered or a combination of. We know that some women have penises and don't mind it. We know some men have vaginas and don't mind it. Are you more of a woman or man than they are? I doubt it. At the most basic level some can live with their birth genetalia, some can't and get an operation. People are different. Simple isn't it? I don't see what the fuss is about. I really don't think we need to be concerned about what other people have between their legs.

Quote from: Ladyrider on May 24, 2009, 12:22:15 AM
And I would agree  - in a perfect world, butcha know, it's not a perfect world and some day down the line the thing between your gf's legs will most definitely become an issue for someone.

-={LR}=-

See - and here's where I'll question your credentials to comment on this issue because a common thread in your posts/ rants have been "that's the way the world is" 'what's between your legs will become an issue for someone"...

All the phrases you keep repeating are of what OTHERS think.  Transition HAS to be about the person going through the process, not everyone else.  A decision made to please someone else will always lead to regret.  Fear seems to drip through these phrases.

Funny how fear is always visible in the posts of those attacking those of us living non-op.

I think you are at the heart of it pheonix.

I think this fear just reflects what a lot of non-trans people feel. "Oh my god a penis in the ladies room, think of the chilldren, families will be destroyed" kind of thing. It is understandable that these same fears bleed into the trans community. It is very difficult not to internalise these messages.

Quote from: Nicky on May 24, 2009, 05:19:00 PM
I think you are at the heart of it pheonix.

I think this fear just reflects what a lot of non-trans people feel. "Oh my god a penis in the ladies room, think of the chilldren, families will be destroyed" kind of thing. It is understandable that these same fears bleed into the trans community. It is very difficult not to internalise these messages.

And see it's part of why I try to post counter points in these threads.... it's an irrational fear.  I've been living full-time non-op for some time, and what's in my pants really has proven to be irrelevant to me and to those around me. 

Quote from: pheonix on May 24, 2009, 05:12:11 PM
See - and here's where I'll question your credentials to comment on this issue because a common thread in your posts/ rants have been "that's the way the world is" 'what's between your legs will become an issue for someone"...

All the phrases you keep repeating are of what OTHERS think.  Transition HAS to be about the person going through the process, not everyone else.  A decision made to please someone else will always lead to regret.  Fear seems to drip through these phrases.

Funny how fear is always visible in the posts of those attacking those of us living non-op.

I have not attacked anyone no matter where I have posted.  I simply state the obvious, well things that are obvious to me.  And as far as credentials are concerned, I have none, well I don't have any letters after my name.  The only experience I have is the experience of life in general.  I don't dwell in fantasy land, I'm not a goddess, a witch, a fairy princess, I'm simply a woman, and a very successful one at that.

You say that I fear monger, well all you need to do is to read the incessant topics asking "Do I pass", "Should I get FFS", "What cloths should I wear", etc, etc.  Judging by what you say why should they care if they pass, or what are the right cloths and so on, geeze we even have androgynes asking if they look androgynous enough. 

Most if not everyone is concerned to some degree about appearance so don't tell me I'm fear mongering when I tell a someone straight out what I think.

Respectfully.

-={LR}=-

This is a forum to exchange idea's, and whether we agree or disagree with observations, we can certainly learn.  Debate can be a wonderful learning experience, and we need to keep that forefront in our thinking. (Forefront in our thinking??  Is that a correct statement??)  At any rate, this topic gets debated every month or so in our support group, and the results are usually the same.  Lori will do what she must, and I'm sure we all hope it works out well for her, just as we hope our lives do for us.

That is a good point Ladyrider,

I wonder though, "Do I pass", "Should I get FFS", "What cloths should I wear", is this the same thing as asking "does she pass, do you think they should get FFS, what clothes do you think they should wear"?

In some ways I think you make a good case. If transexual was a term that absolutely only applied to those that desired SRS to the point where they would do anything to get it in a kind of life/death strugle, then yeah, a lot of people that call themselves transexuals would not be. But I think there are a heap of people that don't stick with that definition, instead taking it to mean a less defined "I am a person with a binary gender identity that does not match my birth sex" kind of deal. Who has it right, and who has the right to decide on the 'true' meaning and does it really matter?

I guess the ultimate implication of your arguments, Ladyrider, is that if you are a natal male and don't feel you need to do everything in your power to get a vagina you can't possibly be a woman. Is that what you believe? I suspect this is the real sore point for most people. Might as well get that out in the open.

I know when the time comes who I am asking if I pass or not via a pic. I don't want a sugar coated  BS nice answer. I want the truth.

Quote from: Nicky on May 24, 2009, 06:54:18 PM
That is a g...,

...
What someone else does with what is between their legs should not be our concern. It is none of our business. What you do with your own is yours don't you think?

You're quite right but when someone asks or states something then I'll reply.

-={LR}=-

Quote from: Ladyrider on May 23, 2009, 11:58:06 AM
And for those who think that genitals don't not make you an man or a woman, I would challenge you to stand naked in a changing room of those who you identify with and ask them what they think.  Oh yes I forgot "It's not what others think, it's what I think", ya right.  Stop kidding yourselves, if you want to keep your male organs then you are obviously not TS, you are something else.

Not to get involved in a mud-slinging contest here, but I think it's interesting that you choose to draw the line at a point most convenient to yourself.  There's any number of points that you could have chosen.  You could have drawn the line at gender identity, at passability, at naked form, or at genetic/natal sex.

The majority of people in our culture define "womanness" by the latter, but have to content themselves with assumptions made by the former.  When someone appears to be a naked female, it's assumed that she was born that way, i.e., she's a "real woman".  (That's you.)  When someone appears to be a fully-clothed female, it's assumed that she looks female when naked, and that she was born that way.  (That's the people you're criticising.)

While most people will treat you like a woman, you're dreaming if you think that they'd consider you to be on the same level as a cis-woman, after knowing your history.  Perhaps you've let yourself forget, because there's nothing more you can do:  Were you born female?  Nope!  Are you genetically female?  Certainly not!  Can you produce your own sex hormones?  Yeah, right!  Do you have a uterus?  Have you menstruated?

Perhaps those who choose not to have SRS when it is available to them simply have different priorities.  After all, there is more to life than the approval of others.

Keep it real,

   ~ Burgundy ~

Fair enough,
I added this bit to my above post, so you might have missed it:

"I guess the ultimate implication of your arguments, Ladyrider, is that if you are a natal male and don't feel you need to do everything in your power to get a vagina you can't possibly be a woman. Is that what you believe? I suspect this is the real sore point for most people."

I get the feeling this implication is what people are reacting too. Pretty much along the same lines as what Burgundy said.

Quote from: Burgundy on May 24, 2009, 07:19:39 PM
Not to get involved in a mud-slinging contest here, but I think it's interesting that you choose to draw the line at a point most convenient to yourself.  There's any number of points that you could have chosen.  You could have drawn the line at gender identity, at passability, at naked form, or at genetic/natal sex.

The majority of people in our culture define "womanness" by the latter, but have to content themselves with assumptions made by the former.  When someone appears to be a naked female, it's assumed that she was born that way, i.e., she's a "real woman".  (That's you.)  When someone appears to be a fully-clothed female, it's assumed that she looks female when naked, and that she was born that way.  (That's the people you're criticising.)

While most people will treat you like a woman, you're dreaming if you think that they'd consider you to be on the same level as a cis-woman, after knowing your history.  Perhaps you've let yourself forget, because there's nothing more you can do:  Were you born female?  Nope!  Are you genetically female?  Certainly not!  Can you produce your own sex hormones?  Yeah, right!  Do you have a uterus?  Have you menstruated?

Perhaps those who choose not to have SRS when it is available to them simply have different priorities.  After all, there is more to life than the approval of others.

Keep it real,

   ~ Burgundy ~

Good points Burgundy.  Yes generally speaking there is a good chance that should our pasts be revealed we would not be accepted as cis.

The crux of the matter is that I don't believe that anyone who who claims to be TS and not want SRS is in fact not TS but a Dual Role TV as outlined in ICD-10 F64.1.

Hey it's what I believe.

-={LR}=-

Quote from: Ladyrider on May 24, 2009, 09:10:48 PM
Good points Burgundy.  Yes generally speaking there is a good chance that should our pasts be revealed we would not be accepted as cis.

The crux of the matter is that I don't believe that anyone who who claims to be TS and not want SRS is in fact not TS but a Dual Role TV as outlined in ICD-10 F64.1.

Hey it's what I believe.

-={LR}=-

Agreed.

F64.0   Transsexualism 
  A desire to live and be accepted as a member of the opposite sex, usually accompanied by a sense of discomfort with, or inappropriateness of, one's anatomic sex, and a wish to have surgery and hormonal treatment to make one's body as congruent as possible with one's preferred sex. 

F64.1   Dual-role transvestism 
  The wearing of clothes of the opposite sex for part of the individual's existence in order to enjoy the temporary experience of membership of the opposite sex, but without any desire for a more permanent sex change or associated surgical reassignment, and without sexual excitement accompanying the cross-dressing. 
  Gender identity disorder of adolescence or adulthood, nontranssexual type

  Excludes:  fetishistic transvestism ( F65.1 )

http://apps.who.int/classifications/apps/icd/icd10online/ (http://apps.who.int/classifications/apps/icd/icd10online/)

Although F64.0 does say "usually accompanied by a sense of discomfort with.... ones anatomical sex, and a wish to have surgery..."

Not exactly clear cut is it? It does not sound like there is a requirement for you to want to have grs to be 'diagnosed' as transexual.

The important bit seems to be the desire to live and be accepted as a member of the oppostite sex in F64.0. Perhaps you are putting too much emphasis on the last part?

If you still hold to your argument, then there is a hole, maybe call it F64.05 - "The desire to live and be accepted as a member of the opposite sex but withou the desire for a more permanent sex change or associated surgical requirement."

Quote from: Nicky on May 24, 2009, 09:23:48 PM
Although F64.0 does say "usually accompanierd by a sense of discomfort with.... ones anatomical sex, and a wish to have surgery..."

Not exactly clear cut is it? It does not sound like there is a requirement for you to want to have grs to be 'diagnosed' as transexual.

The important bit seems to be the desire to live and be accepted as a member of the oppostite sex in F64.0. Perhaps you are putting too much emphasis on the last part?

That isn't what I'm reading.  But maybe it's a matter of interpretation.

F64.0   Transsexualism
  A desire to live and be accepted as a member of the opposite sex, usually accompanied by a sense of discomfort with, or inappropriateness of, one's anatomic sex, and a wish to have surgery and hormonal treatment to make one's body as congruent as possible with one's preferred sex.

http://apps.who.int/classifications/apps/icd/icd10online/ (http://apps.who.int/classifications/apps/icd/icd10online/)

Your interpretation is possible too. But if someone does not have the sense of discomfort or inappropriateness of one's anatomical sex as allowed for in this description (it does say usually), it would be stupid for them to have GRS woudn't it? - unless they are trying to meet the criteria for transexual, which seems like a silly reason for doing it. 

Also, if your interpretation is correct, there is a big hole between .0 and .1. Why would someone that "desires to live and be accepted as a member of the opposite sex" instantly be considered someone that "the wearing of clothes of the opposite sex for part of the individual's existence in order to enjoy the temporary experience of membership of the opposite sex" just cause they don't want grs. That does not equate. Either you are right and there is a big hole, or I am right and the desire to have grs is not a requirement to be classified as a transexual. Either way, there is no way we could say that someone that desires to live and be accepted as a member of the opposite sex but does not want grs could be diagnosed as being duel-role transvestism. (but maybe they fit with F64.8 or 9?)

It is not like a opt out of one default to another system. Not meeting the criteria for one does not instantly put you into another.

This is not even considering that most of us are not qualified to use these to self diagnose or diagnose other people. (even if you believe the people that wrote them knew what they were talking about).

Quote from: Jeannette on May 24, 2009, 09:29:16 PM

That isn't what I'm reading.  But maybe it's a matter of interpretation.

F64.0   Transsexualism
  A desire to live and be accepted as a member of the opposite sex, usually accompanied by a sense of discomfort with, or inappropriateness of, one's anatomic sex, and a wish to have surgery and hormonal treatment to make one's body as congruent as possible with one's preferred sex.

http://apps.who.int/classifications/apps/icd/icd10online/ (http://apps.who.int/classifications/apps/icd/icd10online/)

Yes, the wording could be ambiguous, but considering the order of the phrasing, I do not think it is.
p =  A desire to live and be accepted as a member of the opposite sex
q = usually accompanied by a sense of discomfort with, or inappropriateness of, one's anatomic sex
r = a wish to have surgery and hormonal treatment to make one's body as congruent as possible with one's preferred sex

I think if (p ^ r) was the given it would have been worded:
A desire to live and be accepted as a member of the opposite sex and a wish to have surgery and hormonal treatment to make one's body as congruent as possible with one's preferred sex usually accompanied by a sense of discomfort with, or inappropriateness of, one's anatomic sex

As it stands, I believe the wording is p is a given with (q ^ r) as a maybe.

Doesn't that stuff come from a book that gets more revisions than the bible did?  Are they not working to revise it even as we write?  Has it not been proven that just about everything in it has both a political as well as an economic aspect to it?

Thought so.

Quote from: Jeannette on May 24, 2009, 09:29:16 PM

That isn't what I'm reading.  But maybe it's a matter of interpretation.

F64.0   Transsexualism
  A desire to live and be accepted as a member of the opposite sex, usually accompanied by a sense of discomfort with, or inappropriateness of, one's anatomic sex, and a wish to have surgery and hormonal treatment to make one's body as congruent as possible with one's preferred sex.

http://apps.who.int/classifications/apps/icd/icd10online/ (http://apps.who.int/classifications/apps/icd/icd10online/)

Just because something is written down doesn't make it correct (otherwise we'd never be amending things and we'd still be stoning people for adultery etc.). :)

My gf takes hormones and will be having breast augmentation surgery, just not SRS.  There are aspects of hormone treatment alone that are permanent, so to argue that this is dual-role transvestitism seems very disingenuous to me - not least of all because the "vestitism" is derived from the French word "vestement" meaning clothing.

I'm relatively new here so I don't understand some of the apparent friction behind the scenes between some personalities - I don't prejudge and have no problem with anyone.

Hugs,
J.

In my personal opinion I was transsexual and was preop with all intentions of having the surgery to make me as congruent to the preferred *sex and gender.* as I could be.

To me, being transsexual means it is a condition I was in until I had the surgery, I was*preop until the surgery.* I believe that you are preop for as long as you have the desire to have the surgery, even if for some reason you can not have the surgery, whether it be because of money, medical, poor physical and psychological, health but you would still have the surgery if it were in any way possible to do so in the future.

After surgery you are as female/male as medical science can make you, you begin your new life as your true self. May God bless your hide if you are not ready to accept that roll. Better go back to transsexual school or be prepared to skulk around street corners, dark alleys after dark and hide in your little hole during the day lest someone sees you. If you are TG, my best advice is, please seriously think about it before you play the game. A dead serious game.

Cindy

It really would be nice if the non-op section could be a place where those who have made this choice could be supported by others instead of being told that their identities don't exist, or being redefined as dual transvestic whatevers... I don't see non-ops barging into conversations in the post op forum telling peeps that they don't exist.

Z

Quote from: tekla on May 25, 2009, 12:35:00 AM
Doesn't that stuff come from a book that gets more revisions than the bible did?  Are they not working to revise it even as we write?  Has it not been proven that just about everything in it has both a political as well as an economic aspect to it?

Thought so.

Thank you. Like I said earlier, this is stupid because it should not even be in that book. We are NOT crazy. Anything they try to label or define it under is going to be wrong. Even the French figured that out.

What is it with Americans and the French?  France is a wonderful place I always thought.  The food is divine, the wine is first rate, the art among the best in the world, Paris IS the City of Light, and the Riviera is pretty cool.  The train system ought to make Americans weep, the TGV runs at well over 250 MPH, is clean, bright and they serve French food and French wine. 

Oh yeah, and it seems like every block in Paris has a bakery and a lingerie shop - how much more civilized can you get.  I think they even invented the word lingerie - somehow so much sexier than underpants.

And the reason they keep it in the DSM here is largely economic.  If Nichole is right that transition is a middle class deal, just let it be dropped from the DSM and it will be exclusively that.  No more money for therapy, for SRS, for HRT.  Nada.  All out of pocket.

labels is why we all know what person X means when person X says the word "table".
They aren't, and should never be the be all end all, but we'd be silly to think we can just do away with all labels and somehow be better for it. Language is the way it is for a reason.

And I enjoy many French foods, wines, and other things.
It's just as rude, belligerent, and/or bigoted to pick on "the French" as it is to pick on any other group.

I'm not sure about the not picking on any groups, North Korea is not exactly awesome these days - but some Americans seem to have a special hard on about the French for reasons I don't quite get.

Quote from: tekla on May 25, 2009, 10:46:21 AM
I'm not sure about the not picking on any groups, North Korea is not exactly awesome these days - but some Americans seem to have a special hard on about the French for reasons I don't quite get.

Well, there's a difference between stating facts about the situation in north Korea, and stating that "all" north Koreans are X (X here a place holder for any insult you can think of).
I don't know what their beef with the French is, but when it's gone so far that stating that "he speaks French" is used as an insinuated insult, then we're talking bigotry.

Quote from: tekla on May 25, 2009, 09:53:16 AM
...  If Nichole is right that transition is a middle class deal, just let it be dropped from the DSM and it will be exclusively that.  No more money for therapy, for SRS, for HRT.  Nada.  All out of pocket.

You are quite right, tekla, about the results of just "dropping" GID from the DSM.

You missed, a bit, what I say about "middle to upper class deals." :)

The vast majority of TS people on internets ARE middle to upper class white europen-heritaged and educated to some extent folks. :)

TS itself, like so much else doesn't come by way of class or race or ethnicity. That is a universal occurrence as best we can tell.

The "middle-class" prejudice I talk about is the one that invariably sees "mental illness" or mental difficulty as something "I cannot possibly have because I am white, european heritaged, somewhat educated, have a dollop or more of socio-economic privilege.

Just like the "TSes all have transition-or-die" mentality or the "I have completed srs and so have gone beyond GID even though I continue to show symptomatology of GID" tropes are just poses meant to show a "superiority" and a state of being that actually show the reverse of thye thing they are aimed to show.

There is much possibility and good that can come from a unitary "diagnosis" of GID without all the binary bs that currently exists and as much good that would ensue from moving the diagnosis out of the "paraphilias and sexual disorders" section of DSM.

One needs to have enough sense to see that she's tossing both baby and bathwater out at the same time. Many do not. Many others, imo, simply don't care as they now "have mine so screw you" attitudes.

N~

removed a joke that was apparently inflammatory -- N~

Quote from: Ladyrider on May 24, 2009, 06:34:32 PM
I don't dwell in fantasy land, I'm not a goddess, a witch, a fairy princess, I'm simply a woman, and a very successful one at that.

hahaha you forgot "mermaid", "unicorn", "sorceress", "pegasus", "chimeras" :laugh:

Quote from: Jeannette on May 24, 2009, 09:20:28 PM
Agreed.

F64.0   Transsexualism 
  A desire to live and be accepted as a member of the opposite sex, usually accompanied by a sense of discomfort with, or inappropriateness of, one's anatomic sex, and a wish to have surgery and hormonal treatment to make one's body as congruent as possible with one's preferred sex. 

F64.1   Dual-role transvestism 
  The wearing of clothes of the opposite sex for part of the individual's existence in order to enjoy the temporary experience of membership of the opposite sex, but without any desire for a more permanent sex change or associated surgical reassignment, and without sexual excitement accompanying the cross-dressing. 
  Gender identity disorder of adolescence or adulthood, nontranssexual type

  Excludes:  fetishistic transvestism ( F65.1 )

http://apps.who.int/classifications/apps/icd/icd10online/ (http://apps.who.int/classifications/apps/icd/icd10online/)

I'm going to differ with you here.  Because if you claim non-ops are Dual-Role transvestism, then what the hell am I? :p

Breaking these down individually:

F64.0   Transsexualism 

A desire to live and be accepted as a member of the opposite sex,
YES!

usually accompanied by a sense of discomfort with, or inappropriateness of, one's anatomic sex,
YES!

usually accompanied by a wish to have surgery and hormonal treatment to make one's body as congruent as possible with one's preferred sex.

Partially true.  Hormones, yes.  No to the surgery.

F64.1   Dual-role transvestism

The wearing of clothes of the opposite sex for part of the individual's existence in order to enjoy the temporary experience of membership of the opposite sex,

That would be a No since this isn't a temporary or back and forth thing with me.  I am a woman and live in female roles.

but without any desire for a more permanent sex change or associated surgical reassignment,

Again, while I have no interest in GRS, my body is irrevocably altered. I couldn't go back to what I was even if I wanted to.

and without sexual excitement accompanying the cross-dressing. 

This is true - no sexual arousal here. 

The key difference is how you interact with society.  Someone with Dual Role Transvestism moves between the gender roles and appearance.

Again, most everyone here posting is NOT a medical professional and is not qualified to give a medical diagnosis.  I can tell you everyone qualified who has ever evaluated me has classified me with transsexualism despite my choice not to pursue GRS.

---

Post Merge: May 25, 2009, 12:20:20 PM

---

Quote from: Natasha on May 25, 2009, 12:04:47 PM
hahaha you forgot "mermaid", "unicorn", "pegasus", "chimeras" :laugh:

You do realize that chimeras do exist -- it's a person who carries more than one set of genes...  ;D

http://www.damninteresting.com/?p=412 (http://www.damninteresting.com/?p=412)

many people on here brag about loving themselves  "warts & all".  really? do they really love themselves "warts" & all?  i'm not convinced they do.  if that were true, they wouldn't be ashamed of who they are.."warts" & all.  think about that! ;)

Hi Pheonix
I am not meaning to be condescending but I do wish to ask an honest question.

I do not understand how you can identify as a woman and still have the wrong parts down there. If you have gone as far as you have, to the point of no return, why would you not want to complete the journey as congruently as medical science can make you. There are many like you here and I just wish to understand is all.

If I am to be supportive of others on this board I only seek to understand the reasoning behind this.

Cindy 

Quote from: Nichole on May 25, 2009, 11:59:00 AM
Perhaps we can get another disorder added! :laugh: The short-sighted, or uncaring self-loathing post-op transsexual disorder.

how about the self-loathing-in-denial-suffering-from-low self-esteem non-op transgender disorder?

Natasha

Quotemany people on here brag about loving themselves  "warts & all".  really? do they really love themselves "warts" & all?  i'm not convinced they do.  if that were true, they wouldn't be ashamed of who they are.."warts" & all.  think about that! ;)

I just wish I was a 10 year old girl starting life over again. "BWAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAaaaaaaaaaaaa!!!!!!"

Cindy

Quote from: cindybc on May 25, 2009, 04:03:50 PM

I just wish I was a 10 year old girl starting life over again. "BWAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAaaaaaaaaaaaa!!!!!!"

Cindy

...sorry Cindy ..the que is over here.. ;D

Quote from: Nichole on May 25, 2009, 11:59:00 AM
You are quite r...

...
N~

Perhaps we can get another disorder added! :laugh: The short-sighted, or uncaring self-loathing post-op transsexual disorder.

Or perhaps we already have some DOs that cover that syndrome in place, just waiting to be used. :laugh:

Ya know I was really enjoying what you wrote until you had to go and take a poke at those you obviously loath because of who and what they are.  It would seem from all this that you hide behind your intellect because you're pissed at what they have achieved and you haven't or can't. Typical!  BUT I could be wrong after all (As it was so eloquently pointed out to me,) I don't have much of a edjumacation.

Actually N~ now you have me thinking, "a short sighted, uncaring self loathing post-op transsexual disorder", that could be me, all this time I've been wondering and you diagnosed my problem just like th...  Oh! wait a sec...  Nope it can't be me I just took out my tape measure and I'm close to 5'7" so I can't be short sighted.

-={LR}=-

Quote from: Ladyrider on May 25, 2009, 07:44:30 PM
Ya know I was really enjoying what you wrote until you had to go and take a poke at those you obviously loath because of who and what they are.  It would seem from all this that you hide behind your intellect because you're pissed at what they have achieved and you haven't or can't. Typical!  BUT I could be wrong after all (As it was so eloquently pointed out to me,) I don't have much of a edjumacation.

Actually N~ now you have me thinking, "a short sighted, uncaring self loathing post-op transsexual disorder", that could be me, all this time I've been wondering and you diagnosed my problem just like th...  Oh! wait a sec...  Nope it can't be me I just took out my tape measure and I'm close to 5'7" so I can't be short sighted.

-={LR}=-

Hmm, and I'm 5'6" and so, shorter-sighted than you. :)

It wasn't a "poke," but a joke.

You read the rest of rthat post & the ones in the Telltale Heart thread. To see such a possible state in some people isn't to see that in all.

One of the things I consistently notice in the more virulent posters who are post-op on a non-op thread. LR, is that there appears to be the assumption that any post-op who doesn't loathe non-ops must be a non-op. Education or not, you certainly logically know better than that.

The non-ops have a small space to themselves, or at least allegedly so. It seems only fitting that they should be the ones chatting in their threads and the rest of us take our disagreements with what they feel and how they live their lives elsewhere.

I don't recall any non-ops here ever making a sortie into a "soon to have srs thread" and telling the prospective candidate that she/he was a fraud and not really TS or anything like that.

If you've a problem with me, then perhaps you should be aware that my PM function works fine.

Thanks.

N~

Quote from: Nichole on May 25, 2009, 08:26:39 PM
Hmm, and I'm 5'6" and so, shorter-sighted than you. :)

It wasn't a "poke," but a joke.

You read the rest of rthat post & the ones in the Telltale Heart thread. To see such a possible state in some people isn't to see that in all.

One of the things I consistently notice in the more virulent posters who are post-op on a non-op thread. LR, is that there appears to be the assumption that any post-op who doesn't loathe non-ops must be a non-op. Education or not, you certainly logically know better than that.

The non-ops have a small space to themselves, or at least allegedly so. It seems only fitting that they should be the ones chatting in their threads and the rest of us take our disagreements with what they feel and how they live their lives elsewhere.

I don't recall any non-ops here ever making a sortie into a "soon to have srs thread" and telling the prospective candidate that she/he was a fraud and not really TS or anything like that.

If you've a problem with me, then perhaps you should be aware that my PM function works fine.

Thanks.

N~

Then I owe the Non-Op Forum and it's members an apology.  I was not aware that I shouldn't post in this forum.  These things should be posted in the rules maybe.

No need to use the PM thingy.  If I have anything to to say I say it in public. 

5'6" - you really are short aren't you. :)

-={LR}=-

Quote from: Zythyra on May 25, 2009, 06:25:14 AM
It really would be nice if the non-op section could be a place where those who have made this choice could be supported by others instead of being told that their identities don't exist, or being redefined as dual transvestic whatevers... I don't see non-ops barging into conversations in the post op forum telling peeps that they don't exist.

Z

AGREED! (I am kind of frustrated with this whole argument being directed at non-ops  >:( )

Those who are non-op are not somehow dual-role transvestites, that just doesn't make any sense.  Granted, since I had an Orchi I'm not technically non-op, but if you are only taking GRS into account, then yes, I am non-op in that I don't want to have GRS.  I'm happy with what I have after getting the orchiectomy, I've made peace with the "equipment" that I have.  Doesn't make me any less of a woman for having done that. 

All my records say female now, I live and I'm accepted as a female in everyday life by EVERYONE.  So please don't say that those who are non-op are really dual-role transvestites, that's insulting and degrading to the struggles we have gone through.

Like Zythyra said, we don't question the decisions of those who choose to get GRS, so why are you debating the decisions of non-ops and trying to dissect the definitions from the DSM, which in my opinion is a messed up document anyway, so why bother trying to make sense of it (just throw it into a bonfire already).

Quote from: cindybc on May 25, 2009, 01:13:16 PM
I do not understand how you can identify as a woman and still have the wrong parts down there. If you have gone as far as you have, to the point of no return, why would you not want to complete the journey as congruently as medical science can make you. There are many like you here and I just wish to understand is all.

If I am to be supportive of others on this board I only seek to understand the reasoning behind this.

Cindy 

To some of us, they are not necessarily the "wrong" parts; there is no right or wrong.  Some of us have just chosen to make peace with what we have.  You ask why would we not "complete the journey," well...some of us see this as the end of our journey, and GRS is not necessary for our personal happiness.

Understanding something is not a prerequisite to respect and decency, and in turn a little support.  This is all we ask for, as we give the same to you in regard to your decisions for GRS.  We may not understand the reasons why you choose to pursue GRS, but we do not question your decision to live your life as you do, so why do you question our lives and our decisions?

Just asking for a little more respect, thanks.

Jenn

Quote from: Ladyrider on May 25, 2009, 09:01:46 PM
Then I owe the Non-Op Forum and it's members an apology.  I was not aware that I shouldn't post in this forum.  These things should be posted in the rules maybe.

No need to use the PM thingy.  If I have anything to to say I say it in public. 

5'6" - you really are short aren't you. :)

-={LR}=-

It's public but not in "The Rules."  Perhaps you'd be inclined to make the suggestion on the Suggestions thread Susan has for that purpose.

It's not that you cannot be here. It's that those who choose to come here should be respectful of the choice made by non-ops. Susan published this post as the first thread on the first topic in this space. https://www.susans.org/forums/index.php/topic,58171.msg367524.html#msg367524 (https://www.susans.org/forums/index.php/topic,58171.msg367524.html#msg367524)

Actually, we can all prolly do with questioning and the input of other povs. But, that input should be at least respectful of the people in the group being questioned or advised by others.

And yes, I am short. But cindybc is way shorter than I am!! About 3" as I recall. Ask her. :laugh:

N~

I don't have much of a edjumacation

I never said that.  I said you were lying or intellectually lazy.  I know plenty of people with lots of degrees who are one or the other, or both.

I chose to get GRS because of the locker room test, the wanding at airport security, the DMV, medical exams, Social Security and a host of other struggles against the Gender Police :police: that gets just too tiring for words. Sometimes you do things just to stop fighting. I stayed in college to stay out of Viet Nam. I was living F/T 24/7 and all that good stuff for 5 years when I decided I was just sick of having my identity disappear when I got undressed. But again, I am a hard-core left-wing radical/liberaterian who sees very little without a political slant. Even GID. However---GID is a self-diagnosis and as far as I am concerned you can be whatever you want to be however you want to be it. Our world has too many rules already. I guess if you get undressed and see genitalia not congruent with your self identity it can be a bummer, but then maybe not. I'm just going back to Luckenbach Texas with Willie , Waylon, and the boys and jest be one of the gurls. Yeehaw!

Quote from: tekla on May 25, 2009, 10:19:27 PM
I don't have much of a edjumacation

I never said that.  I said you were lying or intellectually lazy.  I know plenty of people with lots of degrees who are one or the other, or both.

So just because I said that I don't have an agenda I am either a liar or intellectually lazy.  You may very well know plenty of people, probably more than I would ever hope to know, even those with degrees, butcha don't know me, so keep your personal comments to yourself peanut, and buzz off.

-={LR}=-

I've never met anyone who does not have an agenda, and only those who are REALLY trying to push theirs would even say such a thing.

supposition = conjecture, hunch, assumption, shot in the dark, suspicion, etc.

&  you think i'm an idiot, right? please!

Thank you for the information Fae, although your response still leaves a lot to be desired. I guess maybe there is no pat answer or no alpha and omega, just an infinity of shades of grey when it comes to being gender phosphoric.

I am a woman who had a history of GID that I have been relieved of and grateful to see behind me. I am who I am.

And ya got that right, Nichole, 5' 3" 125 lbs  Shortest sighted on this board so far that I am aware of.  ;D

When I left home I had grade five education and worked as a laborer for nearly thirty years of my life, then decided to go back to school to get my certificate in social work and was given an IQ test that showed I was well into the 170 range.  So what does that classify me as, a genius level idiot?

I don't really think transsexualism picks and chooses what level on the hierarchy you are at, anymore than alcohol does as to who is going to be an alcoholic. And alcoholics have proven to be of a high intelligence level as well. Don't worry folks, I'm not picking anyone apart here, I just like to throw around random hypotheses.

One thing I am certain of is that I was not a by chance transsexual. Random maybe, but not by chance

Cindy

I certainly don't speak for the non-ops despite identifying as one (and I doubt they would have me speak for them) but the choice to be non-op seems to have less to do with one's skin and more to do with one's comfort level with oneself.  I, for instance, have found a way to be comfortable with just my orchi and my male body despite my GID.  Fae has learned to be comfortable with her orchi and living as female.

Your argument, Cindy, about completing the journey, is highly subjective.  To take your example to the extreme, could not someone say, well you haven't had FFS, therefore you haven't completed the journey, or to use your quote, "I do not understand how you can identify as a woman and still have the wrong parts on your face."  I realize that a vagina is more central to the idea of being a woman than is the removal of some brow bossing, but I hope you see my point.

Each of us has to determine the point at which we are comfortable.  Going beyond that means we are at best wasting time/effort/money or at worst possibly doing it for the wrong reasons.

Hey, what can I say, there is only so much one can improve upon a 63 year old face. Sure I wish I was ten years old again but I don't think that's going to happen unless someone has a map to the fountain of youth I can borrow.

I am who I am and I am content with what I have achieved in my life. Literally from rags to riches and a loving princes to go with it, which for the likes of me can't figure out why she cares for me as she does. But I ain't complaining at least I have someone to love who loves me back. Twin Flames, we are.

Cindy

Quote from: cindybc on May 26, 2009, 01:58:33 AM
Hey, what can I say, there is only so much one can improve upon a 63 year old face. Sure I wish I was ten years old again but I don't think that's going to happen unless someone has a map to the fountain of youth I can borrow.

I am who I am and I am content with what I have achieved in my life. Literally from rags to riches and a loving princes to go with it, which for the likes of me can't figure out why she cares for me as she does. But I ain't complaining at least I have someone to love who loves me back. Twin Flames, we are.

Cindy

My wife is everything to me so I understand your comment about having someone to love you back.  I still marvel each day how she puts up with me and my craziness. ;) 

Quote from: interalia on May 26, 2009, 01:45:42 AM
[...]  I realize that a vagina is more central to the idea of being a woman than is the removal of some brow bossing, but I hope you see my point.
[...]

Indeed.  Without intending to be provocative, I can't help but feel that focusing on the vagina as a definition of what it means to be a woman is a very male point of view (ironic given this context).  Based on some conversations I've had with cisgendered females, I'm pretty confident that they would be rather irked to say the least with this vaginocentric argument  and would ferociously assert that being a woman is much more than what's in your knickers. 

Honestly, I find the idea that having a constructed vagina somehow makes someone more of a "real woman" rather silly.  It's a way of affirming a gender identity, or correcting a "birth deformity", or any other number of terms for aligning the apparent physical gender with the very real mental gender.  I applaud and support all who wish to take that step - good for you.  However, the lack of SRS does *not* dissolve that mental gender identity or make it any less real.

After all, it's just a vagina - were I to argue that no amount of physical intervention changes your genetic makeup and hence a post-op could not be a "real" or complete woman, I'd be roundly lambasted - and quite rightly too.

The journey "ends" when your identity is fulfilled - whatever amount of surgery that may or may not entail, surely?

OK, ask any one of those cisgendered female friends if they would still feel complete as women if they had ovarian cancer and had to have most of their working parts removed. Or how about breast cancer? Or ask them how they would feel if they were to wake up in the morning and look in the mirror and see a man's body on the outside.

I would sooner die than to lose anyone of those parts or to go back to what I was before. I love who I am, I am as complete physically as I can be, I may still have a lot of learning inwardly to understand the innerself. But that is OK, like an adventure, something new around every turn on my journey as my true self.

Cindy

Quote from: cindybc on May 26, 2009, 03:00:16 AM
OK, ask any one of those cisgendered female friends if they would still feel complete as women if they had ovarian cancer and had to have most of their working parts removed. Or how about breast cancer? Or ask them how they would feel if they were to wake up in the morning and look in the mirror and see a man's body on the outside.

My ex-gf in China, with whom I am still very close, is in hospital right now with cervical cancer and I can assure you that while she acutely mourns the loss of her child bearing ability, she has never once suggested that her gender identity as a female has been undermined.  Besides, I'm not for a moment suggesting that there aren't good reasons why someone with gender dysphoria would want SRS.  I'm simply pointing out that we can't make arbitrary definitions of womanhood based on what degree of surgical manipulation one has had.

Quote
I would sooner die than to lose anyone of those parts or to go back to what I was before. I love who I am, I am as complete physically as I can be, I may still have a lot of learning inwardly to understand the innerself. But that is OK, like an adventure, something new around every turn on my journey as my true self.

Cindy [/b][/i]

And I genuinely support and admire you for that.  I intend no criticism whatsoever, nor are my comments directed at any individual.  I simpy mean to argue strenuously against the assertion that a non-op or pre-op is "incomplete" by default.  Only the individual can decide for themself what constitutes complete - or as interalia says, sufficiently comfortable with oneself.

-J

Yes, what ever floats one's boat, I guess we all have our own comfort zone. I suppose once we find what floats out boat we darn well better be grateful to what ever higher power we believe in and pray that someone doesn't drop the anchor through the bottom of the boat. "I left the darn bailing can on the dock!!!"  ;D Just a little humor.

Cindy

Quote from: cindybc on May 26, 2009, 03:00:16 AM
OK, ask any one of those cisgendered female friends if they would still feel complete as women if they had ovarian cancer and had to have most of their working parts removed. Or how about breast cancer?

I would have to respectfully disagree with this, as well.  As I feel many breast cancer survivors would.  Of course, many of them who have had to have mastectomies elect to have their breasts rebuilt because they feel very self conscious and incomplete without them.  However, there are many others who feel okay about it, and see it as a sign of their fight, a badge of pride.  They would probably be deeply offended if anyone told them they were incomplete as women.  Walk up to a breast cancer survivor and tell her, "you're missing a breast, therefore you are less of a woman."  See what kind of fury will occur.

As for ovarian cancer, well.. as a woman who has no real plans to ever have children, I honestly don't think it would bug me very much, if it wasn't for the obvious health issue.  I mean, 'being complete as a woman' would be the absolute last thing on my mind.  Since I never interact with my ovaries besides an annoyance once a month, I don't imbue them with a part of who I consider myself to be.

I agree with finewine that no woman should be defined by what she has in her pants, just as no man should be defined by what he has in his.  That's just.. missing the point, in my opinion.

I am not in disagreement with what you say Tam Tam, although I thank my maker every morning for all of my working parts of my body are still all working, as well as any of those that define me as a woman.

I had a lady friend who lost both breasts to cancer and so I do know what that can do to a person, and I shall leave it at that. Goodness, judging one by what they have in their pants? Yea I have met a few people like that, and they didn't strike me as very intelligent or caring people.

Intelligence and wisdom is what dwells between the ears and the heart. I do not get upset if someone answers with a little annoyance or irritation especially when dealing with such topics as we have here. But then how can one learn unless they ask questions.

I consider myself intelligent but all the intelligence in the world doesn't mean that one knows the answers to everything. Goodness if I could do that everyone here would be going home with an answer to all their dilemmas. Wish I could, but not.

I only ask questions because I wish to learn, and I do my best that they do not come out sounding to impertinent.

Cindy

Quote from: tekla on May 25, 2009, 11:05:22 PM
I've never met anyone who does not have an agenda, and only those who are REALLY trying to push theirs would even say such a thing.

Well guess what peanut I'm someone that you've never met who doesn't have an agenda who is REALLY not trying to push one.  Geeze.

Sorry I don't conform.

-={LR}=-

Please, your agenda is so obvious you might as well light it in neon.

You don't have any values?  No personal experiences that come to bear on what you think and advocate?  No morals or ethics that would dictate which course of action would be more appropriate?  You don't think that one way is better than the other?  You don't believe in anything?  You just have pure truth as in Veritas?  Sure.

Quote from: cindybc on May 26, 2009, 12:27:58 AM
Thank you for the information Fae, although your response still leaves a lot to be desired. I guess maybe there is no pat answer or no alpha and omega, just an infinity of shades of grey when it comes to being gender phosphoric.

That was basically the jist of my argument Cindy.  How does my response leave more to be desired?  I believe I more or less covered how I (and perhaps other non-ops, though I can't speak for them) feel in regard to this argument, which seems to happen fairly regularly every month.  Why we continue to have these debates, I'll never know.

Quote from: cindybc on May 26, 2009, 12:27:58 AM
I am a woman who had a history of GID that I have been relieved of and grateful to see behind me. I am who I am.

As I am also.  We are the same despite having taken different paths in this life in dealing with our GID.  So we may not always understand the journeys of others...does that mean we may question their journey?  Absolutely not!

Quote from: cindybc on May 26, 2009, 12:27:58 AM
I don't really think transsexualism picks and chooses what level on the hierarchy you are at...

As a feminist and a free-thinking, educated person, I reject all notions of any kind of hierarchy.  With regards to GID and this discussion, there is no hierarchy of any kind.  Are you suggesting that just because I am non-op by choice, and you are post-op by choice, that you and others who are post-op are somehow better off or somehow hold a "higher" position within the community than those like me who are non-op?  Because that doesn't make any sense, and such thinking only serves to undermine the struggle for acceptance and equality among society that this community strives for.

No hon no one is better then anyone else. What's the difference between the town mayor and Billy the bum out there next to the hot dog vending machine with his hat out for enough change to buy a hot dog. They are both human, Ah, one might say that the mayor commands a place of power, has a better education and has more money.

What no one knows is that Billy the bum use to t be a philosophy professor down on his luck, and finding his freedom there to spend more time in his own world, in his mind, he can write and compose his philosophies anytime and wherever he wants. On the other hand the mayor is restricted as to what he can do and can only command through a comity. Billy answers to no one. I knew such a sole in real life, I try to live  that way.

No hun, your no better then me and I ain't better then you or anyone else on this board. I was sincere when I said I only wished to learn how other undertake their journeys.

QuoteI guess maybe there is no pat answer or no alpha and omega, just an infinity of shades of grey when it comes to being gender dysphoric

I had hoped that was part of your answer.

Thank you. I am only the student on threads such as these.

Sincerely
Cindy

Quote from: tekla on May 26, 2009, 12:48:03 PM
Please, your agenda is so obvious you might as well light it in neon.

You don't have any values?  No personal experiences that come to bear on what you think and advocate?  No morals or ethics that would dictate which course of action would be more appropriate?  You don't think that one way is better than the other?  You don't believe in anything?  You just have pure truth as in Veritas?  Sure.

Well peanut, my lights must have burnt out.

Yes I have values, but they're not listed in any agenda; I have personal experiences and I keep track of them in a blog; I have morals and ethics and I do my best to live by them; I believe in much, but those things are for me alone; and as far as pure truth is concerned I'm simply true to myself and my man.

No agenda, just me.

-={LR}=-

Quote from: cindybc on May 26, 2009, 01:46:36 PM

QuoteI guess maybe there is no pat answer or no alpha and omega, just an infinity of shades of grey when it comes to being gender dysphoric

I had hoped that was part of your answer.

Essentially, yes, that was what I was getting at, that there are different positions, or "shades" as you put it, along the gender spectrum.  I'm at one point, and I'm happy there.  You're at another, and are happy there.  To each individual finding their own personal happiness and where they fit within this community and within the greater society as a whole, that is the essence of our situation.

Why we continue to have debates about GRS and who gets the procedure and who doesn't, and who is really TS/TG, instead of keeping in mind the different "shades" and maintaining an atmosphere of respect for each others struggles,  I don't know.

Quote from: cindybc on May 25, 2009, 01:13:16 PM
Hi Pheonix
I am not meaning to be condescending but I do wish to ask an honest question.

I do not understand how you can identify as a woman and still have the wrong parts down there. If you have gone as far as you have, to the point of no return, why would you not want to complete the journey as congruently as medical science can make you. There are many like you here and I just wish to understand is all.

If I am to be supportive of others on this board I only seek to understand the reasoning behind this.

Cindy 

Hi Cindy-  I will take a stab at your question, and thank you for offering it in a very sensitive and warm way.
I have been on estrogen for 12 years, I have had a trachal shave, breast implants, extensive FFS, and have been living full time as a woman for 8 years.  I have a passport with the F, annd SS also has me as an "F". 
When I had my breast implants, I looked at my body, and saw my new breasts and the penis that remained, and all of a sudden I realized that I did not want SRS.  I was completely satisfied with the wonder I discovered as I looked at my body with breasts and a penis.  I looked totally beautiful.

Also, I have always had very good sexual response.  Yes, the estrogen has changed my sexuality a good bit over the years, but I still maintain sexual function and enjoy the performance of the "parts.

So for me, I am a woman with a penis, I am just that lucky.  99% of health care professionals and others who have seen my body have been completely respectful.  I have not felt dissed because of my body.  Part of the reason is probably because I am very comfortable with myself and my body and expect others to also be comfortable.

I hope this helps a bit but please feel free to ask questions as they arise.

Hi Virginia, thank you for your response. I believe that your response helps for me to have  more of an understanding. I always try to ask questions with respect, and I do my best not to judge anyone for who they are and the decisions they make. But it does help to have a better understanding.

I have been living full time in my preferred gender for nine years and had the surgery 4 years ago. I was living in Ontario at the time I began my transitioning, and the surgery was *not* covered by provincial health insurance back then. The cost for surgery was prohibitive on the meager salary I was making as a social worker. Here in Canada the wages for a provincial employee doing social work are mostly underpaid and overworked. But I loved my job and I love working with people especially those in need.

Anyway what it boils down to is that I had pretty well given up on the chance of ever getting the surgery, so I had pretty well resigned myself to the fact that in all probability, I would be living the rest of my life incomplete, so I better get over it. Who the hell would be any wiser anyway unless they looked in my pants, and only one person ever saw my personal parts down there was my JP. To the rest of the world they didn't have to know.

Having resigned to the fact that I may never get the surgery helped much in allowing myself to accept myself the way I was, basically a female with a deformity between her legs. I may very well have lived the rest of my life content with that if an unexpected source of intervention to allow for surgery hadn't come along. This allowed for one more final change in my life that brought me closer to completion and have since rewritten my past only by switching the gender roles.

The point is that I had accepted myself the way I was, and decided it was time to move on with my life as complete a female as I could be. Any similarities?

Cindy

QuoteHere in Canada the wages for a provincial employee doing social work are mostly underpaid and overworked. But I loved my job and I love working with people especially those in need.

Don't feel bad.  It's an international phenomenon.

Quote from: Virginia87106 on May 27, 2009, 08:15:21 PM
Hi Cindy-  I will take a stab at your question, and thank you for offering it in a very sensitive and warm way.

Agreed.  Cindy, if more people approached this sub-forum with that type of sensitivity, we'd likely have less fights... I've Pm'd my response to you since I have no urge to link my story to "Wealthy" anything... I'm as poor as they come.  :P

Post Merge: July 23, 2009, 02:18:21 PM[/b][/color][/size]

---

Quote from: Virginia87106 on May 27, 2009, 08:15:21 PM
Hi Cindy-  I will take a stab at your question, and thank you for offering it in a very sensitive and warm way.
I have been on estrogen for 12 years, I have had a trachal shave, breast implants, extensive FFS, and have been living full time as a woman for 8 years.  I have a passport with the F, annd SS also has me as an "F". 
When I had my breast implants, I looked at my body, and saw my new breasts and the penis that remained, and all of a sudden I realized that I did not want SRS.  I was completely satisfied with the wonder I discovered as I looked at my body with breasts and a penis.  I looked totally beautiful.

Also, I have always had very good sexual response.  Yes, the estrogen has changed my sexuality a good bit over the years, but I still maintain sexual function and enjoy the performance of the "parts.

So for me, I am a woman with a penis, I am just that lucky.  99% of health care professionals and others who have seen my body have been completely respectful.  I have not felt dissed because of my body.  Part of the reason is probably because I am very comfortable with myself and my body and expect others to also be comfortable.

I hope this helps a bit but please feel free to ask questions as they arise.

How can your passport say F is you have not had SRS? Isnt this a requirement in the US before you can change your gender in your passport. Can anyone please help? Please.....

One can only change the gender marker before SRS on drivers licence in Canada and I believe in a few of the states in the US. You can get a name change on all of your documents but cannot get the gender marker from M/F or F/M changed until after SRS. Same with passports, you can get name changed in all provinces in Canada and most states but not the gender marker until after SRS.

I traveled over the border many times with my drivers licence name and gender marker changed but with only my name changed in all my other documents, had no problems and only just answered what questions they asked politely and concisely.

I didn't argue with them and they didn't argue with me.

Cindy

Are there any pre-op ladies out there who have travelled with an M passport? How did immigrations with other countries deal with you? Just out of curiousity. Hope it the experience wasn't harrassing looking like a female but questioned why M is in your passport?

Quote from: jenasianbeauty on July 25, 2009, 10:46:08 AM
Are there any pre-op ladies out there who have travelled with an M passport? How did immigrations with other countries deal with you? Just out of curiousity. Hope it the experience wasn't harrassing looking like a female but questioned why M is in your passport?

Sorry, I'm not a pre-op but my gf is and we had this very same conversation, which is why I'm replying.  It seems that it depends somewhat on the country - she got an extra grilling to verify the motivation for her travel and (she suspects) to try and discern if she was a hooker or not.

To cross any border, you greet the border agent and offer your passport.
You appear calm and look at the agent openly but not in a challenging way.
You answer any question truthfully but without delving into more than what was asked.
You should politely refuse to answer any specific medical questions.
If you have an "M" in your passport they'll just have to get over it.

In any case, it always worked for me.

I dont know how often this is but some officers just look at the picture on the passport, so perhaps we can simply change the picture on the passport with how we currently look? YEAH?

---

Post Merge: July 25, 2009, 10:06:28 AM

---

Quote from: finewine on July 25, 2009, 10:54:49 AM
Sorry, I'm not a pre-op but my gf is and we had this very same conversation, which is why I'm replying.  It seems that it depends somewhat on the country - she got an extra grilling to verify the motivation for her travel and (she suspects) to try and discern if she was a hooker or not.

Besides your GF, any other pre-op women on  this forum?

---

Post Merge: July 25, 2009, 12:31:21 PM

---

Regular Passports
"Individuals who can document transition-related surgical procedures and who seek to change the gender marker should submit a certified letter from their attending surgeon
or the hospital, simply stating that sex reassignment surgery has been completed.
No further medical details are required by the policy and NCTE encourages trans people to neither seek nor offer clarification as to what is meant by "sex reassignment surgery." Passport processors sometimes misinterpret the policy to require genital surgery. People who encounter this problem should notify NCTE immediately."


I found this on the ntcequality website.  Can someone please help clarify the part where we do not need to clarify what SRS is and how processors misinterpret to require genital surgery. Correct me I am wrong but this sounds like hormonal treatment and FFS/ BA are enough to change the gender on your passport

If you do not have SRS. you may get your photo and your name changed no problems but the only way you can get the marker, [M] or [F] changed is with SRS. Canadian or US government does not classify you with the proper gender marker unless you are accordingly the same physical sex as your marker says, PERIOD that's it. You can't be both.

Cindy

Quote from: cindybc on July 25, 2009, 03:03:01 PM
If you do not have SRS. you may get your photo and your name changed no problems but the only way you can get the marker, [M] or [F] changed is with SRS. Canadian or US government does not classify you with the proper gender marker unless you are accordingly the same physical sex as your marker says, PERIOD that's it. You can't be both.

Cindy

While YMMV Cindy, I was able to have the gender marker changed on all records after my orchi, including my birth certificate and social security, without any problems whatsoever.  The requirements vary by state here in the US, and you're in Vancouver, so it is not always the case that full SRS is needed, as you are saying.

Maybe having incongruent ID is of minimal issue in the Western industrialized countries, but any thoughts on the Middle East or other states that are run by state religions or otherwise totalitarian?