Susan's Place Transgender Resources

TRUE or FALSE?

A Transgendered Individual is:
Either a male who identifies as a woman or a female who identifies as a man.

(Feel free to explain your answer)

False, transgender covers a lot of territory. Your definition fits a transsexual more than transgender.

false

False, transgender is far broader than that. Have a look in the Wiki section. As it has been largely written by Susan's people it is very good.

Also I think a lot us really don't like labels they tend to be inaccurate and even hurtful. I'm not trans anything. I'm a woman with a birth defect that is being medically corrected.

Cindy

Absolutely False, I'm not Trans* anything, never have been and never will be.  Regardless of what definition is given or my past history is.

Kind regards
Sarah B

 I must be a very confused woman if I am really trans.  jking

noun: I am a woman or old girl or fiberglasser, or Busters Buddies mommy, my kids parent
verb: Trans   - what I`m doing about a birth problem

False:

Gender is not a binary.  It is a spectrum.

-Sandy

Transgendered is an umbrella term that covers all people whom would be considered "gender variant" (which are loaded words by themselves), but it does include males who identify as women and females who identify as men. I personally prefer to use it to describe myself as opposed to "transsexual", not only because it's more vague, but also sounds less clinical.

Ultimately, I'm going to agree and say gender is a spectrum, everybody experiences it differently, and transgender as a word is a catch all for those that don't fit the majority's characteristics.

False a transgender person is anybody who identifies as transgender. I say this because some people that typically fall under the transgender umbrella don't identify as transgender.

Transgender can include people who are intersex, transsexual, androgyne, agender, bigender, genderqueer, drag kings, drag queens, genderfluid, gender ->-bleeped-<-, two spirit, queer sex, pangender, two-spirit, third gender, hijra, trigender...and that's all I can think of.

Also false that gender is a spectrum. A spectrum is very much point A to point B where gender is multi dimensional.

Quote from: Nygeel on April 02, 2011, 10:41:56 AM
Also false that gender is a spectrum. A spectrum is very much point A to point B where gender is multi dimensional.

But neither is it a binary which is what the question implied.

-Sandy

Quote from: Sandy on April 02, 2011, 11:24:26 AM
But neither is it a binary which is what the question implied.

-Sandy

Yes, but a spectrum still isn't right.

In your opinion.

Quote from: Nygeel on April 02, 2011, 11:34:52 AM
Yes, but a spectrum still isn't right.

Quote from: Juliet on April 02, 2011, 03:21:20 PM
In your opinion.

Not an opinion. Gender is multidemensional.

I'll just say TRUE because no one else has said it yet and I like to be different!

And actually.... if over half the world population believes something to be true, doesn't that justifiably make it true? ;-)

Quote from: RabbitsOfTheWorldUnite on April 03, 2011, 02:27:55 AM
I'll just say TRUE because no one else has said it yet and I like to be different!

And actually.... if over half the world population believes something to be true, doesn't that justifiably make it true? ;-)

No. Most of the people in the world thought the earth was flat, that the earth was the centre of the universe, that the earth and all of its creatures was created in seven days ( some people still do :laugh:) that there is an inferiority between people of different skin colour.
Belief is rubbish. Proof is the only truth.

Cindy

Quote from: CindyJames on April 03, 2011, 02:35:32 AM
No. Most of the people in the world thought the earth was flat, that the earth was the centre of the universe, that the earth and all of its creatures was created in seven days ( some people still do.

Cindy

Perhaps my sarcasm was a bit too subtle tonight!
:-)
You said exactly what I was thinking, which needn't've been said if you got the sarcasm!

Sorry Doll :laugh:

Can I put it down to not enough wine :laugh:

Hugs

Cindy

Don't tempt me! You know how everything changes after some time on hrt, well, now I'm getting an urge for wine and I used to hate the stuff. In fact, ikll go now and make that a new thread... "what food preferences, if any, have changed while on hrt?" Well, I'll post it if you say its a good topic, I've not seen anything about this on this site yet...
Thanks for chatting with me cindy!

Quote from: RabbitsOfTheWorldUnite on April 03, 2011, 02:53:52 AM
Don't tempt me! You know how everything changes after some time on hrt, well, now I'm getting an urge for wine and I used to hate the stuff. In fact, ikll go now and make that a new thread... "what food preferences, if any, have changed while on hrt?" Well, I'll post it if you say its a good topic, I've not seen anything about this on this site yet...
Thanks for chatting with me cindy!

Sounds a great topic,  go for it.

I use to like drinking beer, I can't stand the stuff now. I hated spicy food, I'm totally into spice. I can't drink coffee but I love tea, use to be the other way around :o. Yea sounds a fun thread.

Happy to chat at any time.
Oh and Welcome to a new Sister.
Hope you are comfortable and happy with the gang

Cindy

Quote from: Nygeel on April 02, 2011, 11:34:52 AM
Yes, but a spectrum still isn't right.

Ok, so it's multi-dimensional...

-Sandy

Quote from: Sandy on April 02, 2011, 06:11:06 AM
False:

Gender is not a binary.  It is a spectrum.

-Sandy

No you have it completely backwards. Gender is Binary. Sexuality is a spectrum.

Quote from: Catherine on April 03, 2011, 01:34:25 PM
No you have it completely backwards. Gender is Binary. Sexuality is a spectrum.

Err.. no. You've got it wrong too, gender is more of a spectrum than a binary.

Also 'Gender is Binary' could be seen as a pretty shockingly rude and dismissive statement by anyone genderqueer/andro/etc I would have thought.

And just how many angels can dance on the head of a pin?

-Sandy

I'm sure this won't be popular but....

Sorry but I don't see being TG as something to be ashamed of or try to put it off saying 'I have a birth defect'.  No one is born a woman, not even a female. You become a woman, that is a social construct.

If you are born male and you want to become a woman, that's being transgendered. You can try to deny or hide that fact but that's all you are doing.

I see NOTHING wrong with surgery, hormones etc either. (I plan on both) But I do see something wrong with using them as a means to NOT accept you are transgendered. Why would someone be insulted at being seen as transgendered? Why do we try SOOOO hard to hide this from everyone?

How can we expect anyone to respect us or ever be accepting of TG/TS's when many of us can't even accept ourselves. We force ourselves to fit into a binary gender role that we then claim at the same time doesn't exist? If gender is so fluid, why do some of us try so hard to fit at the polar ends of it?

I was born this way and am proud of it. I'm a unique person that has a life perspective few people have. I find it sad so many people in this community can't also accept themselves for what they are.

Don't hide yourself in regret
Just love yourself and you're set
I'm on the right track, baby
I was born this way, born this way

Quote from: pixiegirl on April 03, 2011, 02:26:12 PM
Err.. no. You've got it wrong too, gender is more of a spectrum than a binary.

Also 'Gender is Binary' could be seen as a pretty shockingly rude and dismissive statement by anyone genderqueer/andro/etc I would have thought.

Shockingly rude?
Yeah, it can easily be seen like that if a person is bored and looking for something to be insulted by. 

Quote from: Stephe on April 03, 2011, 09:21:20 PM
I'm sure this won't be popular but....

LOL
I'm tempted to start all my posts with that same sentence :)

tl;dr:  don't let anyone tell you who you are or aren't.  let go and be yourself! :)

Quote from: Stephe on April 03, 2011, 09:21:20 PM
Don't hide yourself in regret
Just love yourself and you're set
I'm on the right track, baby
I was born this way, born this way

I tend to agree with Stephe, though I am definitely open to any other interpretations of gender identity, expression, etc.  I'll never have a cis-male body,  and i'll always have the early socialization of a girl, but i'll also always have the childhood of a human with the mind of a boy, and the socialization and body of a girl.  In part because of my feminine childhood, i doubt i'll ever fit into a binary gender, and i wouldn't want to since i don't.  on the other hand, i want to be accepted as a man- but what does that really mean?  i fit some definitions of "man" while those same definitions exclude me from other definitions of "man."  but really, i only want to be known as a just, compassionate person, without regard to gender.  in my opinion, labels are divisive, and since one that accurately describes hasn't crossed my path yet, i haven't settled on one.  however, i would never want to prevent someone else from identifying as something that i don't understand! be yourself and ->-bleeped-<- anyone who doesn't accept you!  ;)

i hope that's not offensive to anyone.  i really don't mean it to be- just my 2 cents.

Quote from: pixiegirl on April 03, 2011, 02:26:12 PM
Err.. no. You've got it wrong too, gender is more of a spectrum than a binary.

Also 'Gender is Binary' could be seen as a pretty shockingly rude and dismissive statement by anyone genderqueer/andro/etc I would have thought.

Well according to the shrinks over here in the UK there are two Genders. Male and Female.

Quote from: Stephe on April 03, 2011, 09:21:20 PM
I'm sure this won't be popular but....

Sorry but I don't see being TG as something to be ashamed of or try to put it off saying 'I have a birth defect'.  No one is born a woman, not even a female. You become a woman, that is a social construct.

If you are born male and you want to become a woman, that's being transgendered. You can try to deny or hide that fact but that's all you are doing.

I see NOTHING wrong with surgery, hormones etc either. (I plan on both) But I do see something wrong with using them as a means to NOT accept you are transgendered. Why would someone be insulted at being seen as transgendered? Why do we try SOOOO hard to hide this from everyone?

How can we expect anyone to respect us or ever be accepting of TG/TS's when many of us can't even accept ourselves. We force ourselves to fit into a binary gender role that we then claim at the same time doesn't exist? If gender is so fluid, why do some of us try so hard to fit at the polar ends of it?

I was born this way and am proud of it. I'm a unique person that has a life perspective few people have. I find it sad so many people in this community can't also accept themselves for what they are.

Don't hide yourself in regret
Just love yourself and you're set
I'm on the right track, baby
I was born this way, born this way

Wow is all i can say there.

**Sorry but I don't see being TG as something to be ashamed of or try to put it off saying 'I have a birth defect'.  No one is born a woman, not even a female. You become a woman, that is a social construct.**

You have a Male or Female brain. That is not a social construct. It is what you are.


** If you are born male and you want to become a woman, that's being transgendered. You can try to deny or hide that fact but that's all you are doing. **

I dont want to become a woman.. I am a Woman. I have some issues with my body but I am a woman. I dont think I want to become one.

Wow, no wonder the U.S. can't get ENDA passed. Nobody in the TS/TG community knows what the hell transgender means how the hell is the general public ever going to understand it!  :)

Quote from: Sandy on April 03, 2011, 05:25:32 PM
And just how many angels can dance on the head of a pin?

-Sandy

Four, five if they are very tiny angels and only do that shuffley little angel dance. ;D

Next question.

Quote from: Dana Lane on April 05, 2011, 11:23:21 AM
Wow, no wonder the U.S. can't get ENDA passed. Nobody in the TS/TG community knows what the hell transgender means how the hell is the general public ever going to understand it!  :)

ENDA tends to just use the phrase "gender identity" and possibly "gender expression" which is a bit easier to understand.

Quote from: Dana Lane on April 05, 2011, 11:23:21 AM
Wow, no wonder the U.S. can't get ENDA passed. Nobody in the TS/TG community knows what the hell transgender means how the hell is the general public ever going to understand it!  :)

Yup.  Thank you for seeing this and admitting to it. 

Quote from: Valeriedances on April 05, 2011, 11:58:12 AM
The term cannot be openly discussed without being devisive or violating the TOS. If we cannot discuss it, or have input on the definition, then how do we expect the public to do so in a loving, empathetic way?

So, just who are they when it comes to who has input into the definition? I dont think we can even discuss that...

YEESSSS thank you

Quote from: eli77 on April 05, 2011, 12:49:13 PM

While the definitions of the terms are not THAT unclear, there is obviously a lot of dispute over how people identify. This isn't really very extraordinary. The same thing happens in the gay community as well. There is endless dispute over the word "lesbian" for example.

I like what you're saying but theres practically no dispute over the word lesbian in comparison to the trans disputes.

Quote from: Nygeel on April 02, 2011, 10:41:56 AM
Transgender can include people who are intersex, transsexual, androgyne, agender, bigender, genderqueer, drag kings, drag queens, genderfluid, gender ->-bleeped-<-, two spirit, queer sex, pangender, two-spirit, third gender, hijra, trigender...and that's all I can think of.

Sorry dude. Most of the words you have mentioned here as actually 'Synonyms' or titles in other language/culture. Hence, I agree with what you're saying.

False..

I would say a better Definition would be...

A Transgender Individual is a person whom does not fit on the gender spectrum within the common socially accepted boundaries of Male and Female. A Transgender individual has traits either physical, mental or both that do not neatly fit into the social construct of a Binary Gender System.

Also as a side note for those not in the know.. from wikipedia
Virginia Prince (November 23, 1913 - May 2, 2009)
Prince seems to have been the first to use the term transgender, which she used to mean a person who lives full time in a gender other than the one identified at birth but without surgical body modification, even though she herself underwent surgical body modification, took female hormones, changed her legal name to Virginia and lived full-time as a woman. This is substantially different than what the word would come to mean later, there currently being sometimes very distinct meanings assigned to the expression. She also made many claims about non-fetishistic nature of most crossdressing, asserting instead that it was a display of identity. In discussions with Robert Stoller of UCLA, however, she affirmed that cross-dressing had erotic aspects.

Some people say we should not use transgender becuase of where it originated form but tbh IMHO I just see it as an evolution of a word.

Language words and gender change and evolve just look at gay going from... happy and joyful...
(https://www.susans.org/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fkatnip.files.wordpress.com%2F2009%2F07%2Fgay-johnny.jpg%3Fw%3D350%26amp%3Bh%3D249&hash=1b02634e4ae4a6fd3bfd2fb414037c92710103b3)
^am I the only one that thinks Gay johnny doesn't look to happy? The brand was used to sell vegetables beans soap and other products way way back...
and
(https://www.susans.org/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fkatnip.files.wordpress.com%2F2009%2F07%2Fovaltine_old_ad.jpg%3Fw%3D252%26amp%3Bh%3D686&hash=4e85965c96b741af08d754ea200a75f4f0db0b6e)

To it's use today...

It just sucks that we are going to have a very hard time gaining acceptance when our definitions are all wishywashy.  People dislike what they don't understand.  If the public can't get a grasp on what being transgender means, in a simple straight-forward fashion, they will not understand it and will not take it seriously.  We need to put our egos aside and settle on a damn definition of the word, even if it means having the definition not reflect 100% of everyone's individual feelings perfectly to a tee. 

Quote from: Juliet on April 14, 2011, 08:35:59 AM
It just sucks that we are going to have a very hard time gaining acceptance when our definitions are all wishywashy.  People dislike what they don't understand.  If the public can't get a grasp on what being transgender means, in a simple straight-forward fashion, they will not understand it and will not take it seriously.  We need to put our egos aside and settle on a damn definition of the word, even if it means having the definition not reflect 100% of everyone's individual feelings perfectly to a tee.

I agree with that. While most people here seem to think that labels are reductive and limits our freedom to be who we wish to be, the fact remains that people rely heavily on labels in their everyday lives. Unless all of us want to enter a fight that we cannot win (teaching everyone that they are wrong for putting labels on stuff around them), we should be able to agree on what our label means, and then try to get people around us to acknowledge it. It's way easier to change the label then actually trying to remove it.

Quote from: babykittenful on April 14, 2011, 11:37:04 AM
I agree with that. While most people here seem to think that labels are reductive and limits our freedom to be who we wish to be, the fact remains that people rely heavily on labels in their everyday lives. Unless all of us want to enter a fight that we cannot win (teaching everyone that they are wrong for putting labels on stuff around them), we should be able to agree on what our label means, and then try to get people around us to acknowledge it. It's way easier to change the label then actually trying to remove it.

     Yes! Like here's an example-- I have Attention Deficit Disorder.  Now I personally don't have the hyperactivity which many people with A.D.D. do,  yet I still have A.D.D.  Notice I'm not going around telling people "No, I don't have A.D.D., I have...uh... M.A.D.D.B.W.L.P.S, which stands for Mental Attention Deficit Disorder But With Little Physical Symptoms."  No.  Its still A.D.D., even though the commonly accepted meaning differs from my situation.  If there's a reason for it, I'll elaborate a little and explain that I'm not hyperactive.  If not, I won't.  Its A.D.D. and thats it.  It works well enough.
     Or maybe I should drop the A.D.D. label, saying "Actually I identify as having MindChaos" or some other name that sounds cooler.  "I'm not suffering from A.D.D., I'm just Cognichaotic."  Cognichaotic that has a nice ring to it.  I'm gonna identify as that instead, in order to not be lumped in with the hyperactive ADDers.  At least until other people start using it too, then I'll start identifying as a new word.  And if all you neuro-normal folks can't keep up, you will feel my wrath. Yeah!

p.s.  If anyone accuses me of comparing A.D.D. to being transgender.... lol

I'm all for simplifying definitions, but if transgender is going to be an umbrella term to include everyone who experiences trans* discrimination, then the definition needs to be a lot broader. Save the specificity for "transsexual" and other subcategories.

And in developing the specific definition of "transsexual," you still have to be somewhat careful. Your definition is close...but many of us, myself included, will reject being classified as 'a female' or 'a male.' I am not my genitals; I am male and identify as a man. I have female genitals and reproductive organs.

FALSE

  Keeping in mind that there are some in the spectrum that fit this description, it is in no way an accurate definition.

Quote from: Stephe on April 03, 2011, 09:21:20 PM

How can we expect anyone to respect us or ever be accepting of TG/TS's when many of us can't even accept ourselves. We force ourselves to fit into a binary gender role that we then claim at the same time doesn't exist? If gender is so fluid, why do some of us try so hard to fit at the polar ends of it?

I was born this way and am proud of it. I'm a unique person that has a life perspective few people have. I find it sad so many people in this community can't also accept themselves for what they are.

  The binary exists and some of us fit there..... Don't assume that all trans folks identify their gender as fluid and don't assume that everyone should feel comfortable in your box.

Quote from: kyril on April 14, 2011, 07:50:57 PM
I'm all for simplifying definitions, but if transgender is going to be an umbrella term to include everyone who experiences trans* discrimination, then the definition needs to be a lot broader. Save the specificity for "transsexual" and other subcategories.

And in developing the specific definition of "transsexual," you still have to be somewhat careful. Your definition is close...but many of us, myself included, will reject being classified as 'a female' or 'a male.' I am not my genitals; I am male and identify as a man. I have female genitals and reproductive organs.

Well, I don't intend to be rude or offensive, but when you were born, there was no other way to gender you other then your genitals. Since personality and gender "realization" really comes later in life (it does come very late for some), for at least a moment in your life, you were of a gender that is different then the one you identify with. Since gender isn't something that is very specific (like, let's say, your DNA), it is impossible to say that a transsexual person has *always* been of the gender he or she prefers to be.

While you can argue that you knew very early in your life that you were born in the wrong gender, this only goes the prove that you were initially in that wrong gender, hence why you had to transcend it to become who you are today. If I were to give my word on what I think "transgender" means, I'd say that the broad definition would be anyone who transcend gender. It doesn't really matter if you see it as binary or as a spectrum, as long as your moving from one position in the gender "scale" to another, you earn the title of being transgendered. That definition includes genderqueer, androgynous and gender fluid people, drag queens and drag kings, intersexed people and of course, transsexuals.

I don't think we have to fear the label. Instead, we should choose to be proud of who we are and what we stand for. There is nothing wrong with being transgendered, and being in deny or feeling offended about it won't change the reality. While I agree some people don't want to be associated with people who don't share the same stories and obstacles, I suggest that they remember something. All of us around are part of a group called humans. Within this groups, there are people who do great things and people who do very bad things, there are people of every social class, every religion and every political views. Does being human makes you less unique as an individual? Certainly not! Of course you share many things with the other people from that group, otherwise it wouldn't be a group. Being human is just a label, but it doesn't have to be one to be ashamed of. The same goes with being transgendered. Being part of that group doesn't take away anything from you... you just are.

Instead of fighting to prove we are not "one of them", why don't we just let the label be and focus on showing the world how unique we are?

P.S. To Kyril, After reading the initial definition that Juliet, I think I understand a bit more what you meant to say. Transgendered aren't necessarily still of their original gender (male or female). So it would be inaccurate to say that someone who is transgendered is a male who identify as female or vice-versa, since after transition, the new gender can be seen as the correct gender. To answer the original question, I'd say that the affirmation is false, because it fails to be broad enough.

Quote from: babykittenful on April 14, 2011, 10:14:51 PM

While you can argue that you knew very early in your life that you were born in the wrong gender, this only goes the prove that you were initially in that wrong gender, hence why you had to transcend it to become who you are today. If I were to give my word on what I think "transgender" means, I'd say that the broad definition would be anyone who transcend gender. It doesn't really matter if you see it as binary or as a spectrum, as long as your moving from one position in the gender "scale" to another, you earn the title of being transgendered. That definition includes genderqueer, androgynous and gender fluid people, drag queens and drag kings, intersexed people and of course, transsexuals.

  I respectfully disagree. It would be more accurate to suggest that we all transcend biological sex. (XX, XY)

  I really don't see any of us as moving from place to place on a spectrum; most of us place ourselves on a very specific place on that spectrum or assert the ability to move throughout.

  "Transgender" is not a title, nor is the attribute earned. To suggest so is to suggest a hierarchy. Categories exist but no transgender person should consider her/himself more valid than anyone else.

  Drag queens identify as male; drag kings identify as female. There's nothing truly transgender going on there and these folks generally don't see themselves as part of the transgender community. Their performance identities are defined by their sexual preference, not by their gender identities. 

  Lots to learn there, babykittenful.

Quote from: CindyJames on April 02, 2011, 01:51:53 AM
False, transgender is far broader than that. Have a look in the Wiki section. As it has been largely written by Susan's people it is very good.

Also I think a lot us really don't like labels they tend to be inaccurate and even hurtful. I'm not trans anything. I'm a woman with a birth defect that is being medically corrected.

Cindy

Ditto!!!

Kate

Quote from: Catherine on April 03, 2011, 01:34:25 PM
No you have it completely backwards. Gender is Binary. Sexuality is a spectrum.

Beg to disagree. Gender is an spectrum from very female to half female half male, to very male, to no gender at all.

Kate

Neither option is correct. 

Just as there is no true binary in sex or gender, there is no true binary with true and false.  There is ALWAYS a middle.  (And even though us light-switch enthusiasts and computer wienies may argue differently, as every good spouse and/or politician knows, one should never let the facts get in the way of a good argument.)

     Spoon boy: Do not try and bend the spoon. That's impossible. Instead... only try to realize the truth.
     Neo: What truth?
     Spoon boy: There is no spoon.
     Neo: There is no spoon?
     Spoon boy: Then you'll see, that it is not the spoon that bends, it is only yourself.

Maybe I should just say it this way...there is no true or false, only your own bent self....err...twisted beliefs...I mean...oh shut up!

As discussed earlier in this thread, at one point everybody KNEW the earth was flat.  Who is to say it actually wasn't?  We weren't there...well, most of us weren't, but some of you old heifers may have been.  Isn't it true that one's perception defines one's reality?  Do we have so little faith in the power of our true natures that we can be 100% sure the entire universe didn't shift at a fundamental level to follow Copernicus' belief of the way things are?  I know I do.

Now, if somebody could just tell me what I said, and then point me to the door, I'd be truly (or falsely?) grateful

....Laurry
   

Hi Laurry

You said:

Quote from: Laurry on April 17, 2011, 12:37:42 AM
Now, if somebody could just tell me what I said, and then point me to the door, I'd be truly (or falsely?) grateful

....Laurry

I'm sorry but you cannot be truly or falsely grateful, you can only be, "you maybe grateful"  ;D

Warm regards
Sarah B

Quote from: JessicaR on April 16, 2011, 12:18:43 AM
  I respectfully disagree. It would be more accurate to suggest that we all transcend biological sex. (XX, XY)

  I really don't see any of us as moving from place to place on a spectrum; most of us place ourselves on a very specific place on that spectrum or assert the ability to move throughout.

  "Transgender" is not a title, nor is the attribute earned. To suggest so is to suggest a hierarchy. Categories exist but no transgender person should consider her/himself more valid than anyone else.

  Drag queens identify as male; drag kings identify as female. There's nothing truly transgender going on there and these folks generally don't see themselves as part of the transgender community. Their performance identities are defined by their sexual preference, not by their gender identities. 

  Lots to learn there, babykittenful.

Considering how there are so few people who are actually aware of their genome, I'd say the "XY-XX" would be pretty hard to put as discriminating factor on what transgendered means.

I think we can think gender in about three sides. There is the gender you feel you are, the "inner" gender. That is the gender we, as transsexuals, have to fight to get recognized as the most important gender, the "real" one. There is also the gender you present yourself as. That means, for a closeted transsexual, that while you may feel female, but you still dress and "act" like a male. We could call this one the "projected" gender. And finally, there is the gender that is perceived by everyone around you. This one can be tricky, since every single person you mean will gender you, no matter what gender you try to project, hence the importance of "passing" for transsexual people.

At its root, "trans" opposes "cis". "Cis" means on the same side, while trans means on both sides. Something that is transparent allows you see something from the other side. Something that transcend the limits means that you can go from one side of the limit to the other, where it is no longer a limit, but a stepping floor to go higher. When I think about the word transgendered, I think it is meant to mean that the different sides of genders (inner, projected and perceived), are no longer in accordance (on the same side, or "cis").

I think a drag queen is transgendered because, even for a moment, the projected gender is changed. The flaw here could be that any comedian who ever impersonate a female character would be "stuck" with the transgender label, but I think there is a way out of it. A comedian who has impersonated a female character wouldn't define himself with that trait. Drag queens who choose the title choose to be defined by it, and therefore also fall under the umbrella of "transgendered". So does the genderqueer or the androgynous who doesn't necessarily feel like they are part of a different gender nor try to project one, but get read by other people in a confused manner. In that situation too, it's not the inner gender, but the projected and the perceived gender that allows them to come under the label. Again, one of the flaw here could be that once a transsexual person has undergone full transition and is perceived by everyone around has the gender they project, they are no longer transgendered. I'd be curious to know what other people think about this...

I know that this definition seems to contradict the one I have previously given. If I were given enough time, I'd probably be able to put up something that could encompass the two, but then again, I'm curious to see how this particular definition gets accepted compared with the other. I like how this tread allows to throw ideas like that and try to make sense out of stuff.

I don't think that setting a definition of what it means to be transgendered creates any hierarchy. This in not a title of honor nor is it a title of shame. It is just a way of describing one aspect of any given person. That person can be cisgendered or that person can be transgendered. That doesn't tell anything about this person's worth or personality, it simply tells us that this person has a gender setting that is different then that of most people.

Quote from: Valeriedances on April 17, 2011, 10:32:57 PM
I understand I'm being argumentative here, but why does someone elses reality have to be mine? It's kind of a turn off, that my reality has to match theirs (speaking generally here). To say someones reality is incorrect is another way of saying they are delusional.

I used to be caught up in labels much more in the past. Now, its not much of a big deal to me. I do get annoyed when others try to tell me who or what I am. I have my life and am happy with it. I'm secure in who I am. It's that stupid past that seems to bite me at times  :).

Unless you don't want to be understood by the people around you, it is a good thing when everyone's reality is aligned, preferably in a logical way. If I want to start calling a cat "dog" and a bird "horse", this might become my reality. However, when I talk with other people, it's to be expected that people won't understand what I'm talking about, since our reality doesn't match. Feeling bad about a label and denying it won't keep people from posing it on you. Therefore, it could be a good thing that you have a feel for what it really means, in case you had to educate some ignorant people on the signification of it. (Like the fact that being transgendered doesn't mean anything beside its strict definition)

Quote from: Valeriedances on April 17, 2011, 10:32:57 PM

What if your done moving and are post-transitioned? Are you still transgendered, according to this definition?

If a person's body had a transsexual history, was corrected, and they are living in the gender they identify with, with physical bodies to match ...what are they?

I think that this is one aspect of the transsexuals under the transgendered umbrella that could seriously be debated. I'd be tempted to say that the mere fact that you had a gender switch in you life is enough to say that your life possess the attribute of being transgendered. I still have some work to do to make that part of my argumentation stronger, however, I'll see if I can come back with something that can make that intuition more valid than just the intuition I have. Until then, I have to give it to you for this part. I could very well be wrong.

Quote from: Valeriedances on April 17, 2011, 10:32:57 PM
It is a little complicated, I admit. So maybe it can be a good thing cut out some of the labels in our lives. While there are many labels that could apply to a person, qualifying them with the use of a qualifier is a form of denying that person their identity. While I am many things, I am a woman first. It isnt necessary to add a qualifier every time to describe myself. Its also somewhat offensive to have labels thrust on them by others.

Say for example ...a one legged runner. You can picture that one legged runner racing down the course doing their best ...and the announcers qualifying that runner every time they update the audience with ...and the one legged runner is doing so and so... Are they really calling that person a runner, equal to other runners. Or by qualifying it with the prefix one legged, are they being condescending and in truth denying that athletes identity and equal status?

-Valerie

The label itself is not condescending, its how people interpret this label. If I tell you that I have seen a black haired woman, this is a very objective statement. In no way is it diminutive, I'm just describing the person I have seen physically. If I meet a dark skinned woman, I could still make the same kind of objective statement. However, it could be seen as less objective because of how people will interpret that statement. Am I implying that the fact that this woman has dark skin gives her any undesirable trait? I have said nothing about such traits, I just gave an objective description of the person I've met, its the people who are listening and interpreting what I said who are actually putting the diminutive attributes.

The same goes with transgendered. It is nothing more then a piece of information about that person, and it doesn't tell us anything about that person's worth or unique qualities. We should not fear the label. Instead, we should keep fighting until it becomes just as objective as being "black haired" or "red haired". There is nothing wrong with being transgendered, so why should we be ashamed of being called by that name?

Quote from: Valeriedances on April 18, 2011, 12:55:58 PM
It would be racist and objectionable, if an additive description was not also used for people of other color.

The same would be true using the label transgendered woman. If you use it to describe that woman, then dont use other additives in the same conversation to describe other ladies, then that is qualifying that person and applying a judgment, in my opinion.

I understand what you mean, and I agree with you. However, even if it can be seen as rude to consistently repeat an information that shouldn't matter when making a judgement, that doesn't mean that the simple act of stating it is objectionable. While referring constantly to someone has "that transgendered person" would certainly become rude, because being transgendered is far from accurately describing what that person really is like and might even give a false impression that we should "guess" other characteristics from this single one, the fact remains that this person is not less transgendered. It's not the fact that you say it that is rude, but the fact that you say it in a manner that implies that we should judge that person based on it. I think these are two different things.

Quote from: babykittenful on April 18, 2011, 01:19:11 PM
I understand what you mean, and I agree with you. However, even if it can be seen as rude to consistently repeat an information that shouldn't matter when making a judgement, that doesn't mean that the simple act of stating it is objectionable. While referring constantly to someone has "that transgendered person" would certainly become rude, because being transgendered is far from accurately describing what that person really is like and might even give a false impression that we should "guess" other characteristics from this single one, the fact remains that this person is not less transgendered. It's not the fact that you say it that is rude, but the fact that you say it in a manner that implies that we should judge that person based on it. I think these are two different things.

Referring to a person as 'that transgendered person' is not rude it is discriminatory and as such should be stamped on. The Discrimination Law of 2010 in the UK stops this sort of thing for all groups of diversity and anyone associated with a diverse group.

People should be left to get on with their lives as they see fit. For me that means being the woman I have always known myself to be

Quote from: Valeriedances on April 18, 2011, 01:53:15 PM
Sure :)

I am not 'trans-ing' or moving to another physical sex. I am not in transition. I am legally, medically and socially female. if someone misrepresents who I am and disregards how to relate with me, then there is no potential for relationship, be it friend, acquaintance or stranger.

I have no desire for a legal or public status other than female. If political groups (trans or otherwise) move in this direction, they will surely have a big fight on their hands.

I so agree with you on this.

I did a talk to a government department in the UK... and the main question they wanted to be answered was how to treat trans people. I told them we just want the trans bit to be ignored and treat us as we are. For me that is as just a woman nothing else.

And that is what they do

Quote from: Catherine on April 19, 2011, 03:32:05 AM
Referring to a person as 'that transgendered person' is not rude it is discriminatory and as such should be stamped on. The Discrimination Law of 2010 in the UK stops this sort of thing for all groups of diversity and anyone associated with a diverse group.

People should be left to get on with their lives as they see fit. For me that means being the woman I have always known myself to be

Are you saying its discriminatory because the speaker is saying "person" instead of man or woman, or because the speaker is putting the word transgender before the word person?

Quote from: Juliet on April 14, 2011, 08:35:59 AM
It just sucks that we are going to have a very hard time gaining acceptance when our definitions are all wishywashy.  People dislike what they don't understand.  If the public can't get a grasp on what being transgender means, in a simple straight-forward fashion, they will not understand it and will not take it seriously.  We need to put our egos aside and settle on a damn definition of the word, even if it means having the definition not reflect 100% of everyone's individual feelings perfectly to a tee.

I think one of the main problems with -us- being accepted is the vast majority of trans people haven't accepted themselves.

I am always blown away by how many trans people get insulted if someone includes them as being TG. Sorry but if you were born with a body that doesn't match your gender id, you are transgendered. End of story, it's that simple.  Doesn't matter if you stay in the closet forever or have every surgery possible and no one on the planet knows you did. Being TG also does -not- mean you aren't a woman or female or whatever other label you cherish. You don't have to proclaim your TG status or wear it like a badge of courage, it's just a fact about what you are and where you came from. It's not a negative thing, I am lost as to why people feel insulted and feel they need to hide this from everyone?

And back to my earlier post, no one is born a woman. Unless you consider a 4 year old girl a woman and are using a different definition of the word. Female <> Woman. If that was the case no MTF could ever be a woman.  People become women just as people become men. Obviously most girls want to become women but some boys do which is what being TG is. Some girls want to be men which is also TG.

It's really not that complex if trans people would accept themselves and not be ashamed of how they were born. Life threw us a curve ball, get over it and get on with enjoying life. Being ashamed of yourself and spending your life hiding from this isn't healthy.

Quote from: babykittenful on April 14, 2011, 10:14:51 PM

I don't think we have to fear the label. Instead, we should choose to be proud of who we are and what we stand for. There is nothing wrong with being transgendered, and being in deny or feeling offended about it won't change the reality. While I agree some people don't want to be associated with people who don't share the same stories and obstacles, I suggest that they remember something. All of us around are part of a group called humans. Within this groups, there are people who do great things and people who do very bad things, there are people of every social class, every religion and every political views. Does being human makes you less unique as an individual? Certainly not! Of course you share many things with the other people from that group, otherwise it wouldn't be a group. Being human is just a label, but it doesn't have to be one to be ashamed of. The same goes with being transgendered. Being part of that group doesn't take away anything from you... you just are.

Instead of fighting to prove we are not "one of them", why don't we just let the label be and focus on showing the world how unique we are?

Very well said.

Quote from: Valeriedances on April 17, 2011, 10:32:57 PM
I understand I'm being argumentative here, but why does someone elses reality have to be mine? It's kind of a turn off, that my reality has to match theirs (speaking generally here). To say someones reality is incorrect is another way of saying they are delusional.

I used to be caught up in labels much more in the past. Now, its not much of a big deal to me. I do get annoyed when others try to tell me who or what I am. I have my life and am happy with it. I'm secure in who I am. It's that stupid past that seems to bite me at times  :).


What if your done moving and are post-transitioned? Are you still transgendered, according to this definition?

If a person's body had a transsexual history, was corrected, and they are living in the gender they identify with, with physical bodies to match ...what are they?

Does being transgendered and having had surgeries etc diminish your womanhood?

Yes we all have "That stupid past". Either we can learn to embrace it as part of who we are or try to run and hide from it for the rest of our lives trying to pretend it doesn't exist. We didn't create that past. It was what we were dealt. Why should we be ashamed of it? I am not saying you need to add a modifier to your title "woman" or even go around telling people you are if you don't want to. But I don't think it should be something you would be uncomfortable if people knew either.

Take a breast cancer survivor. They don't go around with a tatoo on their forehead but they shouldn't be ashamed of it and try to pretend it never happened either. They will always be a cancer survivor, just something in their past that likely has an affect on who they now are and what their perspective is like.

As TG's, we also have a unique perspective of the world cis people would never be able to grasp. I think it's a good thing and makes us tough :P YMMV of course..

Quote from: Juliet on April 19, 2011, 07:17:48 AM
Are you saying its discriminatory because the speaker is saying "person" instead of man or woman, or because the speaker is putting the word transgender before the word person?

It is discriminatory because of the 'transgendered' part. but also the tone of it with 'that'... I am a person, I may be transgendered but that is my business no one else's.

We should be free to be who we are without others labelling us in s derogatory manner.

Quote from: Stephe on April 20, 2011, 01:27:55 AM
I think one of the main problems with -us- being accepted is the vast majority of trans people haven't accepted themselves.

I am always blown away by how many trans people get insulted if someone includes them as being TG. Sorry but if you were born with a body that doesn't match your gender id, you are transgendered. End of story, it's that simple.  Doesn't matter if you stay in the closet forever or have every surgery possible and no one on the planet knows you did. Being TG also does -not- mean you aren't a woman or female or whatever other label you cherish. You don't have to proclaim your TG status or wear it like a badge of courage, it's just a fact about what you are and where you came from. It's not a negative thing, I am lost as to why people feel insulted and feel they need to hide this from everyone?

And back to my earlier post, no one is born a woman. Unless you consider a 4 year old girl a woman and are using a different definition of the word. Female <> Woman. If that was the case no MTF could ever be a woman.  People become women just as people become men. Obviously most girls want to become women but some boys do which is what being TG is. Some girls want to be men which is also TG.

It's really not that complex if trans people would accept themselves and not be ashamed of how they were born. Life threw us a curve ball, get over it and get on with enjoying life. Being ashamed of yourself and spending your life hiding from this isn't healthy.

The problem with labels is that it gives people an excuse to discriminate. I know I am transgendered, I would suspect everyone who is transgendered knows this unless they are deluded. I just dont want to be known as being transgendered. It is private information to me.

The problem is do I particularly want everyone else knowing this or do I just want to be seen as what I am ?? Personally I want to just fit in and live my life. I don't want people knowing what I was or the fact that I have changed my body.

I understand that people are different and have differing views to me. But as I have said I just want to get on with my life now I have fixed it.

Quote from: Stephe on April 20, 2011, 01:43:44 AM
Does being transgendered and having had surgeries etc diminish your womanhood?

Yes we all have "That stupid past". Either we can learn to embrace it as part of who we are or try to run and hide from it for the rest of our lives trying to pretend it doesn't exist. We didn't create that past. It was what we were dealt. Why should we be ashamed of it? I am not saying you need to add a modifier to your title "woman" or even go around telling people you are if you don't want to. But I don't think it should be something you would be uncomfortable if people knew either.

Take a breast cancer survivor. They don't go around with a tatoo on their forehead but they shouldn't be ashamed of it and try to pretend it never happened either. They will always be a cancer survivor, just something in their past that likely has an affect on who they now are and what their perspective is like.

As TG's, we also have a unique perspective of the world cis people would never be able to grasp. I think it's a good thing and makes us tough :P YMMV of course..

Breast cancer survivors do not also shout it from the roof tops. Most are worried that it diminishes them as a woman if they are without breasts. They as you say dont deny they have had it but they also dont advertise the fact.

Trans peoole in my experience feel that same. Yes we are trans and no we are not going to advertise the fact.

I read the first page and felt bad. lol. I was like...pft ya its so true. 8) Then really read the wiki page that was recommended and see what it really meant and was all  :embarrassed:. lol To be honest I am still a tad confused but learned alot.

This is a very personal issue to many and unfortunately it usually ends up in disarray and hurt feelings.

Lets try to keep this civil.

Quote from: Sarah Louise on April 20, 2011, 01:46:33 PM
This is a very personal issue to many and unfortunately it usually ends up in disarray and hurt feelings.

Lets try to keep this civil.

It does seem to be a very personal issue indeed. I think the goal here was simply to establish a logical and general definition of the word transgendered. Valerie, I intend to respect your feelings about being forced to recognize what you see as a political label, but I'd like to repeat something that I have said again and again: The label in itself doesn't hold any power.

If an immigrant person arrives in a new country, that person will get the label of an immigrant. It doesn't matter why he chose to move from his country to ours, it doesn't matter if he had a choice in doing so, he still is an immigrant. Once that immigrant has been established in his new country and started over a new life, feeling completely integrated, will that person stop being an immigrant? The fact is that this person will always be an immigrant. That doesn't mean that he hasn't perfectly adapted to his new country, that doesn't mean that is not just as worthy as anybody to live there. Being an immigrant simply means that this person has a history of being in a different country.

Did that immigrant face discrimination for being one? Sadly, it often the case. But it is not word that forced that discrimination to happen, it's the other people's fear and insecurities. Someone might say "I'm not an immigrant, I'm a real citizen.", but that comes from a wrong set of mind that thinks immigrants can't be real citizen, which is a very discriminative one. While the person doesn't realize it, he has internalized the fear and insecurities that other people have projected on him, and took refuge from them by denying reality.

I think saying " I'm not transgendered, I'm a real woman." is exactly the same as saying "I'm not an immigrant, I'm a real citizen.". Saying so implies that being transgendered exclude being a real woman, when this is absolutely not the case. And the problem with that kind of thinking is that it doesn't help anyone, including the person who's denying. When people learn about your history, they won't care about the words you use to describe yourself. If no one as taught them that being transgendered is in no way an obstacle to being a real woman, they might just as well see you a man in delusion. Accepting the label means that you can start actively promoting tolerance and credible knowledge about it.

I have no desire to attack anyone on their beliefs and I have a huge respect for the history of everyone on this forum. I'm still very closeted about my own issues, but I've seen enough to know that the world his far from tender to those who aren't gender normative, and even less to the transsexuals. I know many of us have good reasons for not wanting to labeled as transgendered, but we should remember that people use labels everyday. Unless we actively shape our own, it's the cisgendered people who are going to do it. And the result is rarely very satisfying.

Quote from: Caleb_ on April 20, 2011, 03:42:36 PM
There is no reason for her to identify as an immigrant any longer. She is a Canadian with a Dutch background.

I understand that, and I know that, but can't we just summarize the "with a Dutch background" by saying immigrant? Would that take away the fact that your grandmother's home is here in Canada? The definition of an immigrant is "someone who has lived in an other country before this one". So instead of bothering in using the whole cumbersome definition every time, why wouldn't we use the word that was meant to say that?

Should we let the stupid people who have misused the word win by allowing them to decide the meaning they want to give the word?

This is just the problem, once a position is taken, its hard to change.

No matter how much you debate it, minds are seldom changed.  Usually they just dig in deeper.

Why not just agree to disagree?

Quote from: Valeriedances on April 20, 2011, 04:06:19 PM
It is unfortunate that in many instances people who are living in a part-time or closeted status, for very valid reasons, have a point of view or agenda in asking folks who have risked everything and faced real discrimination in their lives to be who they are, to label themselves a certain way. I believe those that are doing and risking all should have the peace and freedom in being accepted as they show themselves to be.

That is all I am saying.

What is the most important thing for you? To be seen as a real woman or to be seen as a real cisgendered woman? I know I'll never be a cisgendered woman. No matter what I do, no matter what I think, I'll always know where I come from and what my history is. If the real goal of transition is to become a cisgendered woman, then I know it's not worth it, because it will never be achieved.

It might be hard for someone who's risked it all to hear of people who are actually questioning on what it is that they are facing and what it's going to mean. But to me, it's very important to be thorough in my reasoning if I want to ever consider going in such a huge change in my life. This is why I think it's very legitimate to question these kind of things. Once I am done transitioning, maybe I won't care anymore about what is real or what it not, but right now, this is a very important question for me and I'm simply trying to find answers.

I think everyone here knows that life is filled with hardships and deceptions. This is part what brought us together in the first place.

now i know why i come to susans place.........thanks for reminding me

Quote from: Catherine on April 20, 2011, 05:11:22 AM
The problem with labels is that it gives people an excuse to discriminate. I know I am transgendered, I would suspect everyone who is transgendered knows this unless they are deluded. I just dont want to be known as being transgendered. It is private information to me.

Read through the comments, several people here have proclaimed they are NOT transgendered and see it as an insult.

Also, if people want to discriminate, they will find a way to do so.

No one is saying you need to proclaim and announce to everyone you are transgendered. But when you work so hard to hide something like this from people, it sends the message that this is something people should be ashamed of or why bother to hide it? That it turn affects how the public views someone being transgendered, clearing it's BAD or they wouldn't be ashamed of it. I'm a woman, quite a few people know I am transgendered and I too have moved on with my life. This isn't a mutually exclusive thing.

As far as woman who define their womanhood by their breasts, size or lack thereof... I don't see how that is a positive way to live your life either, nor should we strive to follow in their footsteps or use them as a role model for our behavior..

Stephe

Quote from: Valeriedances on April 20, 2011, 04:06:19 PM
It is unfortunate that in many instances people who are living in a part-time or closeted status (for very valid reasons) have a point of view or agenda in asking folks who have risked everything and faced real discrimination in their lives to be who they are, to label themselves a certain way. I believe those that are doing and risking all should have the peace and freedom in being accepted as they show themselves to be.

The only "agenda" I have is the public needs to have "transgender" defined.

It needs a VERY simple definition that a cisgendered person can wrap their mind around, which is the one at the start of this thread. It doesn't need 2 paragraphs about "Some people who have had sex changes don't like to have their past revealed and so no longer fit in this group and have their own special group, which they also don't want used to define them, but some TS's still identify as TG" or whatever other exemptions some people want to create.

I have been living 24/7 as a woman for years and transitioned in place with no medical or therapists help whatsoever. I just did it on my own so I KNOW what discrimination is and that it exists. I risked as much as anyone has doing this the way I did with ZERO support. I'm not sure what your above statement is about.. I don't feel my opinions on this hold any more weight because of my life choices so far or than someone who still lives as their birth gender and is 100% in the closet.

I'm really sorry this topic and my comments upset you so much. Clearly no one can force a label on you and you can deny it applies to you. That's clearly your right. No one is saying you must tell anyone your past and feel free to hide from your past if that makes you happy. I'm sure not going to make a judgment on that for you and can totally understand why you would want to, it does make life more difficult if people know.

I like the example she gave of being an immigrant. You can become a full fledged legal citizen and -most- people will accept you are as much of a citizen as anyone. The law is on your side that you ARE a citizen. Personally I have  MORE respect for someone who worked to become a citizen than someone who was born a citizen. Are there people who view these immigrants as "less than real citizens?" Clearly there are, but should they live their life to stay under the radar of those types of ignorant, narrow minded people? 

Obviously that is a personal choice and again no one can tell you "You have to proclaim at every opportunity "I am transgendered!". I don't think anyone is saying that here. But IMHO to deny you are transgendered would be just like an immigrant trying to deny they ever lived in another country. Their past is nothing they have anything to be ashamed over. On the other hand, no one expects them to go around telling people "I was originally from ____ before I became a citizen" either..

Stephe

Quote from: Valeriedances on April 20, 2011, 09:11:10 AM

I'm not trans-ing anything, as I've said before. I'm legally female. That is all the identification I need or want.

I'm curious, if they had denied this "legally female" identification would that change your self perception? And were you a different person before the legal status was granted? Just curious as you keep saying this, like this legal status changed who you are.

One last thing I'm curious about, were you ever transgendered and now you're not? Or are transgendered people a totally different group of people who just happen to also have been born a different sex than their goal gender identity, many of whom may one day end up post op with this same legal female status?

One question of yours I didn't answer, by -us- I was talking about transgendered people. I'm tracking to have surgery, get my legal female status etc so maybe I'm not part of this -us- and don't realize it yet or it's that your not part of this -us-? I guess I'm confused in that I don't see the difference between me and you.

Valerie, allow me a shot at understanding.

TG is important label for the politically active, I've been asked to be part of the political and social TG community as part of my therapy- and I kind of balked at the notion. I tried, but ultimately came to the conclusion that, since I will consider myself just "another girl" when all is said and done, that I have no special tie to the group in that manner. For those who don't require relative stealth to address their GID, a transsexual of incredibly intense nature is a frustrating individual.

I can't take it, I tried, but settling for anything other than "her" wil not do. I find myself identifying with women like you more and more. I try to help others on their journey through, and I need help too, but I won't let trans be the biggest part of my life beyond it happening. (surgically)

I know that is probably going to make quite a few people mad, but ghats

* that's what I feel I had to get off my chest. There are complications, of course, byt there goes a belief of mine.

I think y'all are building boxes with vapor and then being upset when things fall on the floor.

The topic of sex/gender has a real language problem.  Inadequate terminology and understanding of the subject in the early days led to a creation of this very confusing set of terms we have today.  Fuzzy and often contradictory meanings and definitions abound.  Trying to have a conversation about gender without it diverting into a discussion of semantics at some point along the way is darn near impossible, which frustrates us all to no end.  Also, language is the framework upon which thoughts are built, so when all you have in your arsenal for thinking about a subject is an inadequate set of blurry and conflicting terms, it can be really difficult to even think clearly about it.

It would be nice if we could scrap the whole sex/gender lexicon and start over, but unfortunately language doesn't really work that way.  We're pretty much stuck with what we got.  This means you have to formulate your own way of thinking about the subject and you have to allow others to do the same.  You also just have to accept that, given all of the above, we're not all going end up on the same page.  In fact it's a miracle if any of us ever do.

Also, Valerie.... <huuugs>

Quote from: Valeriedances on April 21, 2011, 04:50:08 PM
I have spoken my position plainly already. I dont want to argue any longer, it is tiresome.

I dont know why I am still here honestly.

-Valerie

Sorry you see this as a argument, that's not my intention. I was trying to understand why this upsets you so badly and how you got to this place where you don't consider yourself transgendered when some other post TS's do and what the difference is. You seemed to be focused on this "legally female" thing and I was trying to understand: is that the point you were no longer transgendered or ?? Again sorry if you see this as a fight, argument or somehow being attacked personally.

Quote from: EmmaM on April 21, 2011, 07:08:30 PM
Valerie, allow me a shot at understanding.

TG is important label for the politically active, I've been asked to be part of the political and social TG community as part of my therapy- and I kind of balked at the notion. I tried, but ultimately came to the conclusion that, since I will consider myself just "another girl" when all is said and done, that I have no special tie to the group in that manner.

I honestly have never had an interest in being politically TG active or involved with "the transgendered community" either. None of my close friends are TG but there are a few trans people at my church and they seem nice. I just don't have a lot in common with them, other than being TG, and for me that's not like some common ground to base a friendship. Anymore than being white or a woman is. it wouldn't exclude them from being my friend either. I've been invited to come to their support group thing, I'm not interested. I don't feel any "ties" to this community or feel like I need to go do things with other TG's etc just because they are TG.

I too am just another woman/human being that just happens to be transgendered. I have no desire to live in a "trans friendly area of town". And being transgendered is not really something I dwell on or is part of my life as such, but it just -is- if that makes any sense. Being TG doesn't make me not a woman or any more or less anything. Doesn't mean I have to talk to people about it or go hang out with other people just because they are either.

I do feel that the non-transgendered people around us in the world are curious and a simple explanation of what the term means, without a confusing list of exclusions, would help things for a lot of people. NO ONE is saying anyone has to take this on as their own. Like I never said "Valerie is transgendered", I only said "transgendered means: someone who was born male wants to be a woman or someone who was born female wants to be a man".  This seems to be what is the accepted definition of the term. No where does it say you must be involved in the community or anything such as that.

If someone doesn't see these definitions fitting them, then they aren't transgendered. I don't see why this is so complicated or how anyone would get upset over this.

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/transgender (http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/transgender)

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/transgender (http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/transgender)

http://www.answers.com/topic/transgender (http://www.answers.com/topic/transgender)

 I'm about to say something really inflammatory.

   I apologise, ahead of time, if what follows offends you, but it's how I genuinely feel. I'm not suggesting that anyone here has less validity than anyone else... just that self-identification is quite subjective and contrary to the objective definition suggested by the first post in this thread.

  There are those that have been truly born with a birth defect. Gender Identity Disorder is a very real condition for many here... I, personally, experienced profound depression, debilitating anxiety and real suicidality as a result of my condition. I once tried to castrate myself.  My brain is physiologically female; medical treatment worked wonders for me.. HRT, quite literally saved my life; SRS has been determined a necessary medical procedure for me.

There are many here that are self-identified as "non-op" or "non-medical." Some would describe themselves as having lived years as a certain gender but still assert the desire to use the genitals they were born with. I don't get that.

  If you want to live as a woman but be a man in bed.. yep, you're Transgender. DO NOT, however, suggest that folks like me should identify with you. I think the Transgender definition has become TOO broad, mixing lifestyles with life conditions.

Quote from: Stephe on April 21, 2011, 09:53:26 PM
Sorry you see this as a argument, that's not my intention. I was trying to understand why this upsets you so badly and how you got to this place where you don't consider yourself transgendered when some other post TS's do and what the difference is. You seemed to be focused on this "legally female" thing and I was trying to understand: is that the point you were no longer transgendered or ?? Again sorry if you see this as a fight, argument or somehow being attacked personally.

I didn't see any posts where she came across as being so upset.  In any case, I think she explained why she doesn't identify with the term pretty clearly.

Like many words describing gender related issues, transgendered has so many meanings for so many different people that the word doesn't effectively mean anything, or at least it can mean darn near anything you want.  One person's version isn't any more valid than another's.

If y'all want to have a single and well-defined meaning for the word that everybody is going to go along with, well good luck with that one...

Quote from: JessicaR on April 22, 2011, 12:02:53 AM
I'm about to say something really inflammatory.

   I apologise, ahead of time, if what follows offends you, but it's how I genuinely feel. I'm not suggesting that anyone here has less validity than anyone else... just that self-identification is quite subjective and contrary to the objective definition suggested by the first post in this thread.

  There are those that have been truly born with a birth defect. Gender Identity Disorder is a very real condition for many here... I, personally, experienced profound depression, debilitating anxiety and real suicidality as a result of my condition. I once tried to castrate myself.  My brain is physiologically female; medical treatment worked wonders for me.. HRT, quite literally saved my life; SRS has been determined a necessary medical procedure for me.

There are many here that are self-identified as "non-op" or "non-medical." Some would describe themselves as having lived years as a certain gender but still assert the desire to use the genitals they were born with. I don't get that.

  If you want to live as a woman but be a man in bed.. yep, you're Transgender. DO NOT, however, suggest that folks like me should identify with you. I think the Transgender definition has become TOO broad, mixing lifestyles with life conditions.

Good post,

I agree there are so many 'definitions' invented to allow people to justify a lifestyle.

As I keep saying my Shrink told me there are two genders and many sexualities well six actually... and he seemed to me to be pretty up on the current practice.

Personally I don't get transvestism.. I don't see how a man can get sexual gratification from wearing a pair of silky knickers. I know they do, I don't criticise them for doing it but I don't get it and I certainly don't identify with it..

If gender is binary, where do intersexed people fit?

Quote from: JessicaR on April 22, 2011, 12:02:53 AMI think the Transgender definition has become TOO broad, mixing lifestyles with life conditions.

The more broad and generalized a term becomes, the fewer people therein will truly identify with that term.

The "Benjamin scale" brought forward in the 1960s separated (or attempted to separate) "variation" into six general categories based on patient needs & desires and the appropriate medical treatments and it seemed to work well. In particular, it became the 'justification' that allowed the medical treatment of transsexuals (Type V and Type VI). The vast majority of the people so treated just vanished into the fabric of society and became invisible - which was the objective of the treatment in the first place and demonstrated the effectiveness of treatment to a conservative and non-understanding public. If the person they knew as that 'typical girl next door' was found to have been 'born different' it was easy to accept "born in the wrong body" in "a gender binary society" because she was no different than any other girl they knew.

The number of "transsexual type V & VI" were very small in proportion to the "gender variant" community as a whole and it seemed that  the success of transitions and integration of these people added a great deal of credibility to the "born in the wrong body" theory, a credibility that others wanted to tap in to. I don't know what happened between 1975 and 2000 (when I was off living a normal life) but it seems everything got lumped into one umbrella term and everyone seemed to be fighting about being "more valid" than the other. Certainly the melting of everything into one pot seemed to make it a stretch for the general public to accept any of it!

JohnR: "If gender is binary, where do intersexed people fit?" I know quite a few Intersex people and about half of them gladly accept the "gender binary" and the other half simply don't want to be categorized as either.

Quote from: Sarah7 on April 21, 2011, 10:50:24 PM
No. This has been covered in this thread. The medical term transsexual means: "someone who identifies as male who was assigned female at birth or someone who identifies as female who was assigned male at birth."

Transgender(ed) was originally a term developed to mean a non-op transsexual. It has since been expanded by the LGBT movement to act as an all inclusive umbrella term for any kind of gender-variant individual.

Of the "dictionaries" you link to only Merriam-Webster is a real dictionary and, surprise surprise, it actually has a fairly accurate description: "of, relating to, or being a person (as a transsexual or ->-bleeped-<-) who identifies with or expresses a gender identity that differs from the one which corresponds to the person's sex at birth."  Note the word "differs" which is not synonymous with "opposite." And that it says identifies with OR expresses.

And further Merriam-Webster defines transsexual separately as: "a person who strongly identifies with the opposite sex and may seek to live as a member of this sex especially by undergoing surgery and hormone therapy to obtain the necessary physical appearance (as by changing the external sex organs) ."

Please stop trying to redefine transgender(ed) to exclude all non-transsexual identities. It is actually against the ToS for this site: "10. Bashing or flaming of any individuals or groups is not acceptable behavior on this web site and will not be tolerated in the slightest for any reason.  This includes but is not limited to:    * Advocating the separation or exclusion of one or more group from under the Transgender umbrella term."

Transgender as defined by Susan's Place: "an inclusive umbrella term which covers anyone who transcends their birth gender for any reason. This includes but is not limited to Androgynes, Crossdressers, Drag kings, Drag queens, Intersexuals, Transsexuals, and ->-bleeped-<-s."

And please please stop trying to tell people they "want to be a woman (or man)." That may be true for you but it is not how all transsexuals experience their identity.

Wow, I'm surprised that my definition was actually so closed to the Merriam Webster one! I guess this is one thing though, I think many people here have confused the transgendered definition with the transsexual one.

Quote from: JessicaR on April 22, 2011, 12:02:53 AM
I'm about to say something really inflammatory.

   I apologise, ahead of time, if what follows offends you, but it's how I genuinely feel. I'm not suggesting that anyone here has less validity than anyone else... just that self-identification is quite subjective and contrary to the objective definition suggested by the first post in this thread.

  There are those that have been truly born with a birth defect. Gender Identity Disorder is a very real condition for many here... I, personally, experienced profound depression, debilitating anxiety and real suicidality as a result of my condition. I once tried to castrate myself.  My brain is physiologically female; medical treatment worked wonders for me.. HRT, quite literally saved my life; SRS has been determined a necessary medical procedure for me.

There are many here that are self-identified as "non-op" or "non-medical." Some would describe themselves as having lived years as a certain gender but still assert the desire to use the genitals they were born with. I don't get that.

  If you want to live as a woman but be a man in bed.. yep, you're Transgender. DO NOT, however, suggest that folks like me should identify with you. I think the Transgender definition has become TOO broad, mixing lifestyles with life conditions.

I'm sorry you are sorry, but I can't help but to see this post as harsh. Are you really getting into the "My pain is bigger then yours" to explain how you are more legitimate then other people? I personally still have a desire to use the genitals I was born with. Of course, if some magical fairy were to give me female genitals, along with the whole female body, I couldn't be happier. But right now, this is not how my body works.

Believe me, my condition Is painful. Believe me, you are not the only one who have and who still have suicidal thoughts about being who they are and having the body they have. I praise your courage to have undergone transition, but I beg you to remember how transition is a ->-bleeped-<-ing scary option to live with. First, you have to intervene with your body's natural hormones level. This will have the initial result of making you infertile and messing with you mind. I know most people, including me, actually desire the "messing with your mind" part, but I'm certainly not that interested in the sterilization part.

Then you actually physically remove one of your body's essential glands, so that your body will never ever be able to balance it's hormone levels on it's own. You therefore become medically dependent. Also, after surgery, which is, by the way, a very intimidating medical procedure which can certainly be very scary to many people, you have to deal with new genitals, which are certainly great, but which your body never intended to have, hence the need to dilate every day or week for fear that your body will actually try to sabotage your precious new genitals. And then, there is also the whole fight for "passing" with hair removals, FFS, voice training and, if you want to be stealth, lies. And the worst part about it is that you could do all of that and actually never pass!

Hear me on this, I'm not saying those who chose to transition are wrong to do it. I absolutely admire the courage they've had to do this. I just find insulting when someone diminishes my very real condition to a "lifestyle", simply because I fear such drastic medical procedures. One could argue that the mere fact that I don't "hurt" enough to go trough transition might mean that I'm not "really" transsexual. But then, why does a "simple lifestyle choice" hurt me so much to the point I'd want to die, when I don't even get the "lifestyle" part since I'm still closeted in fear. Right now, I don't see myself as a "cisgendered woman" with a condition. I see myself as a person who's life is made miserable because it's mind seems to want to make war to the very body that support it's life. Being transsexual goes very deeply against my values of being as independent as I can from the bindings of our modern civilization, living in sync with my environment and in the respect of my body. Hell, I even felt bad for coloring my hair.

I don't want to be transsexual. I don't want to transition. I don't want to suffer anymore. But it seems like there are some things that are beyond your control in life. What will happen of me? If only I knew. Maybe therapy will help me find my way, but it seems like such a heavy weight on my shoulder I'm afraid I'll just sink and drown.

Quote from: JessicaR on April 22, 2011, 12:02:53 AM
  If you want to live as a woman but be a man in bed.. yep, you're Transgender. DO NOT, however, suggest that folks like me should identify with you. I think the Transgender definition has become TOO broad, mixing lifestyles with life conditions.

So where did this definition come from? That being transgender has anything to do with sexual preferences? Sorry to ruin your definition but I ID as TG, live as a woman but am not "A man in bed".. Another TS here said she ID's as TG and might be pretty difficult for her to fit in your definition too :P

Standard Terms and Definitions at Susan's Place:

https://www.susans.org/forums/index.php/topic,54369.msg337984.html#msg337984 (https://www.susans.org/forums/index.php/topic,54369.msg337984.html#msg337984)

Transgender: an inclusive umbrella term which covers anyone who transcends their birth gender for any reason. This includes but is not limited to Androgynes, Crossdressers, Drag kings, Drag queens, Intersexuals, Transsexuals, and ->-bleeped-<-s.

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

Quote from: Sarah7 on April 21, 2011, 10:50:24 PM

Of the "dictionaries" you link to only Merriam-Webster is a real dictionary and, surprise surprise, it actually has a fairly accurate description: "of, relating to, or being a person (as a transsexual or ->-bleeped-<-) who identifies with or expresses a gender identity that differs from the one which corresponds to the person's sex at birth."  Note the word "differs" which is not synonymous with "opposite." And that it says identifies with OR expresses.


Please stop trying to redefine transgender(ed) to exclude all non-transsexual identities. It is actually against the ToS for this site: "10. Bashing or flaming of any individuals or groups is not acceptable behavior on this web site and will not be tolerated in the slightest for any reason.  This includes but is not limited to:    * Advocating the separation or exclusion of one or more group from under the Transgender umbrella term."

Transgender as defined by Susan's Place: "an inclusive umbrella term which covers anyone who transcends their birth gender for any reason. This includes but is not limited to Androgynes, Crossdressers, Drag kings, Drag queens, Intersexuals, Transsexuals, and ->-bleeped-<-s."

OK now I am truly lost. Where did I try to exclude people from under the "umbrella term" transgendered? What I said was "transgender is: when a male wants to become a women or a female wants to become a man." I don't see how this is in contrast to the Merriam-Webster one. Doesn't imply they actually need to become one or the other, it's the -wants to- that defines the term. Even if someone just has those thoughts of not wanting to be their birth gender, they are transgendered even if they never act on these thoughts. From someone thinking about part time cross dressing,  all the way to a "true TS" that is post op and stealth. Inclusive of all the different flavors.

Obviously I personally don't relate to everyone that is TG, like I don't relate to a FTM, why would someone want to become a guy, YUK! lol  (just kidding of course) But I accept I am part of this larger group and don't try to exclude myself or anyone from it.

If you want to point out someone who is violating this TOS you referenced,  look at the "True TS's" posting in this very thread trying to remove transsexuals from your above list.. Or the person who posted "Transgender is: people who live as women but are a man in bed".. 

I totally agree with the "Transgender as defined by Susan's Place" you posted above. Sorry if my posts seem otherwise?

Clearly transgender doesn't -replace- the term transsexual, but they fit under the umbrella term transgendered. That is the point I was making.

Quote from: babykittenful on April 22, 2011, 10:24:50 AM

I'm sorry you are sorry, but I can't help but to see this post as harsh. Are you really getting into the "My pain is bigger then yours" to explain how you are more legitimate then other people? 

<snip>

I see myself as a person who's life is made miserable because it's mind seems to want to make war to the very body that support it's life. Being transsexual goes very deeply against my values of being as independent as I can from the bindings of our modern civilization, living in sync with my environment and in the respect of my body. 

Unfortunately there seems to be a "pecking order" in the transgendered community some people still believe in i.e. post-op TS stealth/passing > post-op TS not passing> non-op passing etc etc. I've seen it used 2-3 times already in this thread about why -we should listen to them-.

And I think we all know the feeling of; our mind being at war with our bodies, it's what being transgender involves at it's core. And yes, everyone has to come up with their own unique way of resolving it. I'm not sure why some post-op TS's feel this need to exclude themselves from "us", like they don't or never had this same war inside them or fought this same fight in their own way? How they argue transsexual is NOT also being transgendered (a subset under the term TG). Just because you feel you have won the war, doesn't mean you are cured of "transgender" like it's some disease..

Unfortunately it's been like this for a long time, though not as common as it used to be, but sadly isn't likely to ever end. And because of this infighting and people refusing to accept definitions etc, it makes the concept of transgender much more confusing to the general public, many of whom want to understand it on a basic level.

Quote from: Stephe on April 22, 2011, 11:33:55 AM
OK now I am truly lost. Where did I try to exclude people from under the "umbrella term" transgendered? What I said was "transgender is: when a male wants to become a women or a female wants to become a man." I don't see how this is in contrast to the Merriam-Webster one. Doesn't imply they actually need to become one or the other, it's the -wants to- that defines the term.

I think the distinction you fail to notice here is that some of those who fall under the transgendered categories, namely, the drag queens and kings and the cross dressers, don't necessarily feel gender dysphoria and therefore don't really want to "become" of the other gender, they just "play" or "express" the other gender. They are transgendered, but they aren't transsexuals. I think that what defines transsexuals the most is the gender dysphoria associated with their birth gender. I think what some transsexuals don't like about being included in the transgendered umbrella is that they might be associated with people who don't feel the same pain as them and therefore couldn't possibly understand them.

I think that this is what JessicaR intended to say when she made that post. That is exactly the problem when you don't have a clear definition of what means what: At some point, you don't even know what message the people are trying to pass, since the words themselves have lost their meanings. I have felt genuinely hurt when I read that "If you want to live as a woman but be a man in bed.. yep, you're Transgender. DO NOT, however, suggest that folks like me should identify with you." because by using that half-baked definition, she included the closeted transsexuals and the transsexuals who don't intend to have SRS. If that is really what she meant, then it is rude and it clearly goes against the rules of this forum. But if she didn't mean to say that, this goes to prove that we desperately need the definitions and the labels, otherwise everything is chaos and people hurt each other without even wanting it.

So here's the thing, you can't convene a commitee and have the meaning of words "fixed."  Unfortunately it just doesn't work that way.

Here is a pretty simple fix to the problem though: since the words don't really mean anything, throw them out.  Try just describing things as if the words didn't exist.

For instance:

Quote from: babykittenful on April 22, 2011, 10:24:50 AM
... Of course, if some magical fairy were to give me female genitals, along with the whole female body, I couldn't be happier. But right now, this is not how my body works.

...snip...

... why does a "simple lifestyle choice" hurt me so much to the point I'd want to die, when I don't even get the "lifestyle" part since I'm still closeted in fear. Right now, I don't see myself as a "cisgendered woman" with a condition. I see myself as a person who's life is made miserable because it's mind seems to want to make war to the very body that support it's life.

...snip..

I don't want to transition. I don't want to suffer anymore. But it seems like there are some things that are beyond your control in life. What will happen of me? If only I knew. Maybe therapy will help me find my way, but it seems like such a heavy weight on my shoulder I'm afraid I'll just sink and drown.

That tells me a lot more about your situation than "I'm transgendered," which tells me exactly... nothing.  Yes it's longhand and inconvenient, but trying to communicate with words that have utterly unclear meanings is pretty much infeasable, is it not?   Besides how long has this thread gone on now?  Clearly using words that don't mean anything  does NOT save time.

Quote from: Valeriedances on April 22, 2011, 01:11:56 PM
Because something is against the TOS, doesn't make it wrong to have a view different than the TOS. It just means to speak of it violates those rules set by the owner of this site.

I don't know this for sure because I don't have time to go read the ToS at the moment, but I think that was just from a list of standard terms and definitions and is not part of the ToS anyway.  Although I can just see it:

"What!? You used a word contextually inconsistent with an arbitrary definition we've assigned to an ambiguous word!?  OMG BANNED 4 LIEF!!!"

Now that would be seriously hilarious lol.

Quote from: babykittenful on April 22, 2011, 12:03:09 PM

I think that this is what JessicaR intended to say when she made that post. That is exactly the problem when you don't have a clear definition of what means what: At some point, you don't even know what message the people are trying to pass, since the words themselves have lost their meanings. I have felt genuinely hurt when I read that "If you want to live as a woman but be a man in bed.. yep, you're Transgender. DO NOT, however, suggest that folks like me should identify with you." because by using that half-baked definition, she included the closeted transsexuals and the transsexuals who don't intend to have SRS. If that is really what she meant, then it is rude and it clearly goes against the rules of this forum. But if she didn't mean to say that, this goes to prove that we desperately need the definitions and the labels, otherwise everything is chaos and people hurt each other without even wanting it.

 

  Some may benefit by recognizing the experience of others. Transsexual and Transgender are not the same.

   The subject at hand is asking if the originally posted definition is true or false. It invites opinion. If my having an opinion violates the TOS, you go right ahead and kick me out.

  I'm done with this thread...

   Don't ask me my opinion and smite me for it after...
 

Quote from: JessicaR on April 22, 2011, 09:59:21 PM
 

  Some may benefit by recognizing the experience of others. Transsexual and Transgender are not the same.

   The subject at hand is asking if the originally posted definition is true or false. It invites opinion. If my having an opinion violates the TOS, you go right ahead and kick me out.

  I'm done with this thread...

   Don't ask me my opinion and smite me for it after...

You have your right to your opinion, but we have our right to feel offended when you are directly rude to some of us. Particularly since you don't seem to have any intention of clarifying it, so we may understand what you actually intended to say.

True ONLY if someone asks me and I want to explain it quickly without getting into details. It's the easiest way to "dumb it down" for people.

Also, I have to ask. When some of you say you have a "male" or "female" brain what exactly does that mean?

I've never seen a counselor or psychiatrist for being trans, nor have I ever been diagnosed with GID so this is something I've never heard before?

(I didn't feel the need for it and it wasn't required to have a note for hormones or surgery.)

Quote from: JayUnit on April 22, 2011, 11:35:18 PM
Also, I have to ask. When some of you say you have a "male" or "female" brain what exactly does that mean?

I've never seen a counselor or psychiatrist for being trans, nor have I ever been diagnosed with GID so this is something I've never heard before?

(I didn't feel the need for it and it wasn't required to have a note for hormones or surgery.)

Some research has shown that being trans could stem from hormone exposure/lack of exposure in the womb. The way I've read it explained is that typically XY babies are exposed to a rush of androgens in the womb that "masculinize" the brain, where as the brains of XX babies are typically shielded from that rush of androgens. The role those hormones apparently play is pretty much "sexing" the brain. It could explain why transguys experience themselves as male, while transwomen experience themselves as female from very early ages.

I've also read some researching showing findings that transguys in that particular test group seemed to have somatostatin-expressing neurons (in the BSTc/bed nucleus of the stria terminalis) in the male range, while transwomen had them in the female range. This has led some researchers to hypothesize that sex is not restricted to biological sex, but that "brain-sex" is another determinant of the sex of an individual. It at least would explain why transguys feel like they're male trapped in a female body and viceversa for transwomen.

Anyways, personally I prefer the term XX male to describe myself or transguy but don't feel like it makes me any less male. As far as the definition of transgender, it's a tough one since it is so broad, but I think in a way that's a good thing. I think the term should remain inclusive rather than exclusive. The OP's description is kind of problematic, I find. Definitely really dumbed down and doesn't cover the full breadth of transgender. As far as trans rights bills, I support their using gender expression or identity, but it would be good to have something in there "non-cis," too.

I'd be curious to know the source of these studies. I have yet to fall on anything coming from a credible source that links transsexualism to biology. It seems to me like that no one wants to study the damn thing, which create a huge emptiness were psychiatrist and trans people are free to put all their suppositions.

In the end, it seems like no one knows what is such a thing as a male brain or a female brain...

No one can tell while you're alive, not without killing you in the process of finding out. They have been able to tell from study of TS women after they have died:

QuoteThe recent report from Dick Swaab and his colleagues at the Netherlands Institute for Brain Research confirms this notion [...] Swaab and colleagues examined the brains of many individuals, including homosexual men, heterosexual men and women and six male-to-female transsexuals. They found that a tiny region with the unwieldy name of the central region of the bed nucleus of the stria terininalis (BSTc) was larger in men than in women. Sexual orientation seemed irrelevant to the size of the BSTc because it was as large in homosexual men as in heterosexual men. But the BSTc of the six transsexuals was as small as that of women - about half the volume of the BSTc in other men. (Breedlove)

Breedlove, Marc. "The Chicken-and-Egg Argument as It Applies to the Brains of Transsexuals: Does It           
Matter." Psychologue (1996): n. pag. Web. 20 Nov 2009.

From a college essay I wrote.

First off, I just want to say that using the term 'transgendered' instead of transgender is cumbersome and is easily used against us. Just like saying 'coloured person' is offensive instead of saying person of colour. You might think it nitpicky but the 'ed' is suggesting that it was something that was done to you and can be removed. A person of colour can't stop being a person of colour and neither can a transgender person stop being transgender. To further demonstrate how ridiculous it is, if you were gay then you haven't been homosexualized or 'gayed', you're just simply homosexual or gay.

Transgender suggests a state of being whereas transgendered suggests that you were conditioned to be that way or brainwashed or whatever tripe a bigot wants to use against you.

Personally, I believe sex is just as much of a social construct as gender is.

http://tranarchism.com/2010/11/26/not-your-moms-trans-101/ (http://tranarchism.com/2010/11/26/not-your-moms-trans-101/)

"BODIES

Almost every Trans 101 will contain the truism "Sex is between your legs, gender is between your ears."

Gag.

Or they may say "Sex is physical, gender is socially constructed."

This simply isn't true.

Sex is no more an immutable binary than is gender. There are intersex people who are born with non-binary genitalia, as I have already mentioned. There are people with hormonal anomalies. In fact, hormone levels vary wildly within the categories of cis male and cis female. Chromosomes, too, vary. If you thought "XX" and "XY" were the only two possible combinations, you have some serious googling to do. In addition to variations like XXY, XXYY, or X, sometimes cis people find out that they are genetically the "opposite" of what they though they were– that is, a 'typical' cis man can be XX, a 'normal' cis woman can be XY.

The fact is that the concept of binary sex is based on the fallacious idea that multiple sex characteristics are immutable and must always go together, when in fact many of them can be changed, many erased, and many appear independently in different combinations. "Female" in sex binary terms means having breasts, having a vagina, having a womb, not having a lot of body hair, having a high-pitched voice, having lots of estrogen, having a period, having XX chromosomes. "Male" means having a penis, not having breasts, producing sperm, having body hair, having a deep voice, having lots of testosterone, having XY chromosomes. Yet it is possible to isolate, alter, and remove many of these traits. Many of these traits do not always appear together, and before puberty and after menopause, many of them do not apply.

And what about women who get hysterectomies? Or who have had mastectomies for reasons related to breast cancer? Are they not women?

What about a soldier whose dick gets blown off by a mine? Is he not a man?

The fallacies of binding identity to bodies, which are fragile, changeable things, subject to injury, mutilation, maiming, decay and ultimate destruction, should by now be clear.

Sex is as much a social construct as gender, as much subject to self identification, and besides all that, quite easy to modify. Surgical and hormonal techniques are only becoming more sophisticated. If there ever was a need to consider biology destiny, that time is surely past.

The entire concept of "sex" is simply a way of attaching something social– gender– to bodies. This being the case, I believe the most sensible way to look at the question of sex now is this: a male body is a body belonging to a male– that is, someone who identifies as male. A female body is a body belonging to a female– that is, someone who identifies as female. Genderqueer bodies belong to folks who are genderqueer, androgynous bodies belong to androgynes, and so forth, and so on.

This is why I question the value of phrases like "man in a woman's body" or "male to female." Who is to say we ever were the "opposite sex?" Personally I will never again describe myself as "born female." I was born a trans male and my years of confusion were due to being forcefully and repeatedly told that I was something else. This body is not a woman's. It is mine. Neither am I trapped in it.

None of what I say here is to minimize the necessity of surgery. Many trans people do experience body dysphoria. Many of us do seek hormones, surgery, and other body modifications. But the point is that, while such modifications may be necessary for our peace of mind, they are not necessary to make us "real men" or "real women" or "real" whatevers. We're plenty real right now, thank you."

Quote from: babykittenful on April 23, 2011, 09:21:23 PM
I'd be curious to know the source of these studies. I have yet to fall on anything coming from a credible source that links transsexualism to biology. It seems to me like that no one wants to study the damn thing, which create a huge emptiness were psychiatrist and trans people are free to put all their suppositions.

In the end, it seems like no one knows what is such a thing as a male brain or a female brain...

http://jcem.endojournals.org/cgi/content/full/85/5/2034 (http://jcem.endojournals.org/cgi/content/full/85/5/2034)

Of course, it's a hypothesis, but that doesn't mean it doesn't merit attention. Every discovery begins somewhere. It is interesting at the very least and I wouldn't be surprised if it weren't far from being part of the cause. Of course, I hope that more research will be done, obviously, but it doesn't mean I'm going to ignore the study and pretend it must be bogus.

@Lachlann

Thanks for posting this, it summarizes a lot of what I often think about when it comes to sex/gender. I similarly suspect that the modern notions of sex are at the very least influenced by traditional perception. Of course, science traditionally tells us that XX is female and XY is male, that males have certain biological characteristics while females have certain biological characteristics. But if we look at the world around us, there are species like the parrotfish that change sex throughout the course of their life, species that impregnate themselves and so how can we really apply sex to them? Just as sexuality among over 500 species that have been studied is extremely varied, so does sex seem to be among many as well. Even among human cultures, sex has not always been a binary and I wonder if modern western tradition hadn't played such a huge role in the developmpent of the sciences how it might have been developed otherwise considering the amount of human variation. I also think the modern west, culturally, puts less emphasis on the mind and more on the body itself.

Now, personally, I'm not the kind of guy to just believe things only because I want to believe them. For me science is above all when it comes to any sort of speculation about ourselves and the world around us, however, I don't think that bars me from wondering if science, like all aspects of human doings, is not hindered to some extent by language. If it is not, to an extent, affected by the traditional notion of the binary. And I think the sciences are actually taking a look at themselves in that respect, especially as they continue to make inroads into human reproduction. Just last year or the year before there was research being done showing that female stem cells could be coaxed into "thinking" themselves male and so create, for the first time, female sperm. This was also done with male stem cells and producing male eggs. If this research continues it could mean a solution for infertile couples and same-sex couples. So what do we do with "male" and "female" once females can produce sperm and males eggs? Of course, people were in an uproar about it, but personally I'd love to live in a world where that sort of thing is available, and I'd love to see how that begins to change people's perspective of the sex binary.

QuoteThis is why I question the value of phrases like "man in a woman's body" or "male to female." Who is to say we ever were the "opposite sex?" Personally I will never again describe myself as "born female." I was born a trans male and my years of confusion were due to being forcefully and repeatedly told that I was something else. This body is not a woman's. It is mine. Neither am I trapped in it.

None of what I say here is to minimize the necessity of surgery. Many trans people do experience body dysphoria. Many of us do seek hormones, surgery, and other body modifications. But the point is that, while such modifications may be necessary for our peace of mind, they are not necessary to make us "real men" or "real women" or "real" whatevers. We're plenty real right now, thank you."

The above two paragraphs really reflect my thoughts on a few things. The first reflects what I've been trying to do for a while, which is explain myself without saying "I was born female." While I recognise the reality of my body, I (and this perhaps where I clash with modern western perspectives) also consider my mind to be more of an indication of my "sex" than my body. I've come to prefer the terms transguy or XX male because they don't necessarily presuppose a female beginning. But simply that I'm a "different kind" of male. Of course, that is still problematic, but if it comes down to explaining myself, I prefer to do so with those terms.

The other thing is I differ slightly with what's said about not being trapped in an "alien" body. Externally the body is associated with "female" and even if I tell myself it can't be female because I am not female, that doesn't change the fact that I do feel trapped in a body that my mind thinks it shouldn't have ended up with, and which I absolutely hate being attached to. It might not be necessary to change it in order to be a "real man," but it's certainly preferable and it certainly makes me saner.

Gender and sex both describe outwardly perceptible aspects, sex just being something more specific.  The idea that they are separate things is not true, even though I hear that said a lot.  They are interweaved- you would not have gender if there were no sex.

It's interesting too how the usage of the word gender has developed.  I think it means something different now than it did even a year ago.  It is becoming the dominant word in it's usage in the world, and sex is becoming more of a subcategory- which is actually the opposite of how the word gender was intended to be used in it's modern form.  This change actually causes words/phrases like "transgender" and "gender identity" to make more sense when they used to be misnomers, at least in application to my experience.

The words are so frustrating though.  One person may be offended by "transgendered" with the ed on the end, while another thinks "transgender" sounds silly.  One person doesn't think those words apply to them, while another, who's gone through a very similar experience and is in a very similar place, does.  Another person is okay with "trans woman" but hates "transwoman" without a space, while another is okay with both, and another hates both.  It's a veritable minefield.

Quote from: Sarah7 on April 24, 2011, 11:28:50 AM
Apparently we no longer have to be dead to see the gender of our brains: http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn20032-transsexual-differences-caught-on-brain-scan.html. (http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn20032-transsexual-differences-caught-on-brain-scan.html.)

Ooooeu that's cool!

In that case, do you think that brain scans will be required before someone is allowed to receive treatment for being trans anything?

Something about that possibility screams "thought police!" To me.

Yes and then there's that =/.  Also, you could sure see the concept of "true transsexual" being taken to a new level.  We'd have to be careful about how stuff like that is used.

It could be used for good though if handled right.

One of the major problems impeding understanding comes from the backlash against "binary gender" and the old feminist rhetoric "we are all the same".

There is good research and understanding out there and has been for a decade but it is "played close to the vest" because it isn't politically correct. Numerous studies and research show generalized gender specific behaviour right from birth and significantly different developmental time lines and paths between boys and girls.

There is actually a whole lot of support for the idea of "brain sex" but a great deal of pressure to downplay it.

Quote from: Jen on April 24, 2011, 11:25:40 AM
Gender and sex both describe outwardly perceptible aspects, sex just being something more specific.  The idea that they are separate things is not true, even though I hear that said a lot.  They are interweaved- you would not have gender if there were no sex.

I don't think that last part is completely true other than that one must always have a functioning brain and body to exist and sex just happens to come along with it. Gender binary only started because of  cultures that used sex as a means of gender identity. We have had many cultures in the past and some that still exist today that have several gender identities that don't really relate to sex at all. We have people who don't identify as any sort of gender and feel a disconnect with their sex. Heck, that's like saying gender identity is dependent on your eye colour or your hair or your nose shape. It doesn't make sense for your identity to be determined by your genitals, especially since genitals don't always subscribe to binary.

But hey, some of us have been doing this sort of identity for so long and we're fine with being binary identified. There's nothing wrong with being binary identified but we should acknowledge that identity surrounding how are genitals look and function is a very limiting view of identity and not the whole. It's just plain silly to think it is the only way.

Quote from: Jen on April 24, 2011, 11:25:40 AMThe words are so frustrating though.  One person may be offended by "transgendered" with the ed on the end, while another thinks "transgender" sounds silly.  One person doesn't think those words apply to them, while another, who's gone through a very similar experience and is in a very similar place, does.  Another person is okay with "trans woman" but hates "transwoman" without a space, while another is okay with both, and another hates both.  It's a veritable minefield.

However you choose to reclaim a word is your business. If you want to reclaim a slur then go ahead, it is your right. The point is more or less that if you suggest it is something that is done to you and can be taken away then it can be used as a weapon against you by bigots and next thing we know we get programs designed to cleanse of us our 'mental illness.' It's not really a question of who is offended by what words and reclamation. It's about what can shatter our credibility and further confuse people which in turn takes it from 'I'm offended' to 'this is offensive.'

Could you imagine how much worse racial tensions would be like if we still used the phrase 'half-caste' for people who were of mixed race? Great, now they'd be suggesting that the person isn't as 'pure.' A bigot would then argue that the term 'pure' simply just means they are not full-insert race here and it's completely innocent, but it's still racist! It doesn't matter how they try to sugar coat it, if you're not of mixed race then you don't have any business to tell anyone that the word is OK to use. The same goes for cisgender people and words used against us.

If you want to identify as 'transgendered' then go for it. As long as the person is transgender they have every right to call reclaim what was used against them but they should at least be aware of what they are saying and the implications when dealing with the cisgender crowd. I'm not so sure many people here were actually aware of how it really sounds.

Quote from: Northern JaneOne of the major problems impeding understanding comes from the backlash against "binary gender" and the old feminist rhetoric "we are all the same".

There is good research and understanding out there and has been for a decade but it is "played close to the vest" because it isn't politically correct. Numerous studies and research show generalized gender specific behaviour right from birth and significantly different developmental time lines and paths between boys and girls.

There is actually a whole lot of support for the idea of "brain sex" but a great deal of pressure to downplay it.

There are also studies that show that if you raise two children of different sex in an environment free of binary and give them the same expectations that there is virtually no differences, even in strength. The thing is in order to get an legitimate study you not only have to have a controlled study but you need to question every variable that may affect it and potentially sabotage it with contaminated evidence.

For example they just recently found out that maybe addiction might not have anything to do with substance at all or at the very least, very little to do with it. They were testing Meth addiction with mice in a small cage and the mouse would drink the contaminated water simply because it was there. Then they tried it with a bigger cage and couldn't even get the mice to drink from the contaminated bowl. They always went for the clean water.

All these tests that I have seen that shows a support of brain sex are done on children on playgrounds who are already subjected to society's view of gender roles and how the parents choose the raise them. Even as a baby you are subjected to these and you really have no choice because it's all you know and the parent and society are the ones that are essentially raising you. It's the clothes you wear, the TV you watch, the expectations put on you, how people react because of your sex, etc...

And yet we have other studies where the study is controlled and isolated from outside uses saying that there is no real difference. Which study are we to really believe in?

There is also a budding science that revolves neuroplasticity, and has proven that it does exist until the brain is dead... I am limited by my phone, but I have the study in a paper at home. I have also been told that the mature sexually dimorphic parts of the brain do in fact respond to hrt.

I have read an incidence of homosexuality being cured through regional stimulation, then theman went back some time later. In the end, I knew this all had something to do with the brain, but absolutely none of that mattered anymore. My research turned  up tons of evidence, but it was of no comfort to me at all. I could wait for them to perfect neuroplasticity related treatment, I could view this all as a mental or physical disease and be completely justified in transition, b but I was killing myself learning and trying to make sense of this instead of doing. Not knowing is what put me in the hospital. There is no answer to the trans question and everyone knows it. In the end, all anyone can try to do is live as they think they should.

I wish I knew this was a choice , I also wish I knew this wasn't.

@Lachlann, sex is a prerequisite for gender in the sense that if you imagined there were no man or woman and we were all the same, then there would be no such thing as gender.  Essentially I agree with everything you've said, although my thinking on the subject is coming from a different angle so I may not use the same lines of reason, etc.

For whatever it's worth (which isn't much) I personally claim no terms for myself.  I have no interest in reclaiming words either.  I would like to see them all burned.  I find all gender-related terms unusable because their meanings do not hold from person to person.  So many disagreements spring up on these forums because of that, where both sides vehemently argue the exact same thing, just using different words.  I find it all exhausting.

For myself, I simply identify as a woman.  I personally don't need any other word, qualifier or addendum to get at the heart of who I am.  If anybody wants to attach any additional terms to me, then as long as it isn't out of maliciousness, by all means they may feel free.

Quote from: Lachlann on April 24, 2011, 08:42:48 PMAll these tests that I have seen that shows a support of brain sex are done on children on playgrounds who are already subjected to society's view of gender roles and how the parents choose the raise them. Even as a baby you are subjected to these and you really have no choice because it's all you know and the parent and society are the ones that are essentially raising you. It's the clothes you wear, the TV you watch, the expectations put on you, how people react because of your sex, etc...

That is not true. One of the tests that comes to mind involved infants only hours old and indicated faces held the attention of female babies  longest while male babies were more fascinated by things that moved and the length of time a face held a female baby's attention was significantly longer than the time a mobile held a male baby's attention. If "social conditioning" is a factor within hours of birth than it really doesn't matter if it is "social conditioning" or "brain sex" because the result is the same because it is fixed and immutable so early in life.

Quote from: JessicaR on April 22, 2011, 09:59:21 PM
 

   The subject at hand is asking if the originally posted definition is true or false. It invites opinion. If my having an opinion violates the TOS, you go right ahead and kick me out.

  I'm done with this thread...

   Don't ask me my opinion and smite me for it after...

Hey- this is the original poster verifying that I was definitely asking for people's opinions, so you're correct.  No one should be smiting anyone.  Thank you for participating in the insanity :)

Quote from: RabbitsOfTheWorldUnite on April 03, 2011, 02:27:55 AM
I'll just say TRUE because no one else has said it yet and I like to be different!

And actually.... if over half the world population believes something to be true, doesn't that justifiably make it true? ;-)

"Dear Confused, we think that reality is what everyone agrees is real. What everyone agrees is not real, doesn't exist." (The Android Sisters)

Quote from: Juliet on April 02, 2011, 01:18:04 AM
TRUE or FALSE?

A Transgendered Individual is:
Either a male who identifies as a woman or a female who identifies as a man.

(Feel free to explain your answer)

This is all types of wrong haha.

A woman who identifies in some way as a man or vice a versa is transgendered, but they are primarily the gender they say they are, the transgendering is the "in some way" part.

As a transsexual woman I'm detransitioning to what I really always was.  I was never male I have male characteristics, and actually am far more of a man than many men :)  But I'm not a male who identifies as a woman.  I construct my gender identity, but always from what makes me.  I'm currently transgendered in that I'm in a male styled body, once I correct things to my satisfaction HRT, srs, clothings, laser, hair I will no longer be transgendered in the strong sense, it will still be part of my past which I will acknowledge and help others to the best of my ability.  Male characteristics that are an essential part of me will be make me transgendered like all the other people on the planet.

I would just like to say that this entire thread is exactly the reason I, and I suspect many other transgender people, simply choose to stay entirely away from the 'transgender community' or any sort of trans related activism, and live our lives simply as the gender we identify as without the absurd degree of overthinking and semantic crap more politically inclined members seem to get upset over.

I identify as female, I don't allow people to know anything contrary to that, and thus I am accepted as I want to be. It's easy, it's simple, and leaves so much more time to worry about real life concerns without wasting time being so 'open minded' that there's no actual substance left.

The only reason I bother to post this, is I think it's a shame people waste so much time on these issues rather than more tangible problems that affect the transgender minority.

To answer the original post and give my reply a little bit of legitimacy of being somewhat on topic...

The answer is, neither. There is no answer to the question because the question doesn't carry enough information to form a conclusive answer.

Before you can say what a word means, you have to decide an authority which has the power to definitions.

Most sane people in the real world would simply use a dictionary as the authority, but technically speaking you could then argue which dictionary is the 'right' dictionary.

Then there's the issue that english is an evolving language and that dictionaries change all the time based on the new words that come into existence and evolving uses of existing words, making previous uses of the words that were at the time supposedly 'false', suddenly 'true'.

Which itself brings up the validity of predominant opinion, is the predominant opinion of a word the 'true' definition?

Getting back to my original point, the 'true' definition of the word transgender depends on whom you ask.

These sort of philosophical semantic kinda arguments are utterly pointless though, the point of language is to convey information, as long as the information is conveyed accurately, why does it even matter how it's accomplished? Just be clear and quit worrying so much about definitions.

Quote from: Asfsd4214 on May 11, 2011, 05:15:33 AM
Most sane people in the real world would simply use a dictionary as the authority, but technically speaking you could then argue which dictionary is the 'right' dictionary.

Then there's the issue that english is an evolving language and that dictionaries change all the time based on the new words that come into existence and evolving uses of existing words, making previous uses of the words that were at the time supposedly 'false', suddenly 'true'.

Which itself brings up the validity of predominant opinion, is the predominant opinion of a word the 'true' definition?

Predominant opinion DOES NOT decide how a word is supposedily defined, that is supposedily decided by elites, academics, politicians, medical practioners and psychiarists and psychologists, heirarchy needs to have control.

QuoteGetting back to my original point, the 'true' definition of the word transgender depends on whom you ask.

But their control is not complete for a number of reasons differing from individual to individual.
Fighting for self determination I am as political as they come, I have every right to explore the meaning of words and I respect anyone else who wishes to do so for themselves.

QuoteI identify as female, I don't allow people to know anything contrary to that, and thus I am accepted as I want to be. It's easy, it's simple, and leaves so much more time to worry about real life concerns without wasting time being so 'open minded' that there's no actual substance left.

You're a mass of contradictions.

QuoteThese sort of philosophical semantic kinda arguments are utterly pointless though, the point of language is to convey information, as long as the information is conveyed accurately, why does it even matter how it's accomplished? Just be clear and quit worrying so much about definitions.

It's semantics to you, you're happy good for you.  Exploration of definitions in a willing to learn sense of the word for me and me alone.