i have alot of trouble wrapping my head around many mtf here who put so much emphasis on having a vulva instead of a penis. even though i have a penis, i barely think about it, and i'm not the type who breaks down crying when i have to look at it in the shower. i just feel nothing about it. i don't like it, and i don't hate it. hrt was really the most important thing to me. as far as having a vagina for aesthetic reasons or feeling like more of a woman, well, i don't. exclusively, i feel like it's just the ideal for sex reasons, and that's it. the emphasis of having a vulva just makes me more mad because it keeps furthuring the idea that "you aren't really a woman until the penis comes off." that's just how i see it.
For me it's simply about being as complete a woman as I can.. Sex doesn't really interest me at this point, but I would like to be all that I can be..
There are a lot of trans people that don't want or need surgery. What's unfortunate is the standards in obtaining gender marker changes for trans women. In many ways "full srs" (whatever the heck that means!) is the only way to go to be legally recognized and that's screwed up. Not everybody wants or needs surgery but people feel incredibly pressured to get it then end up unhappy.
I'm not saying that everybody feels that way, but there's a portion that do. Same with me. I've got a large chest, but I'm not going to get top surgery because I just don't want it. Sure, down the road I might want it but for now I'm completely comfortable with my top and bottom half.
Not having surgery doesn't make a person less of a man or woman. Having surgery doesn't make a person more of a man or woman.
For me it's just for sex. And those things aren't easy to take care of you know.
Without the knowledge that surgery is somewhere in my future, I'm not sure anything else would be possible. I'd have no drive to find work and no desire to live in the world. Knowing I'd never be with another person again because I could never have a relationship with an uncorrected body... I'd kill myself.
So what will be my drive after surgery? Living the life that was either denied me or I denied myself due to my loathing of my body.
Quote from: Zoë Natasha on September 06, 2011, 07:56:08 PM
Without the knowledge that surgery is somewhere in my future, I'm not sure anything else would be possible. I'd have no drive to find work and no desire to live in the world. Knowing I'd never be with another person again because I could never have a relationship with an uncorrected body... I'd kill myself.
So what will be my drive after surgery? Living the life that was either denied me or I denied myself due to my loathing of my body.
it seemed to be living fulltime and being on hrt that did that for me. i'm not really "looking forward" to srs. i think i would like it some day, but it would just be the cherry on top of the sundae, no pun intended.
Quote from: Valeriedances on September 06, 2011, 08:28:35 PM
No one should have genital surgery unless they have to. It's a very difficult thing to go through and could be traumatizing if you are not ready for it.
If you are happy now, thats a great thing.
Good luck honey.
Some people "have to" in order to have all of their documents match the gender they identify/present as...to prevent mismatches between SS, birth certificate, and state ID. If you have those miss matches it's possible that you won't be able to get a job...and you might have to explain that you're trans (Which many people DON'T want to do). So at times it can be surgery or never have a job, not being able to get married/have rights associated with legal marriage, etc.
Really is super craptastical that there's the surgery standard.
The only way I could have lived without SRS would be if I never wanted to have a life partner and if I never wanted to have a life period...there are too many activities that I actively participate in ~15 years post-operatively that would not have been available to me as a penis'ed woman.
So for me, having SRS *was* about getting on with life. I could not have lived in the solitude that exists behind a computer screen where I would not be interacting with people on a regular basis in settings where what was between my legs could be an integral part of daily life...
Quote from: Nygeel on September 06, 2011, 08:59:11 PM
Some people "have to" in order to have all of their documents match the gender they identify/present as...to prevent mismatches between SS, birth certificate, and state ID. If you have those miss matches it's possible that you won't be able to get a job...and you might have to explain that you're trans (Which many people DON'T want to do). So at times it can be surgery or never have a job, not being able to get married/have rights associated with legal marriage, etc.
Really is super craptastical that there's the surgery standard.
Yep, it really does bite that unless I have surgery, that I don't feel strongly one way or the other about, I will always have a M on my ID.
This was discussed here recently (got a bit ugly..) and seems even some trans people want to fight to not allow non-op women from having their ID's changed. Main argument they said they wouldn't want to be put in jail with a non-op woman? Seems pretty bizarre reason, like I'm sure there are lots of sex crazed males that would take hormones and kill their ability and desire for sex so they could go out, get arrested and be in jail with women.. That was the argument they gave.
I would think a letter from a doc/therapist saying "this person is now the opposite gender" should be all they require. I think for FTM that's it isn't it?
Quote from: Stephe on September 06, 2011, 10:34:05 PM
Yep, it really does bite that unless I have surgery, that I don't feel strongly one way or the other about, I will always have a M on my ID.
This was discussed here recently (got a bit ugly..) and seems even some trans people want to fight to not allow non-op women from having their ID's changed. Main argument they said they wouldn't want to be put in jail with a non-op woman? Seems pretty bizarre reason, like I'm sure there are lots of sex crazed males that would take hormones and kill their ability and desire for sex so they could go out, get arrested and be in jail with women.. That was the argument they gave.
I would think a letter from a doc/therapist saying "this person is now the opposite gender" should be all they require. I think for FTM that's it isn't it?
If a sex crazed male really wanted to go that far out of his way to do that then he would've done it already. I really don't see the big deal of it but that's not really here or there.
For trans guys to get an M, I'm pretty sure there has to be a surgery. I don't know if it's just top surgery or if it needs to be a hysto. I still haven't gotten my ID changed.
Quote from: Ann Onymous on September 06, 2011, 09:33:22 PM
The only way I could have lived without SRS would be if I never wanted to have a life partner and if I never wanted to have a life period...there are too many activities that I actively participate in ~15 years post-operatively that would not have been available to me as a penis'ed woman.
So for me, having SRS *was* about getting on with life. I could not have lived in the solitude that exists behind a computer screen where I would not be interacting with people on a regular basis in settings where what was between my legs could be an integral part of daily life...
I guess to me what's between my legs isn't an integral part of my daily life. I also don't consider myself a "penis'ed woman" I'm just a woman who can't have the correct gender on my ID because some people think surgically altering my body is required for me to be a woman. For me, my nose job to fem up my face was more important than srs. People see my face on a daily basis, no one sees what's between my legs. I honestly think I can survive not being in a womans public shower etc where the public would see me naked. I really don't get the whole obsession with a penis one way or the other. Most FTM don't seem to be obsessed with this like the MTF are? The only reason I can see that srs would be a deal breaker for me would be for sex with a straight guy, but then most of them you would have to be stealth and never tell them about your past and I don't think I would want to be in a relationship like that to start with. From what I have read lots of post-ops never have an orgasm so not sure how great that sort of sex would be anyway for me.
I realize some people REALLY hate their body and will kill themselves if they can't get SRS, I just don't think ONLY those people should be allowed to change their gender markers.. Oh and BTW, some of us that haven't had surgery exist away from our computer screens.
Quote from: Nygeel on September 06, 2011, 10:37:02 PM
If a sex crazed male really wanted to go that far out of his way to do that then he would've done it already.
Well the crazy part to me, if he is taking hormones, trust me he would no longer be sex crazed and not likely to even be able to have sex with the women he is locked up with.
Quote from: Valeriedances on September 06, 2011, 09:06:02 PM
Then dont have a legal mismatch, but that is beyond the scope of the thread.
When I did my RLE, my id's all had male on it. Of course, I hated that when I went through it but I did it.
So you hated this and know others do but also feel that others should have to just deal with this the rest of their lives unless they have surgery, that you also say they shouldn't have done unless they need to? Do you see any contradiction here?
For myself...I'm male, therefore my body is male.
Quote from: Valeriedances on September 06, 2011, 11:06:49 PM
On second thought I'm not going to argue with you. Your just such an angry person I dont want to talk with you.
I'm deleting my posts here and will just wish Fullmoon good luck.
I was just seeing if you really think it's OK to tell other people they should spend the rest of their life suffering with something you hated to deal with yourself, even though with you it was just a temporary problem. You even posted here how HAPPY you were when you got an F on your ID.
I don't think anyone should have to suffer over something like this. I guess that makes me a mean/angry person?
Quote from: Stephe on September 06, 2011, 10:46:45 PM
I guess to me what's between my legs isn't an integral part of my daily life.
and that would get to the most basic essence of the differences between someone who claims to be transgendered as opposed to those who are transsexual.
QuotePeople see my face on a daily basis, no one sees what's between my legs. I honestly think I can survive not being in a womans public shower etc where the public would see me naked.
some of us ARE in locker rooms on a regular basis. Some of us DO go to pool parties that turn into skinny-dipping affairs on a very regular basis. Some of us DO enjoy our relationships with people where we don't have to explain why we are not anatomically correct.
QuoteI really don't get the whole obsession with a penis one way or the other. Most FTM don't seem to be obsessed with this like the MTF are? The only reason I can see that srs would be a deal breaker for me would be for sex with a straight guy, but then most of them you would have to be stealth and never tell them about your past and I don't think I would want to be in a relationship like that to start with.
I have no idea about relationships with guys. I also cannot tell you anything about what an F2M might deal with since I have known only a few in my lifetime, none of whom I was looking to date, so we never discussed that component of their life. I can tell you that a significant number of lesbians I know and have dated would assure you that a penis in the bedroom would be a deal-breaker.
QuoteFrom what I have read lots of post-ops never have an orgasm so not sure how great that sort of sex would be anyway for me.
And those of us that ARE post-op would tell you that you shouldn't believe everything you read...while some small percentage may not have an orgasm, even those post-ops would generally tell you that would much rather be incapable of orgasm than to live another moment longer with the wrong genitalia.
QuoteI realize some people REALLY hate their body and will kill themselves if they can't get SRS, I just don't think ONLY those people should be allowed to change their gender markers.. Oh and BTW, some of us that haven't had surgery exist away from our computer screens.
The issue of the gender marker is one that has been hashed and rehashed in other threads. The non- and pre-ops tend to be the ones that want to basically create an asterisk category by demanding that 'well, I dress this way, therefore I demand a new letter on my ID.' We live in a binary society and some of us have no problem with maintaining the status quo. But, FWIW, there are a number of jurisdictions in which surgery was not actually required in order to change the DL...although due to the abuses that have taken place, courts are becoming more restrictive in what they will place in the Order associated with the name change. I don't see a problem with that level of restriction. There are a number of valid reasons to have markers that properly identify what is between the legs but the pre- and non-ops have repeatedly refused to pay heed to those discussions, instead reducing it to the jail issue (which is no different at its most basic level than those who reduce public accomodation arguments to the bathroom issue).
I'm transsexual because I have discomfort with the sex I was assigned at birth. I am currently ID'd as non-op because I don't see any possibility of ever affording surgery. What valid reasons are there for making me have an ID based on what's between my legs?
Quote from: Ann Onymous on September 06, 2011, 11:53:50 PM
The non- and pre-ops tend to be the ones that want to basically create an asterisk category by demanding that 'well, I dress this way, therefore I demand a new letter on my ID.' We live in a binary society and some of us have no problem with maintaining the status quo.
I don't "dress this way", I live 24/7 as a woman. I don't see how I am not maintaining the status quo other than subjecting myself to invasive surgery I don't -need-. I actually had some fem surgery, just not in a place most people will never see. Been on HRT for a while too, but I guess all that to some is still defined as "dress this way" until I -girl up- and have it cut off?
Also I'm not asking for "other" to be on my ID or this 'asterisk category' you refer to, just that it reflects my actual identification. How does an M on my ID help identify me? Unless they have xray vision, they aren't going to know what's between my legs.
To use your above paintbrush.. The post ops seem to be the ones wanting to restrict ID changes to themselves, some quite vocally. If we debate this denial of our rights, we are called "angry people". The one smite on my profile is from a post-op TS about this very issue..
Unless of course you see women who haven't had SRS as a "man in a dress". In that case there is no point in going any further with this.
Quote from: Nygeel on September 06, 2011, 08:59:11 PM
Really is super craptastical that there's the surgery standard.
what really sucks is it varies from state to state (I'm in the US)
Quote from: Stephe on September 06, 2011, 10:34:05 PM
I would think a letter from a doc/therapist saying "this person is now the opposite gender" should be all they require. I think for FTM that's it isn't it?
It varies from state to state. My state requires surgery (can be top or hysto if the letter is worded right)
Quote from: Stephe on September 07, 2011, 12:26:33 AM
I don't "dress this way", I live 24/7 as a woman.
so please tell us how your last appointment with the gynecologist went...
Defense rests.
QuoteUnless of course you see women who haven't had SRS as a "man in a dress". In that case there is no point in going any further with this.
There isn't any point in going further with ANY of the pre- or non-op's because the divide between that group and those who are post-op is simply too great to be overcome. But because some of us got on with life as it SHOULD have been, it is only a matter of time before some around here begin tossing the ever-so-popular taunt that those of us who are post-operative are also elitist.
Quote from: Ann Onymous on September 07, 2011, 12:40:19 AM
There isn't any point in going further with ANY of the pre- or non-op's because the divide between that group and those who are post-op is simply too great to be overcome. But because some of us [had the privilege and ability to] gotget on with life as it SHOULD have been, it is only a matter of time before some around here begin tossing the ever-so-popular taunt that those of us who are post-operative are also elitist not the only "twue transsexuals".
Fixed.
Quote from: FullMoon19 on September 06, 2011, 06:59:47 PM
i have alot of trouble wrapping my head around many mtf here who put so much emphasis on having a vulva instead of a penis. even though i have a penis, i barely think about it, and i'm not the type who breaks down crying when i have to look at it in the shower. i just feel nothing about it. i don't like it, and i don't hate it. hrt was really the most important thing to me. as far as having a vagina for aesthetic reasons or feeling like more of a woman, well, i don't. exclusively, i feel like it's just the ideal for sex reasons, and that's it. the emphasis of having a vulva just makes me more mad because it keeps furthuring the idea that "you aren't really a woman until the penis comes off." that's just how i see it.
Kia Ora FullMoon,
::) It all boils down to "contentment"....I found contentment living full time on HRT [minus surgery and did so four for over four years]...Surgery in regards to my mental well being was of no great importance, however it was when I started to look into castration as a way to stop taking AA, that I found out I could have government funded surgery...I thought if I could have it all "for free", then why not, so I did...In a sense genital surgery "FOR ME PERSONALLY" was more along the lines of a "cosmetic" procedure, it was not a matter of life and death in my case... :icon_yikes:
::) But the point I'm making here is "Contentment" is the key issue[or one's level of contentment]...If one can find contentment without the need of genital surgery, all well and good, and if they can have legal documents changed, even better...They should consider themselves lucky....I also found myself in this position due to the Gender Recognition Bill being passed in the UK in 2004-However I was fortunate enough to be selected for government funded surgery here in Aotearoa...
In the long run-each to their own I guess...I just hope whatever one does with their body, one finds true "contentment"...
After all, we each live our own lives...So whatever turns one on... turns one on...So enjoy being you !.
Metta Zenda :)
Lucky dogs with your health care system not being in shambles.
Kia Ora Nygeel,
::) Here in Aotearoa [NZ] we have what's known as the Special High Cost Treatment Funding Pool {SHCTFP] part of this "tax payer's" money covers four surgeries every two years = One F2M and Three M2Fs [Surgery for M2Fs cheaper one could say Three M2Fs for the price of one F2M]...It's not perfect but it could be far worse...
http://www.moh.govt.nz/moh.nsf/indexmh/special-high-cost-treatment-pool (http://www.moh.govt.nz/moh.nsf/indexmh/special-high-cost-treatment-pool)
Metta Zenda :)
Quote from: Ann Onymous on September 07, 2011, 12:40:19 AM
so please tell us how your last appointment with the gynecologist went...
Defense rests.
There isn't any point in going further with ANY of the pre- or non-op's because the divide between that group and [SOME OF] those who are post-op is simply too great to be overcome. But because some of us got on with life as it SHOULD have been, it is only a matter of time before some around here begin tossing the ever-so-popular taunt that those of us who are post-operative are also elitist.
*sigh* I guess discussing your last gynecologist visit is also an integral part of your daily life...
And not elitist, just as narrow minded as any hate group is. I accept some people have a serious NEED for SRS even if I don't understand it myself. But you won't accept other people may not have this same NEED for SRS you did to "get on with their life" as a woman.
BTW how do you feel my life SHOULD have been? For me being transgendered has been tough but I have experienced a LOT of things I would never had and have insights into both genders non-trans people will never comprehend. For the most part I have had a happy life. I'm not sure what it SHOULD have been.
Quote from: Valeriedances on September 07, 2011, 02:27:30 AM
Taking hormones is not representative of an irreversible change of sex. A person can stop taking hormones at any time.
It is in many ways. If a person stops taking hormones, yes their body might go back to being more like it was but after long term use there are irreversible changes. I know if I grow a full beard and stop taking T I'll still have the ability to grow a beard.
Quote from: Ann Onymous on September 07, 2011, 12:40:19 AM
so please tell us how your last appointment with the gynecologist went...
Defense rests.
There isn't any point in going further with ANY of the pre- or non-op's because the divide between that group and those who are post-op is simply too great to be overcome. But because some of us got on with life as it SHOULD have been, it is only a matter of time before some around here begin tossing the ever-so-popular taunt that those of us who are post-operative are also elitist.
Firstly, my last gynaecologist visit went just fine, as did the previous ones and as will the future ones, I hope.. Yes, that's right, only 4 months on hormones and I'm seeing a gyno - that's because she is administering my hormones..
And your right, there is no point in going any further with the Pre/Non-Op vs Post-Op arguments.. Both sides are guilty of being completely idiotic about it and it's been let go so long there is no repairing it..
Quote from: Valeriedances on September 07, 2011, 02:27:30 AM
Taking hormones is not representative of an irreversible change of sex. A person can stop taking hormones at any time.
I understand YOU feel SRS=Woman. Not everyone feels the same way you do. I accept you felt a NEED for SRS to live your life as a woman even if I don't understand it. It would just be nice if you could accept some people don't have that same need.
Again, first (before you removed the conflicting posts) you explain people who don't NEED SRS shouldn't have it. Then you describe how horrible it was during your RLT to deal with the ID thing, but then have no shame in subjecting others who don't have a NEED for SRS to a lifetime of this. So by these statements do you feel that people should have SRS for the sole reason of getting their gender marker changed?
I'm really confused why you feel so strongly about this and why people should be forced into surgery they don't need to resolve this ID conflict. You clearly understand how bad this feels, why wouldn't you be sympathetic towards people who also have this same problem you have experienced first hand. Do you feel that this belittles your womanhood if non-pre-ops are allowed gender marker change or is it you suffered through surgery to get this so others should too? I'm really trying to understand why some post-ops act like this on this subject.
Can we please cool off the attack mode here? This argument isn't doing anything but hurting people.
there's lots of cisgender females who don't go to a gynecologist, like my mom. that just sounds more like the context of "a real woman does this." i believe stephe when she says she lives as a woman 24/7. she is living completely how she herself feels woman is, so then she must be right, she is living 24/7. i just don't care. if someone gets srs because it best suits their lifestyle, great, but when it gets into telling someone else because they don't do it the same that they are something less than who they say they are is just going back to the same oppression most of us are trying to escape through the use of this site.
Quote from: Stephe on September 07, 2011, 02:25:40 AM
*sigh* I guess discussing your last gynecologist visit is also an integral part of your daily life...
daily life? No. But the subject DOES arise on a regular basis within the office given that most of the LA's are women...many of whom are not happy with the limited choice in the area where the firm is located.
QuoteBTW how do you feel my life SHOULD have been? For me being transgendered has been tough but I have experienced a LOT of things I would never had and have insights into both genders non-trans people will never comprehend. For the most part I have had a happy life. I'm not sure what it SHOULD have been.
I cannot speak to what a 'transgendered' person might otherwise have wanted or expect. I was NEVER transgendered. I HAD a transsexual medical condition...that condition no longer exists due to medical intervention consistent with accepted medical protocol for the treatment of said condition.
D'aww, my questions were not answered. Must be another double standard.
Quote from: Nygeel on September 07, 2011, 02:37:53 AM
It is in many ways. If a person stops taking hormones, yes their body might go back to being more like it was but after long term use there are irreversible changes. I know if I grow a full beard and stop taking T I'll still have the ability to grow a beard.
Quote from: Nygeel on September 07, 2011, 08:43:09 AM
D'aww, my questions were not answered. Must be another double standard.
If I may...
There is no doubt that how a person feels is strictly and personal issue that generally would not be changed by debate. And yes if a person feels that simply taking hormones is all that is needed then so be it, it's their life. Where folks can run into trouble is when the condition is know and once know, how society, the general public perceives/treats that person. I could imagine that a person could easily hide the fact that they still had male genitalia, and that's good too, who am I to judge.
With regard to HRT... There does come a point when the effects become irreversible but many medical professionals do not consider HRT alone as a standard that constitutes a sex/gender change. There's enough negative debate/concern in society on wether CD/TV should be allowed/considered to be women and I'm afraid that those simply taking HRT may run up against this same wall.
Just my thoughts.
Quote from: Steph on September 07, 2011, 09:54:08 AM
If I may...
There is no doubt that how a person feels is strictly and personal issue that generally would not be changed by debate. And yes if a person feels that simply taking hormones is all that is needed then so be it, it's their life. Where folks can run into trouble is when the condition is know and once know, how society, the general public perceives/treats that person. I could imagine that a person could easily hide the fact that they still had male genitalia, and that's good too, who am I to judge.
With regard to HRT... There does come a point when the effects become irreversible but many medical professionals do not consider HRT alone as a standard that constitutes a sex/gender change. There's enough negative debate/concern in society on wether CD/TV should be allowed/considered to be women and I'm afraid that those simply taking HRT may run up against this same wall.
Just my thoughts.
Quote from: Steph on September 07, 2011, 09:54:08 AM
If I may...
There is no doubt that how a person feels is strictly and personal issue that generally would not be changed by debate. And yes if a person feels that simply taking hormones is all that is needed then so be it, it's their life. Where folks can run into trouble is when the condition is know and once know, how society, the general public perceives/treats that person. I could imagine that a person could easily hide the fact that they still had male genitalia, and that's good too, who am I to judge.
With regard to HRT... There does come a point when the effects become irreversible but many medical professionals do not consider HRT alone as a standard that constitutes a sex/gender change. There's enough negative debate/concern in society on wether CD/TV should be allowed/considered to be women and I'm afraid that those simply taking HRT may run up against this same wall.
Just my thoughts.
But I'm not asking for the opinion for medical professionals and this does not address the double standard that I see. Trans men might "need top surgery" but trans women always need something down there...I think this is a case of trans misogyny mixed in with a bit of cissexism, topped off with classism.
Darn web browser glitched.
Quote from: Nygeel on September 07, 2011, 10:09:24 AM
But I'm not asking for the opinion for medical professionals and this does not address the double standard that I see. Trans men might "need top surgery" but trans women always need something down there...I think this is a case of trans misogyny mixed in with a bit of cissexism, topped off with classism.
Darn web browser glitched.
I see what you are getting at but I'm afraid that I can't comment on how whether Trans-Men needing top surgery, other than if I were a Trans-Man I would feel the need to have the surgery to feel whole.
Quote from: Steph on September 07, 2011, 10:24:13 AM
I see what you are getting at but I'm afraid that I can't comment on how whether Trans-Men needing top surgery, other than if I were a Trans-Man I would feel the need to have the surgery to feel whole.
There are trans men with incredibly small chests that look male (chests look like a cis male's), so why bother?
Quote from: Ann Onymous on September 07, 2011, 07:09:02 AM
daily life? No. But the subject DOES arise on a regular basis within the office given that most of the LA's are women...many of whom are not happy with the limited choice in the area where the firm is located.
So joining in this conversation makes you a woman? I'm trying to grasp the importance of this. It seems odd for a group of women to regularly discuss their gynecology visits but maybe where you live they do...
Quote from: Ann Onymous on September 07, 2011, 07:09:02 AM
I cannot speak to what a 'transgendered' person might otherwise have wanted or expect.
Well clearly you feel you
can speak on this subject. You said "because some of us got on with life as it SHOULD have been", unless you are including me in this group of "some"? It sounds like you feel I'm not living my life as it should have been.
Also not sure what context "otherwise" is being used here. Other than what?
Quote from: Steph on September 07, 2011, 10:24:13 AM
I see what you are getting at but I'm afraid that I can't comment on how whether Trans-Men needing top surgery, other than if I were a Trans-Man I would feel the need to have the surgery to feel whole.
I think the key thing here is when you say; you would need surgery to feel whole. Not everyone does, but are forced to have surgery or accept the wrong gender marker. Not a good choice to have to make..
Quote from: Valeriedances on September 07, 2011, 01:37:05 PM
The key component/cornerstone of MtF transsexuals is dysphoria over their genitals. If someone is not dysphoric over their genitals then how can they be considered transsexual? And if not transsexual undergoing a sex change operation why would that person qualify for a change of their sex marker?
If someone does not get SRS how can they be considered female (the standard for sex change for over 50 years)? They still have a penis. There has been no change, they are not in transition. Furthermore, if someone decides not to get SRS, how does FFS qualify for a change of sex? that has never been considered as a qualifying standard.
:eusa_clap: :icon_archery:
Valerie, you hit the mark IMO. It draws perfectly the distinction between those that want to be under some umbrella (a different sub-forum then this one) versus those who are or were transsexual by identified medical condition and intervention. And last I checked, this thread was appearing in the 'transsexual talk' forum...although I guess pointing that out makes me elitist or whatever the label
du jour will be.
Quote from: Nygeel on September 07, 2011, 10:09:24 AM
But I'm not asking for the opinion for medical professionals and this does not address the double standard that I see. Trans men might "need top surgery" but trans women always need something down there...I think this is a case of trans misogyny mixed in with a bit of cissexism, topped off with classism.
Darn web browser glitched.
i'm seeing less and less point in this thread, but i can agree with you. i don't even care that you are ftm, because what you say makes sense period. i don't believe trans women can speak for me regardless of what they did, so why should the standard be different for trans men? transsexual is transsexual, and it doesn't matter if you are ftm or mtf. it's the same game, different players.
Quote from: Valeriedances on September 07, 2011, 02:16:17 PM
I am sorry, my only reason for posting in your thread was to wish you well in spite of differences of opinions on some things.
i am glad you did. there's just no point in arguing.
Quotethere's just no point in arguing.
Well, you brought up such a controversial topic, there was bound to be some arguing, lol.
Quote from: JenJen2011 on September 07, 2011, 02:23:56 PM
Well, you brought up such a controversial topic, there was bound to be some arguing, lol.
yeah, probably. it would've served me best to just read the parts where people were being helpful, and then just stop there.
Kia Ora,
::) Sadly it looks like for some so called "transsexual"[pre/post op] and "transgender" people, heart felt "contentment" 'free from the need to judge others because of how they choose to present themselves', is still lacking...That is they continually criticizing each other because some either chooses to keep the genitals of their birth sex intact whilst others don't...
Locker room issues=If a non op[passable/social blender so to speak] M2F trans-person decides to go and get changed in a female locker room, one would think out of concern for the feelings of others and oneself, they would make a point of not disclosing their original "birth sex" parts-[on a personal level prior to genital surgery, in situations like this, I had no wish to stand out by disclosing the fact there was a penis hanging between my legs, so I took care not to]...
It's OK to be proud of being "transgender" but in this day and age[where society's still coming to terms with the whole transsexual/transgender issue], for one to flaunt their "stuff' in public so to speak[locker room situation], I believe this would be like identifying oneself as a "third gender" and from what I gather for most [if not all] M2F trans-people a "third gender" status is not what they signed up for when starting their transition journey...However if one desire is to be part of a third gender, [one "needs" to stand out- extrovertism], I truly do hope the rest of society will eventually come to the party...
As it stands I had reached a level of contentment prior to having surgery, that is even if I hadn't had surgery I was happy with my social status of female, and now the same level of contentment persists post surgery...I have only one wish and this is for others[regardless of their genital circumstances] to find the same level of contentment...
Remember folks "Different strokes for different folks !" that's how life is....
Metta Zenda :)
Quote from: Valeriedances on September 07, 2011, 02:44:28 PM
Hi Zenda,
Everyone deserves the pursuit of happiness and contentment. I do not care what someone does with their life, it is their business. It is only when law changes are proposed that affect everyone, especially future transsexual people, that concerns me. I dont want to see doors closed to future transitioners who follow the standards of care. That would be a travesty.
Kia Ora Val,
::) This law change you speak of, would it really be a burden on those who choose to have genital surgery in a state that legally recognises their new identity...Remember I'm not familiar with the workings of the US when it comes to legal recognition of gender...
I have to sign off now I've work[it's also 8am]
Metta Zenda :)
I don't think a law change (ability to change gender marker without surgery) would affect those who chose to have surgery. If you want surgery you will have it. If not, you won't. The law is unnecessary because not everyone wants or needs surgery. Discomfort with your genitals does not equate to feeling the need to get surgical changes.
Quote from: Andy8715 on September 07, 2011, 03:10:56 PM
I don't think a law change (ability to change gender marker without surgery) would affect those who chose to have surgery.
It can VERY EASILY impact the manner in which those changes are considered in significant legal matters. As long as people have an ability to change markers without having undergone significant and irreversible surgical intervention, then the Court retains the ability to argue that the change does not accurately reflect one's legal status. In effect, there exists the potential to create a significant number of cases with the net effect we have seen in the Araguz matter.
The last thing those who undergo surgery to correct a transsexual medical condition want is to have their duly corrected paperwork cast aside despite the fact that they have genitalia that matches the letter on the paperwork.
Quote from: Ann Onymous on September 07, 2011, 03:52:07 PM
It can VERY EASILY impact the manner in which those changes are considered in significant legal matters. As long as people have an ability to change markers without having undergone significant and irreversible surgical intervention, then the Court retains the ability to argue that the change does not accurately reflect one's legal status.
Has this ever happened in ANY state or country that has relaxed the standards for gender marker change? Sounds like chicken little to me unless you can show example court cases?
Hi Steph
This is the essence of the matter being discussed:
Quote from: Steph on September 07, 2011, 09:54:08 AM
If I may...
There is no doubt that how a person feels is strictly and personal issue that generally would not be changed by debate. And yes if a person feels that simply taking hormones is all that is needed then so be it, it's their life. Where folks can run into trouble is when the condition is know and once know, how society, the general public perceives/treats that person. I could imagine that a person could easily hide the fact that they still had male genitalia, and that's good too, who am I to judge.
With regard to HRT... There does come a point when the effects become irreversible but many medical professionals do not consider HRT alone as a standard that constitutes a sex/gender change. There's enough negative debate/concern in society on wether CD/TV should be allowed/considered to be women and I'm afraid that those simply taking HRT may run up against this same wall.
Just my thoughts.
I would just correct one part of a sentence being "wether CD/TV should be allowed/considered to be women",
to "whether CD/TV/TG should be allowed / considered to be a women or a man".
However, Ann Onymous is also correct in saying that, "We live in a binary society" and currently there are laws that allows one to correct their gender markers. In the US and Australia the laws are basically the same, you must have some form of SRS to have that marker changed. In the UK you can have your marker changed if you suffer from GID, which basically means you can have your marker changed without having surgery. Those who wish not to have surgery is their choice and no one can tell them otherwise. Those who decide that they do not want surgery must realize and accept the current state of the laws where they reside or resided. The only way things are going to change is if the laws get changed and that in itself, I would say is for another thread.
Warmest regards
Sarah B
Quote from: Valeriedances on September 07, 2011, 01:48:24 PM
If someone is not transitioning physically, they have no need for sex marker change. It is their choice not to have surgery, not to transition physically.
You stated that it was very uncomfortable during RLE to have to show your ID with the wrong marker on it in the post you removed.
I'm really just trying to grasp how the mental anguish non-ops (non-op can be by choice or not..) suffer with is -trivial/nonexistent- ("they have no need for sex marker change") but people should still be sympathetic to a true TS's mental pain on the same subject. You felt this pain yourself. Why do you think this is any less unpleasant for someone to deal with a -lifetime of this- just because they don't have your exact same end needs for SRS. All this does is force some people to have unneeded surgery to relieve -this- anguish.
I guess I just don't feel anyone has a right to tell other people what they need and what they don't to be happy, especially in a free country.
Quote from: Valeriedances on September 07, 2011, 01:48:24 PM
There is no Standard of Care for lifetime non-op people. Why would they need any care?
There's a Standard of Care for all trans people, thus there is a SoC for non-op people. I still disagree rather strongly with HBS SoC.
Quote
If someone is not transitioning physically, they have no need for sex marker change. It is their choice not to have surgery, not to transition physically.
I believe taking hormones to be transitioning physically. My hairline has changed, my fat has redistributed, I've been gaining muscle without working out...all physical changes. For many people it's not a choice to not have surgery. There are (for example) older trans people who are recommended not to get surgery do to potential complications in surgery. There are some trans people with medical conditions where surgery is not an option. There are low income trans people who would rather not starve than get surgery which when it comes down to it isn't a choice. There are...lesse...there are trans people who don't get surgery because of an intense fear of having surgery performed which out weighs the need for surgery.
I don't know if it was you or somebody else that pointed out the idea that a person that isn't uncomfortable with their genitals can't be transsexual because that's what a transsexual is.
Well, whoever said that I have a counter point. There's more to sex than simply what is between a person's hips/legs. What is between the hips/legs is considered "primary sex characteristic." There are "secondary sex characteristics" that aren't related to "the bits." Take for example, being a hairy beast of a human being. Massive amounts of thick body hair is seen as a secondary sex characteristic usually held by men. Body fat distribution, etc...all secondary sex characteristics. I am certain, without any sort of doubt that you have/have had discomfort with your secondary sex characteristics, and I'm fairly certain that these are the number one things that bother transsexuals.
Hi FullMoon19
You mentioned at the start of this thread:
Quote from: FullMoon19 on September 06, 2011, 06:59:47 PMi have alot of trouble wrapping my head around many mtf here who put so much emphasis on having a vulva instead of a penis. even though i have a penis, i barely think about it, and i'm not the type who breaks down crying when i have to look at it in the shower. i just feel nothing about it. i don't like it, and i don't hate it. hrt was really the most important thing to me. as far as having a vagina for aesthetic reasons or feeling like more of a woman, well, i don't. exclusively, i feel like it's just the ideal for sex reasons, and that's it. the emphasis of having a vulva just makes me more mad because it keeps furthuring the idea that "you aren't really a woman until the penis comes off." that's just how i see it.
Before I had my surgery, I never placed any emphasis whatsoever on what my genitals were or for that matter of fact what they were going to become. Like you I never thought about them, never cried about it, did not hate them, never damaged them, because I knew they would be used when I had surgery. I was just indifferent towards them. I just lived my life, working and socialising with not a worry in the world. When I finally got my surgery letters, I just set a date for my surgery. So in a sense I'm just like you.
Yet what I have said flies in the face of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders which has five criteria that must be met before a diagnosis of gender identity disorder (302.85) can be given, namely and I quote, with my personal comments in bold on each:
Quote
- There must be evidence of a strong and persistent cross-gender identification. (Never was for me, I just lived my live as a female and people just saw me as a female)
- This cross-gender identification must not merely be a desire for any perceived cultural advantages of being the other sex.(I did not do it for cultural advantages)
- There must also be evidence of persistent discomfort about one's assigned sex or a sense of inappropriateness in the gender role of that sex. (Never had any discomfort, whatsoever)
- The individual must not have a concurrent physical intersex condition (e.g., androgen insensitivity syndrome or congenital adrenal hyperplasia). (I do not have these conditions as far as I know)
- There must be evidence of clinically significant distress or impairment in social, occupational, or other important areas of functioning. (No distress, no impairment to my social life and I worked full time.)
I finally had my surgery and the only reason, why I ever had corrective surgery was, so that I could function as a female." I was born a female, have always been a female and always will be. Regardless of what my biological sex is, regardless of what the DSM or IDC10 says, regardless of what the SOC or WPATH said I had to do, because these documents are not perfect, although over time they will get better. I have never ever regretted my decision and I will always be internally grateful to my surgeon.
What ever anybody decides to do, if that makes you happy then do so with all your heart. Life is too short too worry about what other people think. That is not say you do not consider what advice or opinions they give, only you can judge whether they are relevant or not.
Take care and all the best for the future, whatever you decide to do.
Warmest regards
Sarah B
Quote from: Stephe on September 07, 2011, 05:58:31 PM
Has this ever happened in ANY state or country that has relaxed the standards for gender marker change? Sounds like chicken little to me unless you can show example court cases?
I guess you missed the whole Araguz decision...why am I not surprised. Oh and Littleton 12 years earlier...
Quote from: Ann Onymous on September 07, 2011, 08:40:40 PM
I guess you missed the whole Araguz decision...why am I not surprised.
Of course I have and Araguz is a perfect example of why the laws need to be changed, not why it shouldn't be. She basically lied to the state to get married pre-op because of the current law YOU support. If the law didn't require surgery, she would have been legally married and able to defend herself or maybe never been taken to court. Except for the below..
In the littleton case, the court held that a person's legal sex is genetically fixed at birth and that Ms. Littleton should be deemed to be legally male, despite her female anatomy and appearance, and despite the fact that she had lived as a woman for most of her adult life.
This person was post op but they still said she legally is male. Lowering the standard for gender marker change would not make this any better or worse. If Nikki had been post-op she would still have to fight the above.
What you would need to show for your side of this debate is SOMEPLACE that has dropped the requirement for surgery. Then after this happened, a post op lost their previously allowed rights.That's what you are claiming might happen.
Your examples have nothing to do with your position that surgery should be required for gender marker change. If anything it shows you are defending rights that don't exist and according to the Littleton case (NOT ME!) the F on -your- ID doesn't allow you any rights at all already.
Kia Ora,
::) The UK's Gender Recognition Panel's info, for those who feel they would like to see how legal recognition works for post op, pre op and non op trans-people in the UK...
http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2004/7/notes (http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2004/7/notes)
Metta Zenda :)
Quote from: Stephe on September 07, 2011, 10:48:38 PM
Your examples have nothing to do with your position that surgery should be required for gender marker change. If anything it shows you are defending rights that don't exist and according to the Littleton case (NOT ME!) the F on -your- ID doesn't allow you any rights at all already.
actually in both cases, the marriages took place prior to surgery but where some documents had been changed pre-operatively. And THAT is where the Courts in both estate matters had problems.
Quote from: Valeriedances on September 07, 2011, 01:37:05 PM
The key component/cornerstone of MtF transsexuals is dysphoria over their genitals.
Wrong.
Most gender therapists, WPATH, DSM, ICD do not view genital dysphoria as the key component.
Read the manual.
We're not saying SRS isn't necessary at all. It even says right there in what you quoted. "Usually" is there, and transvestisism says "temporary." The first bit is even titled saying SRS is needed in severe cases as opposed to all cases.
Wow! Thanks Val for putting this straight,
I for one never held that notion, of you "holding personal beliefs that are insulting to some people".
It seems one of life's 'tricks' that some folks do have a need to feeling insulted. Seems to create a sense of inner security? A projection away from our own real fears when we do it?
Then ever so many of us are prepared to put that 'rucksack' on our own back, supporting this sort of neurosis. Because we often are so guilt trained...
EST (LGAT) brought that issue most clearly into perspective for me, and I for one refuse to surrender that learning / knowing.
Thank you again for setting things straight,
Axelle
me honestly, ive been interested in the idea for so long. the only thng holding me back is i dont really have enough info and confidence that it ... works. I mean, ok fine I hate the way i look without it but I can hide it when im outside. i didnt care about men back then til i started HRT now im exclusively into them. only thing i want to wait for is the time when the procedure really can give you something that these guys really cant tell teh difference from those other girls out there. i mean come on, i think its ... best to only take the surgery ONCE right? and im guilty, i love to have an orgasm, i dont want to lose that. if im gonna have a womans thingy, i want it to be fully functional in giving me some pleasure you know. if those two can be met, without a doubt, then ill go for it. hell, ill go for it today if i really can... ok wait, i dont have the money yet so hahahahahaha.
but you know what, thinking about this now. ive feeling so bad lately but, i think ... i may not have the confidence in myself now but i can have the drive to work harder to have enough to get this.
thanks for making this thread. made me... think of things.
Quote from: Valeriedances on September 08, 2011, 07:01:15 AM
Here is Page 18 of the Standards of Care.
Here are pages 4 and 5
There seems to be an impression that I am holding personal beliefs that are insulting to some people. I have only been describing what are long established standards and treatments. There is a difference between transsexualism and transgender. Conflating transsexualism to mean the same thing as the general transgender, which includes transvestism (F64.1 No desire for a permanent change to the opposite sex) and other conditions, erases the particular condition that many thousands of people have gone through and corrected over the past 50 years or so. If there have been say 100,000 SRS (speaking of mtf), saying sex reassignment was not necessary erases them and the trials they went through. It is rolling up Transvestism (F64.1 No desire for a permanent change to the opposite sex) into Transsexual (F64.0).
I dont wish my condition to be erased (treated and cured yes, but what I went through as unreal, unimportant, insignificant, unrecognized no) and I dont think I am alone. I am sorry for coming across offensive.
Seems to be the impression...gee why would anyone think that of you Val? You don't want to be OFFENSIVE, then you don't really mean what you're saying? You are saying these very same things on other posts also, as if you are personally OFFENDED by anyone that identifies as TRANSGENDERED, and does not do everything in their power to CORRECT their bodies.
As to Renate's point that Dysphoria over their Genitals is not the Cornerstone of Transsexualism, your postings from "the manual", did not disprove it. Are you that OFFENDED by those that do not elect to have SRS?
Quote from: gantz on September 08, 2011, 08:40:43 AM
i didnt care about men back then til i started HRT now im exclusively into them.
which has nothing to do with whether one is transsexual.
Quoteonly thing i want to wait for is the time when the procedure really can give you something that these guys really cant tell teh difference from those other girls out there. i mean come on, i think its ... best to only take the surgery ONCE right? and im guilty, i love to have an orgasm, i dont want to lose that. if im gonna have a womans thingy, i want it to be fully functional in giving me some pleasure you know. if those two can be met, without a doubt, then ill go for it. hell, ill go for it today if i really can... ok wait, i dont have the money yet so hahahahahaha.
Most of the surgeons out there in the past few decades have been producing esthetically pleasing works of art that are as comparable to original equipment as can be. And there is plenty of pleasure to be had...I still don't know who started the myth that post-op transsexuals don't orgasm as a result of the surgical intervention.
Ann, I do believe you missed gantz's point, it doesn't matter.
Its funny how you are TWISTING items like the SOC to your OWN definitions, when that is not what they are saying. And yes I have read the SOC more than once, and I do not find anywhere in their words the absoluteness that one is "Trans" or nothing as you espouse.
And now you are changing your line again, that's not what your post's say and imply.
That's right, SURGERY! An effective treatment for GID/Transsexualism. What do you identify yourself as now?
* To use the title of the topic, SRS is NOT a minor concern for me. If that offends you, or I offend you, I dont know what to say. It is a big deal. We are a big deal, all of us. Our cure is a BIG deal *
Well put and I do completely agree. Amen!
Axelle
PS: Dang nice to be able to agree to some things, if only at times :-)
I won't be able to function properly until SRS. It scares the heck out of me, but I know that I won't do without. I simply can't be that variant. Then it's on with life and normal mundane things, as it should have been.
Can't think straight socially when the probability of being spotted is in the mix.
Good! So do I identify as a Woman also. Val there you go again, putting it off on everyone else and acting as if you did not say in your previous posts the things that you did. So it goes that I must or may be offending you by
your insistence that you are offending me!
This is a time that the letter "T" amongst the other THREE ( :laugh:), should be strengthening its bonds, not drawing lines of exclusivity.
Granted that there are differences in opinion, and they should be shared, our futures are still connected to each other as a community.
Interestingly enough is
gantz's "EPITAPH" for this thread...
Quote from: gantz on September 08, 2011, 08:40:43 AM
me honestly, ive been interested in the idea for so long. the only thng holding me back is i dont really have enough info and confidence that it ... works. I mean, ok fine I hate the way i look without it but I can hide it when im outside. i didnt care about men back then til i started HRT now im exclusively into them. only thing i want to wait for is the time when the procedure really can give you something that these guys really cant tell teh difference from those other girls out there. i mean come on, i think its ... best to only take the surgery ONCE right? and im guilty, i love to have an orgasm, i dont want to lose that. if im gonna have a womans thingy, i want it to be fully functional in giving me some pleasure you know. if those two can be met, without a doubt, then ill go for it. hell, ill go for it today if i really can... ok wait, i dont have the money yet so hahahahahaha.
but you know what, thinking about this now. ive feeling so bad lately but, i think ... i may not have the confidence in myself now but i can have the drive to work harder to have enough to get this.
thanks for making this thread. made me... think of things.
Like all the "haha's"? So I guess the joke is on us :laugh:
Quote from: Ann Onymous on September 08, 2011, 05:04:18 AM
actually in both cases, the marriages took place prior to surgery but where some documents had been changed pre-operatively. And THAT is where the Courts in both estate matters had problems.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Littleton_v._Prange (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Littleton_v._Prange)
Christie Lee Littleton was born a male in San Antonio, Texas in 1952. She dropped out of school at age 15 and began living as a woman. In 1977 she began taking female hormones and legally changed her name to Christie Lee Cavazos. In 1980, she completed her surgical reassignment and had her state-issued identification changed to female.[2] In the 1990s she met and married Jonathan Mark Littleton in Kentucky, later moving to San Antonio, where she worked at a salon and he worked as a window washer.
From other sources I read she was over 15 years post op..
Irregardless of you being misinformed, none of this has anything to do with proving a negative effect on post op's if metal status was used rather that surgical status. Actually it the standard for status change was made via mental status rather than physical, the whole "male chromosomes do not change with either hormonal treatment or sex reassignment surgery" argument would no longer affect post-op and would in fact strengthen their rights..
This thread is going to be locked if the personal attacks don't stop. I've already asked for civility once before. :police:
I'm really trying to figure what is, or has been, said that would be offensive here?
I must be SO thick-skinned, I just don't get it.
I'm posting on this because I start to feel pretty stupid, should I ALSO be offended? Eh?
What on this earth is wrong to identify as a woman, AND have SRS. She said she ALWAYS identified as a woman i.e. also before she had SRS. Hello!
All quite fine now isn't it?
If you can't, won't, shan't, have SRS for what ever reason... $$$, medical condition, being too scared, feeling it is therefore or OTHERWISE a minor concern, you still may, will, wish, can, etc. identify as a woman/female.
The key word here is IDENTIFY -> PRESENT.
Without SRS, also what Emma is eluding to, if you have to let your pants down --- there be some need for an explanation and it would be --- that you are a transwoman? Right?
If letting your pants down post SRS, there be no explanation required --- hopefully!
So why would you need to spread your history about your AMAB, unless specifically asked and not willing to tell a lie.
So we are female, some with, some without SRS for various reasons. Oh, GIDNOS could still be another one. 'Trans-' is part of when some explaining is required, maybe even if you're seriously clocked at an interview?
Seems pretty straight forward --- WHAT am I missing? Anyone?
Axelle
Quote from: Ann Onymous on September 08, 2011, 09:26:45 AM
I still don't know who started the myth that post-op transsexuals don't orgasm as a result of the surgical intervention.
Unless I'm mistaken Valerie has stated post op she never has had one and she isn't the first I have read saying this. No one said ALL POST OPS LOSE THE ABILITY TO ORGASM, just that it happens and appears to be a risk of this procedure.
Quote from: Valeriedances on September 08, 2011, 07:01:15 AM
I dont wish my condition to be erased (treated and cured yes, but what I went through as unreal, unimportant, insignificant, unrecognized no) and I dont think I am alone. I am sorry for coming across offensive.
But realize when you say that no op people have no need for gender marker change you are saying our suffering over this issue is "unreal, unimportant, insignificant, unrecognized".
I still am trying to grasp how allowing gender marker change to happen based on someone mental condition (GID) is insulting or belittling of you or any other TS. If anything it will strengthen the rights of post-ops which due to the littleton case at least one court has ruled against post-ops on this issue.
Stephe,
that is very correct in deed, and so is that MtFs (many) that are not at all OK with their gear, AND ALSO FOR THAT REASON DO NOT ORGASM.
(Then there are lots natal females that NEVER orgasm... also depending on their partners and chemistry, etc.)
Now, what about that then?
In fact if not for this latter reason you may or may not orgasm either (as practice makes perfect) --- so who can actually tell?
Recall some figure that ~ 80% of sex is in the brain --- no SRS on the brain, no?
There seems just so much anecdotal stuff floating about, eh.
Axelle
(https://www.susans.org/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi817.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fzz94%2FMaylene466%2F2011-04-22-0074.png&hash=a929a5b0f71c7b83ad23beeb7a930caf2d8f33e3)
Quote from: Valeriedances on September 08, 2011, 01:47:11 PM
I know, it is a difficult issue.
It isnt insulting or belittling to me at all. It gets emotional because of fear. Fear of the right wing conservative and religious elements. I am afraid of them and what they might do. They remind me of my father whom I am terrified of. I only have so much courage.
Look I'm sorry if I seem angry about this but this issue really bothers me. I HATE having the wrong gender marker on my ID but I honestly don't have an overwhelming desire for SRS. I would rather not have what's between my legs but it's not going to ruin my life either. What I would hate is if I end up getting so bothered about this ID thing that -this- became the reason I had SRS.. I think that's the wrong reason to do it and I feel you do too.
I honestly don't believe the right wing conservatives accept SRS=female right now anyway. The littleton case proves some don't believe it. I also feel trying to use physical things as a point of reference allows them to say exactly what was said in the littleton case. The "once a male always a male" argument. I feel using the female brain point of reference, defined by a therapist if needed, is more defensible. Our brain has ALWAYS been female gendered and for people with GID, that isn't changed. There is no "you were born with a male brain" argument. It would cover pre/non/post-ops, we all share this same condition.
I didn't like being diagnosed as having GID to get hormone therapy, but if this diagnosis allowed for a gender change marker, then I can see the validity.
Quote from: Stephe on September 08, 2011, 09:52:11 PM
Ou
I honestly don't believe the right wing conservatives accept SRS=female right now anyway. The littleton case proves some don't believe it. I also feel trying to use physical things as a point of reference allows them to say exactly what was said in the littleton case. The "once a male always a male" argument.
Interesting that in "Littleton" the issue driving the issue was a "wrongful death" lawsuit against the MD caring for her husband. The invalid marriage issue was to derail the "wrongful death" suit.
It was about $'s! Sex and Gender was secondary. As to the Right Wingers, keep dreaming.
Quote from: SandraJane on September 08, 2011, 10:35:02 PM
Interesting that in "Littleton" the issue driving the issue was a "wrongful death" lawsuit against the MD caring for her husband. The invalid marriage issue was to derail the "wrongful death" suit.
It was about $'s! Sex and Gender was secondary. As to the Right Wingers, keep dreaming.
Oh I don't believe the extreme conservatives will accept the brain sex thing any more than they accept srs changes someones sex, but a judge would have to discount what a trained mental health person testifies to, especially if this became a medically accepted part of DSM or something. Both these cases were about $$$, aren't most of them?
Quote from: Valeriedances on September 08, 2011, 10:31:42 PM
My fear is not rational, but emotional. I'm sorry for all my harsh words over the year. I will try to keep a better check on my fear.
And I'll try to reign in myself in the future as well.. Like I said this point really distresses me but I deal with it :)