Susan's Place Transgender Resources

Community Conversation => Transgender talk => Topic started by: BeverlyAnn on March 01, 2007, 12:57:05 AM

Title: Labels
Post by: BeverlyAnn on March 01, 2007, 12:57:05 AM
I'm bringing this to a new thread from the "So is there a place for she-males?" topic.

(Deep sigh).  I HATE labels but apparently we have to have them.  We used to have these discussions years ago here at Susan's and my point then, as now is that these different labels (TV, CD, TS, etc.) separate us.  They are divisive.  We want to be included in ENDA, we want protection in housing, we want to be able to walk the streets safely and we want people to accept us for what we are but the problem is we cannot agree what we are.   If we must have a label, why can't it be just Transgender or TG.  It's kind of like one of the founding fathers who said, "Gentlemen, we must all hang together or we will surely all hang separately."



Bev


Title: Re: Labels
Post by: cindianna_jones on March 01, 2007, 01:16:10 AM
Here, among friends, I don't see that labels are particularly useful. They can be helpful to understand ourselves, but rarely does a generic label fit all. I've found that I genuinely like everyone here. And there are many people that fall all over the place in the spectrum.

For topic threads, I do find it useful. I'm usually not interested in dressing, going out, makeup... that sort of stuff.  However I know that cross dressers are. So classification of topics under labels certainly makes some sense.

I suppose that the labels have more use in the medical field where they like to classify everything.  I see a need there to help guide medical professionals with proper standards for treatment.

For the general public, JEEEZH! They'll take the worst anyone has to offer! So, don't give them anything... just kidding.

Cindi
Title: Re: Labels
Post by: TheBattler on March 01, 2007, 01:23:22 AM
I agree Bev,

I do not like labels but Transgender works for me now as I have discovered it is more then just cross dressing - it is a part of me.

As for where I am going and if I am in fact TS - well watch this space as I am going somewhere - I just do not know where.

Alice
Title: Re: Labels
Post by: katia on March 01, 2007, 02:55:51 AM
i love questions like this. there are times when [labels are useful]. for instance, when you\'re first coming out and you realize that you\'re ts and you\'re trying to find the people who are most like you. just like the ugly duckling, we [gravitate to our kind of people]. in that sense, labels help a lot, because we can find people who are like us.
however, as we go along in tg life and [experience things] we start to realize the [more complex aspects of gender identity] and finding the places where the labels [break down completely]. life is complicated! it\'s not [just about men or women] in little [binary constellations] anymore. it\'s so much more than that.
labels [are easy], actually getting to know the [depth behind the labels] is difficult. ;)

Title: Re: Labels
Post by: taru on March 01, 2007, 07:41:47 AM
Labels are useful in discussions, but can be very lacking when trying to describe an invidual person.

The whole "Who is a true TS" discussion seems quite pointless. Most of the terms are not well defined or at least vary by culture. Even a "woman" is not well defined (sorry for the mtf bias here).

If someone feels that the label TS describes them well, what does it help to fight whether they are really TS or not?
Title: Re: Labels
Post by: Kate on March 01, 2007, 09:13:47 AM
Quote from: Tinkerbell on March 01, 2007, 01:35:49 AM
Labels, IMO, are essential to identify and describe people, things, animals, etc, etc, etc....  *catholics* are Christians...

But that gets confusing. I know of MANY people who call themselves "christians," for example, and yet their actions and attitudes would have you wondering. Heck, *I* am more christian than most christians I know, lol... and yet... I'm not christian.

When people *identify* as a label, it makes for a confusing mess. When a PERSON is a label, it leads to all this confusion.

When ACTIONS and observations are labeled, it makes MUCH more sense: "That person is christian-like" is much more meaningful to me than "that person is a christian."

Kate
Title: Re: Labels
Post by: Shana A on March 01, 2007, 12:24:37 PM
Certainly some labels can be useful, for example when I came out as transgender, being able to look for books on that topic or to find groups of other people who identified similarly was useful for gaining a deeper understanding of myself. Ultimately though, I find that labels or identities can be constricting. I guess I kind of think of them as stepping stones to get where you want to be ;)

zythyra
Title: Re: Labels
Post by: Steph on March 01, 2007, 06:15:54 PM
Quote from: Kate on March 01, 2007, 09:13:47 AM
Quote from: Tinkerbell on March 01, 2007, 01:35:49 AM
Labels, IMO, are essential to identify and describe people, things, animals, etc, etc, etc....  *catholics* are Christians...

But that gets confusing. I know of MANY people who call themselves "christians," for example, and yet their actions and attitudes would have you wondering. Heck, *I* am more christian than most christians I know, lol... and yet... I'm not christian.

When people *identify* as a label, it makes for a confusing mess. When a PERSON is a label, it leads to all this confusion.

When ACTIONS and observations are labeled, it makes MUCH more sense: "That person is christian-like" is much more meaningful to me than "that person is a christian."

Kate

And that's where labels get us into trouble.  For example, a person who assigns them self with the label "Catholic" sees them self as christian, but someone who is interpreting the label "Christian" may not agree that Catholics are christians, and the debate would start :)

Like them or not I feel that labels are essential for us in today's society otherwise we would end up like those robots in the movie "I Robot", now that would be tragic.  I'm proud of the labels assigned to me:

Woman
Female
Girl
Ex Service woman

And I don't even mind it so much when folks use :

Bitch
Slut

to describe me.  I imagine that people have used other more offensive labels to describe me behind my back, and all I do is consider the source and laugh at them - sticks and stones.

We are assigned a label at birth (sometimes incorrectly) and we are assigned a label at death, and a multitude of labels in between.  I think what is important is that we educate those who wrongly use labels with the hope that our actions will have a positive effect.

Just my 2¢ Cdn

Steph
Title: Re: Labels
Post by: cindianna_jones on March 01, 2007, 06:42:48 PM
Steph... I am laughing at your slut comment.  Yes, I agree!  I would be thrilled if a couple of my family members would call me a slut! It's a bit off the mark, but at least it bends in the right direction!

Cindi
Title: Re: Labels
Post by: Steph on March 01, 2007, 09:05:01 PM
Quote from: Cindi Jones on March 01, 2007, 06:42:48 PM
Steph... I am laughing at your slut comment.  Yes, I agree!  I would be thrilled if a couple of my family members would call me a slut! It's a bit off the mark, but at least it bends in the right direction!

Cindi

:)

Steph
Title: Re: Labels
Post by: togetherwecan on March 01, 2007, 10:47:25 PM
This will probably not be popular becaue I agree with what Bev has said about labels, but I disagree about not needing them.
I actually talked with Susan about this a while back.

My 2 cents

As someone new to Susan's (and I don't just mean myelf or even SO' or GG', so many new peeps register every day...) anyhow people come here for different reasons and when they do there are going to be different people they want to seak advice from. That being said, without the labels it is difficult being new and knowing who to turn to. It isn't always easy or comfortable to ask.
Title: Re: Labels
Post by: cindianna_jones on March 01, 2007, 11:47:37 PM
For the record then:

I am a farm resident, middle aged, low income, married, white female slut.  ;)

Oh my... I'm in a funny mood tonight.

Cindi
Title: Re: Labels
Post by: BeverlyAnn on March 01, 2007, 11:51:29 PM
Quote from: Cindi Jones on March 01, 2007, 11:47:37 PM
Oh my... I'm in a funny mood tonight.

I wish I was
Title: Re: Labels
Post by: Buffy on March 02, 2007, 12:02:28 AM
Labels can be both good and bad

Society in general will always try to describe someone (something) by giving it a classification, category that it can be fitted into

It aids to our understanding of what it is or what it does and can be used for educational purposes.

However the problem is that once given a label it is hard to remove. A prisoner once out of jail will be a reformed prisoner or ex-convict, no matter how good their life has become.... the label stays on their record that society creates for them. A cancer sufferer will be in remission of cured once they get the all clear.

Transsexual is one label that is hard to shake off, to me it has described what I did and not what I am, but to society in general, it decribes what I am, a man who has become a woman through surgery.

My birth certificate says Female, my passport and all my official documentation says Female, but I will always be labeled a Transsexual.Perhaps we should focus less on the labels and more on how we can get them removed.

Buffy

PS ...I wish I did have a Slut label or  just plain sex goddess would do
Title: Re: Labels
Post by: cindianna_jones on March 02, 2007, 12:04:24 AM
Now just how can you be feeling down when you have such an elegant blue dress like that?  It is beautiful. And you are a knock out wearing it.

Cindi
Title: Re: Labels
Post by: Suzy on March 02, 2007, 12:39:19 AM
I agree that labels can sometime be necessary, but that doesn't mean I have to like them.  Mopping floors is necessary, and I do it, but I hate it.  I keep getting asked "Have you figured out what you are yet?"  I hate being put on the spot like that.  I just think I'm me.  I am on a journey of self discovery and though it shares some things in common with others here, it's unlike anyone else's because I am unique.  I am coming to enjoy and embrace who I am and I don't want anyone's label to dictate my course.  If I do that I lose my ability to be authentic.  And that means more to me than anyone else's opinion.

Kristi
Title: Re: Labels
Post by: cindianna_jones on March 02, 2007, 12:42:55 AM
Hey Kristi, here's a label that applies to all of us:  "Very Interesting" ;)

Cindi
Title: Re: Labels
Post by: Suzy on March 02, 2007, 12:51:29 AM
Quote from: Cindi Jones on March 02, 2007, 12:42:55 AM
Hey Kristi, here's a label that applies to all of us:  "Very Interesting" ;)

Cindi

LOL, Cindi!

That's one label I'll gladly wear.

Kristi
Title: Re: Labels
Post by: gennee on March 05, 2007, 11:21:26 AM
Labels are fine to help us understand who we are. When labels are used to defame and demean then they should never be used. I describe myself as a ->-bleeped-<- and transgender, but that doesn't define who I am as a person. I have met many people who are all over the gender spectrum. I'm comfortable being with all kinds of folks.

Gennee

:)
Quote from: zythyra on March 01, 2007, 12:24:37 PM
Certainly some labels can be useful, for example when I came out as transgender, being able to look for books on that topic or to find groups of other people who identified similarly was useful for gaining a deeper understanding of myself. Ultimately though, I find that labels or identities can be constricting. I guess I kind of think of them as stepping stones to get where you want to be ;)

zythyra

The fact that we change over time shows that there is more to each individual than the label attached to them. The way to find out about someone is to get to know them as people.

Gennee
Title: Re: Labels
Post by: Melissa on March 05, 2007, 01:30:38 PM
Labels are useful for describing a person using only a few words.  For example, it could take an entire page or more to describe a transsexual without using the word transsexual, but if you use it, you can pretty much assume a certain number of characteristics.  The problem occurs when different people apply different meanings to the same label.

Melissa
Title: Re: Labels
Post by: Shana A on March 05, 2007, 01:31:55 PM
QuoteThe fact that we change over time shows that there is more to each individual than the label attached to them. The way to find out about someone is to get to know them as people.

Absolutely true! Regardless of the label, TG, republican, vegetarian, whatever, to reduce someone to what we think the label means is shallow. The human behind the label is much deeper and complex.

zythyra
Title: Re: Labels
Post by: Brianna on March 05, 2007, 01:52:28 PM
I love precise words. I also like labeling when it's accurate and not pejorative.

The truth is, I want no association by society with crossdressers and ->-bleeped-<-s. It's not accurate, and the lack of information by the mass public leads to confusion. This is why I despise the term Transgendered. It's not in the dictionary, it's not scientific and it's just too hippie dippy for me.

I have come to like the term transsexed. It accurately describes what we have as a transitive birth defect that is cured. I also like Androphillic and gynophillic to describe our sexuality pre-transition to clarify from common confusion with being gay.

I've said it before but crossdresser is another term I refuse to use. It has no meaning. I don't find the term ->-bleeped-<- pejorative - but when someone asks to be called something else, I of course agree. This is being polite.
Title: Re: Labels
Post by: cindianna_jones on March 05, 2007, 01:57:18 PM
One label I truly like, especially when applied to me, is:  woman.

I have a new one for Bri:  bald

Chin up!

Cindi
Title: Re: Labels
Post by: Brianna on March 05, 2007, 02:01:16 PM
Britney likes the label "anti-Christ" along with baldie, Cindy. (See my tagline) I am inclided to agree.
Title: Re: Labels
Post by: cindianna_jones on March 05, 2007, 02:10:58 PM
Bri, that woman has some real problems. It's so hard for me to remember that full sized poster of her in the local 7-11 a few years ago and reconcile that image with the one she now presents. Fame and fortune do not insulate us from life.

Cindi
Title: Re: Labels
Post by: Brianna on March 05, 2007, 02:16:55 PM
Anti-Christ britney will crush you for your arrogance, Cindy. You will pay the price for daring to daring to challenge the Slave4you of Satan.

Bri

Ps - @ your hubris? A tear. ;)
Title: Re: Labels
Post by: BeverlyAnn on March 05, 2007, 02:49:08 PM
Quote from: Brianna on March 05, 2007, 01:52:28 PM
The truth is, I want no association by society with crossdressers and ->-bleeped-<-s. It's not accurate, and the lack of information by the mass public leads to confusion. This is why I despise the term Transgendered. It's not in the dictionary, it's not scientific and it's just too hippie dippy for me.

Brianna, I'll basically repeat what I posted elsewhere.  So you would rather I not have sent an e-mail to the Largo City Commission in support of Susan Stanton, not support groups like National Center for Transgender Equality with donations because the work they do is primarily for TS?  Maybe I shouldn't participate in the Transgender Day of Remembrance either because society might link us by association? 

Hmmm, maybe Susan can split the board and have one just for the elite and one for the rest of us run of the mill peons.

Bev
Title: Re: Labels
Post by: Brianna on March 05, 2007, 03:04:37 PM
It's a TOTAL false choice to say if I don't identify with a group concordantly I don't support them. I am not gay, but I couldn't be more enthusiastic about their rights. The same logic applies to ->-bleeped-<-s.

Bri
Title: Re: Labels
Post by: Reana on March 16, 2007, 10:02:52 AM
I've never been concerned with labels.  The same term from two different persons can have totally different implications depending on the attitude and intent of the person using the term.  I tend to relate to any labels/terms based on the person delivering them and the circumstances under which they come out in the conversation.   
Title: Re: Labels
Post by: katia on March 16, 2007, 12:23:39 PM
Quote from: Reana on March 16, 2007, 10:02:52 AM
I've never been concerned with labels.  The same term from two different persons can have totally different implications depending on the attitude and intent of the person using the term.  I tend to relate to any labels/terms based on the person delivering them and the circumstances under which they come out in the conversation.   

that's cute, but let me remind you that some hateful terms are offensive regardless of who says them.  ex: the Q word, the C word,  the F word [for a gay man] and many others.
Title: Re: Labels
Post by: Reana on March 16, 2007, 03:56:23 PM
Quote from: Katia on March 16, 2007, 12:23:39 PM
Quote from: Reana on March 16, 2007, 10:02:52 AM
I've never been concerned with labels.  The same term from two different persons can have totally different implications depending on the attitude and intent of the person using the term.  I tend to relate to any labels/terms based on the person delivering them and the circumstances under which they come out in the conversation.   

that's cute, but let me remind you that some hateful terms are offensive regardless of who says them.  ex: the Q word, the C word,  the F word [for a gay man] and many others.

It's hard to make a strong argument against your examples above but I will make a "weak" one.  I have a particularly negative thought regarding that "F" word, not sure what "C" word you are referring to, and don't have any use for the "Q" word.  This being said, I remain more interested in the attitude and intent of the person making any comment or attaching any label to me or another person.  Sometimes comments or labels are used more in ignorance or with lack of deep thought rather than with malicious intent.     
Title: Re: Labels
Post by: Melissa on March 16, 2007, 04:11:42 PM
Quote from: Reana on March 16, 2007, 03:56:23 PM
not sure what "C" word you are referring to    
It rhymes with runt.

Quote from: Reana on March 16, 2007, 03:56:23 PM
and don't have any use for the "Q" word.    
I know locally, some people use it to describe themselves when they are not quite sure where they fall with their sexual orientation, but they know they aren't straight.

Melissa
Title: Re: Labels
Post by: Reana on March 16, 2007, 04:19:30 PM
Quote from: Melissa on March 16, 2007, 04:11:42 PM
Quote from: Reana on March 16, 2007, 03:56:23 PM
not sure what "C" word you are referring to    
It rhymes with runt.
   That would have been my first guess.



Quote from: Melissa on March 16, 2007, 04:11:42 PM
Quote from: Reana on March 16, 2007, 03:56:23 PM
and don't have any use for the "Q" word.    
I know locally, some people use it to describe themselves when they are not quite sure where they fall with their sexual orientation, but they know they aren't straight.

Melissa

   I'm aware that some persons that might "qualify" for these terms use them to describe each other.  While this is surely acceptable between the two of them, I would still find the words distasteful.

Edit: Fixed quotes - Melissa
Title: Re: Labels
Post by: Thundra on March 16, 2007, 10:08:11 PM
:: sigh ::  Again with the labels.  :: whew ::
I am at my wits end with this subject here on Susan's.
There seems to be some misunderstandings involving some terms, because the person using, or disliking the term is not versed in the culture that spawned it, uses it, or adapted it to their own needs. For example:

QuoteI know locally, some people use it to describe themselves when they are not quite sure where they fall with their sexual orientation, but they know they aren't straight.

Not to pick on the divine Missy M., but Queer is much more than that. It is yet another word, that the GLBT community has begun to adapt to it's own use. Yes. In the past it was an epitaph meant to inflict harm, much like ->-bleeped-<-. (We'll get to that one later)  But, when a minority community usurps a word like queer, and embraces that word as an identity, it becomes their own, and they use it with pride.

Locally in Portland, we have a GLBT centered center. What is it called? The "Q" Center.
"Q" does not stand for questioning -- "Q" stands for queer. Queer is becoming the word of choice to describe the blanket community, ala GLBT. Gay does not work properly, because homosexual men are gay. Lesbian describes homosexual women, and BI-sexual describes people that identify as either homosexual and heterosexual, or as neither homo/heterosexual. Just as "T" has come to stand for the umbrella term of all people questioning gender roles, "Q" is becoming the word to describe all people that are not heterosexual-identified-- outside the mainstream.

This creates an obvious problem for many people under the "T" category, because they do not identify with anything GL or B. In actuallity, many people that have fallen under the "T" identified category, or have moved thru and beyond those borders are very vested in retaining the current heterosexual paradigm. They do not want to dismantle it, they want to adapt it so that they are accepted under those rules -- in essence changing how the rules are interpreted.

Now we come to ->-bleeped-<-. It is a book by a local author, one of my favorites, actually.
You can order it from In Other Words Bookstore. These women are presenting ideas that rail against traditional values of male and female to the point, where they do not want to modify the heterosexual paradigm, they want to eliminate it and start from scratch. Of course, not all women agree with them either, so the battle rages on.

Main point being, that people from the "T" category want to be accepted by heterosexual people under the current paradigm, whereas many GLB people are trying to escape it, or dismantle it. We are at odds.

On the one hand, People from the "T" background want the protections afforded them from the GLB community, but they do not want to carry the banner of queer, or being different. Being different gets you noticed, and that goes against the motivations of people trying to blend in. How can this work?  I've no idear?

But, we do need to stop criticizing each other on the use of terms we might or might not agree with. Personally, I find the term trans offensive. There is a local group advertising themselves as women and trans. I am like, what? If I were one of those people, I sure wouldn't want to be involved with the group. The groups name is already exclusive.

On specific terms. I have every right to label myself ->-bleeped-<-. Damn skippy!  I find the term ->-bleeped-<- offensive, and the terms trans and "T" anything divisive. But if someone else wants to use that term to identify with, that is their personal business.

Queer is a more difficult example, because it is the term of choice to describe the GLBT community, and all the other labels that don't fall into GLB or T. So, whereas many people support the term "T", because it puts them in allignment with some GLBT causes, they do not identify as queer, or out of the heterosexual mainstream. Those of us that are queer, support those people, because we are alligned with their fight for expanded rights for all minorities -- but......we have to realize that they are not one of us.

I hope that I have not offended anyone in my broad expressions using the "T" terms?
I know that many people on this board do not identify with anything "T" or radical, and yet they are my allies in some fashion.

I would advance that we allow each other to use whatever term to describe themselves as they see fit. But, to be very careful that we do not apply a label to someone else that they are uncomfortable with.

Thundra: butch, radical, feminist, queer womyn. Not a butch, nor a radical, nor a feminist, nor a queer, but a womyn. Descriptors, not definers.
Title: Re: Labels
Post by: tinkerbell on March 17, 2007, 01:26:09 AM
Quote from: Thundra on March 16, 2007, 10:08:11 PM
I am at my wits end with this subject here on Susan's.

LOL :D...hey, I'm getting there fast! ;)

tink :icon_chick:
Title: Re: Labels
Post by: Shana A on March 17, 2007, 06:04:00 PM
QuoteThis creates an obvious problem for many people under the "T" category, because they do not identify with anything GL or B. In actuallity, many people that have fallen under the "T" identified category, or have moved thru and beyond those borders are very vested in retaining the current heterosexual paradigm. They do not want to dismantle it, they want to adapt it so that they are accepted under those rules -- in essence changing how the rules are interpreted.

Thanks for posting Tundra. I've also noticed this, and found it difficult. I was already involved with the GLBTIQ community for many years before I identified as "T" or simply other, and still have close ties with the community. While I support anyone's choice to blend in as their desired gender, I want a world in which anyone can express gender safely, and for the possibility of that expression to be outside current socially accepted borders. I continue to work towards achieving these goals.

zythyra
Title: Re: Labels
Post by: Thundra on March 17, 2007, 09:48:49 PM
Quote
QuoteI am at my wits end with this subject here on Susan's.

LOL ...hey, I'm getting there fast!

tink

I had to go back and make sure it wasn't you, casting a spell again.

I feel like I'm drowning...no, melting, I'm melting, melting, aieeeee!

Yes, I always rooted for the witch. Having an army of flying monkeys at one's disposal would be bitchin' cool.
Title: Re: Labels
Post by: Ms Bev on March 17, 2007, 10:33:26 PM
Quote from: Thundra on March 16, 2007, 10:08:11 PM
:: sigh ::  Again with the labels.  :: whew ::
I am at my wits end with this subject here on Susan's.

Would like to mention one thing:  many of us are "T", and L,G, or B

.....What ever.  But could we   Puh-Leeze  put this topic to bed?  Susan?  Someone...???

Bev
Title: Re: Labels
Post by: Laurry on March 18, 2007, 12:26:08 AM
Quote from: Bev on March 17, 2007, 10:33:26 PM
But could we   Puh-Leeze  put this topic to bed?  Susan?  Someone...???

Bev[/color]

Absolutely, Bev! 

And one more thing...when using labels, don't sew them on, use velcro, as you and they will both change over the years.

........Laurie

Title: Re: Labels
Post by: katia on March 18, 2007, 12:48:02 AM
i find it amusing how we can react to some threads here.  as soon as someone disagrees with the majority, the [wisest] solution is deleting the thread or asking the moderators for help. :eusa_wall: [a brick wall iow]  and one of the reasons why im not part of the majority of anything.
Title: Re: Labels
Post by: Kendall on March 18, 2007, 07:02:08 AM
Well not to go against the grain for the sake of going against any specific opinion.

I like labels

Not that I want to box anyone up. I know I have labels that are open, changing, and sometimes in error. I like words and labels so I can understand. Certainly reality is beyond words. And words are human creations that try to explain reality. Yes they also constrict and sometimes do harm, and make one lost.

But they can also create understanding, good, inspire, and help on find one's way. And they can help one understand.

KK
Title: Re: Labels
Post by: Ms Bev on March 18, 2007, 08:33:37 PM
Quote from: Katia on March 18, 2007, 12:48:02 AM
i find it amusing ......................... as soon as someone disagrees with the majority, the [wisest] solution is deleting the thread or asking the moderators for help. :eusa_wall: [a brick wall iow]  and one of the reasons why im not part of the majority of anything.

Of many things I find un-amusing , one is allowing the "majority" opinion to rule.  In the past, we have let majority opinion label whole races of people as inferior in some way or other.  Other majority opinions have led civilizations to collide for what that majority believed to be absolutely the correct line of thought, belief, spiritual tradition etc, only to be looked back upon as reprehensible, inhumane acts.  Always, the minorities "kept the faith", and asked their mystical powers that be, lend a helping hand.  Sounds melodramatic, I know, but let's zoom in to our own little world.  How often has the majority of the general population despised, killed, beaten, threatened, cheated, discriminated against all members of the Queer community?

Hmmmm.....maybe I shouldn't use that word.  No, not that one.  Damn!  gimmie a word!  You know, all of us who don't  meet the majority populations standard of "looks like a boy, acts like a boy",  "looks like a girl, acts like a girl"

Majorities, like statistics, are often skewed....
Minorities, on the other hand, are usually screwed.
And they will count on their mystical powers that be, to come to the rescue.

So, any mystical forum powers that be can still jump in at any time.
Title: Re: Labels
Post by: BeverlyAnn on March 18, 2007, 10:08:13 PM
Quote from: Bev on March 18, 2007, 08:33:37 PM
[Damn!  gimmie a word!  You know, all of us who don't  meet the majority populations standard of "looks like a boy, acts like a boy",  "looks like a girl, acts like a girl"

Marginalized?