"Technology on the Social and Ethical Aspects of Transsexual Surgery" By Janice G. Raymond
01 Sunday Apr 2012
Posted by bugbrennan
http://bugbrennan.com/2012/04/01/technology-on-the-social-and-ethical-aspects-of-transsexual-surgery-by-janice-g-raymond/ (http://bugbrennan.com/2012/04/01/technology-on-the-social-and-ethical-aspects-of-transsexual-surgery-by-janice-g-raymond/)
The subject of transsexualism, whether raised in the public forum or in the academic or medical communities, has been viewed generally as a medical issue that requires hormonal and surgical intervention. Several assumptions accompany this profile of transsexualism.
That the transsexual is a person who is trapped in the body of the wrong sex. Thus we have the popular definition of a transsexual as a "female mind in a male body."[1] This results in the perception of transsexualism as a disease or as disease-like and thus a medical problem. In many cases, a "cure" can only be effected through radical intervention such as specialized hormonal treatments and sex conversion surgery.
That it is possible to transsex, i.e., to change one's sex through such medical intervention.
Interesting read.
The only thing I really want to comment on is this:
QuoteIndeed, one must ask why it is possible in this society that persons could even talk about a "female mind in a male body."If transsexualism is a disease, then does desire qualify as disease? As Thomas Szasz has asked, does the old person who wants to be young suffer from the "disease" of being a "transchronological" or does the poor person who wants to be rich suffer from the "disease" of being a "transeconomical?"
Desire has nothing to do with it. It's not a want, it's a need. Not some whistful longing for something that's been lost. It's scary, sometimes lonely, often painful, something which, under any other circumstances no one would willingly do to themselves. People transition because there is no other choice. Because they reach a point where their life becomes unlivable without it, and the most a person can say is that they are merely existing. That's why it's not desire. Desire implies that life is bearable without it. And very often, that simply isn't the case.
My impression is that it seems to have been trivialised a little in that article. Like someone going to get a facelift because they think they're looking a bit aged.
The article is authored by the same woman who wrote to the United Nations that protecting against discrimination based on gender identity erodes women's rights (http://www.bilerico.com/2011/08/less_than_woman_less_than_human.php). The article also uses a paper written by Janice G. Raymond from 1980 as its main reference. FYI, that is the woman who wrote an entire book (http://books.google.com/books/about/The_transsexual_empire.html?id=18oMFqYlf9gC) on the premise that "All transsexuals rape women's bodies by reducing the real female form to an artifact, appropriating this body for themselves .... Transsexuals merely cut off the most obvious means of invading women, so that they seem non-invasive."
You were expecting something other than disdain? :'(
Apparently the above comment earned me my very own personal feature blog on the author's site, in which she extrapolates that I "disdain females." At first I thought it was a little creepy but then I just lol'd.
http://bugbrennan.com/2012/04/05/christy-is-more-of-a-woman-than-me-6/