I found out as of 2011 the transgender population in the U.S was approximately 0.3 % that's close to 700.000 people which is a minority among the rest of lgbt. I had a heated argument once with a psychiatrist I knew in the gay community who was himself gay. He got mad at me for insisting the word homosexual was merely a descriptive term used to describe someone's sexual preference .He compared the use of the word homosexual as derogatory. It seems a lot of the trans community is doing the same thing, believing the word transgender is derogatory when it's merely descriptive. everybody has the right to live their only life that god gave them the way they please. I was just wondering why are people so afraid of the word to describe themselves. It's just a factual descriptive term.
And a rose will smell as sweet by any name. With due apologies to Mr Shakespeare but transgender can also be viewed as simply a word while we add the weight, depth and context.
Eve it is more than the word or descriptor to many here. Some clearly see transgender as part of a process of confirming their better aligned identity rather than an end unto itself. Many will not want the label and baggage while obviously seeing themselves simply as men and women after and even prior to transition.
Sometimes the label can be overwhelming and obscure every thing else we are and have done in our lives. At my age I can refer to any number of labels or titles including great grand parent. I would guess most of us want to be acknowledged for the richness of our lives and the complexity of our character. One word just wont do justice to your life.
People do things under the large umbrella term 'transgender' that I do not agree with. I use the term transsexual, since I am going through through a rather large process of changing the way I live my life with requisite sex change. I am also called 'pre-op' because I have I have a surgery for SRS scheduled in April.
When transition including SRS is further along I will likely drop my personal usage of transsexual in favor of just being a woman. I have taken my transition far further many using the term transgender do. I have risked my job, life, and factually lost many relationships to disclose my gender change, change my name, then convert to living full time.
I don't like being referred to as a transgender person, I think the word is lazy when used to describe an individual and erases the uniqueness of those that are considered part of the term.
(https://www.susans.org/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.pfl-%3E-bleeped-%3C-hoenix.org%2Fimages%2Fumbrella_transgender.jpg&hash=570ff44b2a2194f462c42236913ddcaba1193d36)
See though, you're posting on a transgender umbrella site. That's what the place is founded on. Saying you don't like the umbrella concept here is akin to walking into an NAACP meeting and announcing that the back of the bus rules have returned. These comments are really out of place here.
Hugs, Devlyn
Meh...I'm trans and I will always be trans. It is what it is...life goes on.
Its probably seen as a negative word by the rest of the world because the greatest number of trans people HIDE in the shadows and don't stand up for themselves.
Devlyn,
I know this is an umbrella site :) I have no problem with that, I just prefer to identify as a transsexual as that describes me best. It's not a competition. Umbrella terms are always like this, they erase uniqueness.
Think of the term "Asian" it's a meaningless construct. Japanese people are different than Koreans, who are in turn different from Chinese and Indians,
You can say the same about any umbrella term.
I don't like being called "white" for this exact reason. It's a homogenizing term.
Uniqueness is beautiful and should be celebrated.
I dont like the term for myself and rather describe myself differently because frankly transgender is too much of a broad description. Its like saying one works in "IT". Then I dont know what that person does - Java programming? Assembler Coding? Or selling computers? I dont think the term is bad it is just vastly imprecise and I dont want people to make asumptions about myself by using that term for me. Thus I may say I have a transsexual past or I am a woman born with a largely male body or whatever else. If i want to choose a less precise term for myself because I dont want people to know I had a SRS or whatever else, I will just call myself a woman - I personally align more with being a woman than with being a transgender - meaning I feel that I have more in commin with the large group of women overall than with the not that small group of transgenders of which only a fraction is similar to myself. So as a purely decriptive umbrella term - I guess it is ok - but I still do not really like the term for myself.
One reason i dont like it is that it somehow implies by its wording trans-GENDER, that I am somehow having an issue with my gender or gender identity. People also day gender dysphoria or gender identity disorder. There is nothing wrong with my gender - I am female - I have an issue with my body which is not fitting to that gender of mine and the body has a sex and that sex does not match my gender , so if anything, trans-SEX-ual, even if it contains "sex" seems to me a better description really. I am also having a SRS and not a GRS - as I am changing my body, not my gender. If that all makes sense (gender=being male or female in mind & soul, sex=being male or female on a physical level of the body including genitals)
Quote from: Katie on December 18, 2013, 07:43:43 PM
Its probably seen as a negative word by the rest of the world because the greatest number of trans people HIDE in the shadows and don't stand up for themselves.
You can stand up for yourself without making yourself a target. Sorry, but I'm not doing that just for the sake of other people. It's my life to live, not their's.
Quote from: Missy~rmdlm on December 18, 2013, 06:34:57 PM
People do things under the large umbrella term 'transgender' that I do not agree with. I use the term transsexual, since I am going through through a rather large process of changing the way I live my life with requisite sex change. I am also called 'pre-op' because I have I have a surgery for SRS scheduled in April.
When transition including SRS is further along I will likely drop my personal usage of transsexual in favor of just being a woman. I have taken my transition far further many using the term transgender do. I have risked my job, life, and factually lost many relationships to disclose my gender change, change my name, then convert to living full time.
I am ahead of you dahrling...LOL... I dropped the trans anything long ago... I hate them all...they mean nothing... I was born female and I will die one with or without the surgery or the hormones...
It is like the term "Hispanic"... what the hell is that, it is not race, it is not nationality, what it is.... it is a term to set the "us" versus "them... the same for transgender versus cisgender
Quote from: Isabelle on December 18, 2013, 07:02:02 PM
I don't like being referred to as a transgender person, I think the word is lazy when used to describe an individual and erases the uniqueness of those that are considered part of the term.
(https://www.susans.org/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.pfl-%3E-bleeped-%3C-hoenix.org%2Fimages%2Fumbrella_transgender.jpg&hash=570ff44b2a2194f462c42236913ddcaba1193d36)
hey! forgot the she-male and the female impersonators...I think they are also covered by the transgender umbrella
Quote from: Orange Creamsicle on December 18, 2013, 06:23:45 PM
The reason why, I believe, is it's one of those descriptors that when you are known as it, it seems to become the only thing about you to other people. While there are many different parts to a person, once that word comes in, nothing else seems to be important to other people.
I think OC's hit it right on the head here. As soon as people know about my past, they just can't seem to think of anything else. It's like all my other interests and characteristics suddenly ceased to exist. So I prefer to avoid the term.
Honestly, even if I am in the transgender umbrella and technically transsexual, I hate the terms. I don't know. It's probably because society has created a negative connotation around those terms . I just prefer seeing myself as a girl, but I know I'll always be a transgirl no matter what. There is nothing wrong with being trans, it's just hard for me. I guess I have this dream of living just like any other cis girl does that I don't like making a distinction between me and them, even if that distinction makes sense because of my birth status.
Quote from: peky on December 18, 2013, 08:31:03 PM
hey! forgot the she-male and the female impersonators...I think they are also covered by the transgender umbrella
Yup, there's probably a vagillion terms that have been missed out in that picture, I just linked to it as a visual example. Everyone is on the gender spectrum somewhere, that doesn't mean it's all the same rainbow though.
I'm just not a fan of terms that erase identity for the sake of "simplicity"
Quote from: learningtolive on December 18, 2013, 08:47:08 PM
Honestly, even if I am in the transgender umbrella and technically transsexual, I hate the terms. I don't know. It's probably because society has created a negative connotation around those terms . I just prefer seeing myself as a girl, but I know I'll always be a transgirl no matter what. There is nothing wrong with being trans, it's just hard for me. I guess I have this dream of living just like any other cis girl does that I don't like making a distinction between me and them, even if that distinction makes sense because of my birth status.
As one recent representative from a LGBTQI group asked me recently, "Do you identify as transgender woman or just a woman". To which I said, aside of the technicality of it, I'm just a normal everyday woman. Nothing more, nothing less.
I believe that one day my trans status will be forgotten. By me, and by those who already know.
To paraphrase George Carlin: Words are neither good nor bad. Context makes them so.
I'm scared to call myself a woman and nothing else. :-\ I feel it's disingenuous, but this might just be a self-esteem issue, or a desire to be 'acceptable' to cis-people that would confront me about it. Which I know, it's an awful attitude to have. So I've been clinging to 'transsexual woman' as my gender identity, but I just don't know half the time. I mean, I blame my therapist in a way for getting me on that track. At one point, I may have readily accepted becoming a woman, but he got me thinking about alternative viewpoints, and some genderqueer-type stuff. So my gender identity started getting wobbly. Then reading comments from people that consider transsexuals 'delusional' for thinking they're 'real women' just made me really unsure about myself. It didn't impact my desire to transition, or anything like that, just... how I define myself I guess.
In making my 'unicorn' thread, I did think about the positive aspects of being trans*, and that if I am secure in that identification, I could maybe be another positive and visible example of the community. Which is ironic, because before transitioning, I had no concept of 'transgender pride', like how the LGB community celebrates it. Now, I'd like to say I could make something of it, and maybe be an 'out and proud transsexual', but I don't really know. Perhaps time will tell. But I do know I would have difficulties choosing to go stealth, and to bury the trans* part of me and leave it behind. On the other hand, I also know that I naturally consider myself female, and will often refer to myself as such without thinking twice about it. I look in the mirror and register as female.
So for me? I'm just torn between embracing and abandoning the trans* label...
Well, transgender is way too broad and it encompasses too much of everything while failing at being specific. One of reasons I am not very OK with it, because I have seen way to many ads on boards dedicated to transsexuals and transgender, where You can see things You would normally prefer not to see. And while this site is kinda dedicated to include the whole umbrella - even here we dont get to see pics with unshaved guys wearing lingerie and showing "excitement" with parts of their bodies... In other words, in many cases the term is misused as being about sex and not gender expression. Male sex drive, male libido, sex, sex, sex and yeah, female wardrobe as an added bonus. And those kinky guys describe themselves as tgirls, trans and transgender. And they have a whole bunch of ->-bleeped-<-s too who posts ads like this ,,Looking for feminine and slender trans/tgirl. HE should be such and have this." I once made my own ad, and I got a couple of replies asking for my pic and whether I am cleanly shaved... I did not bother to reply to any of them, but asking a tranwoman if she shaves and epilates....
Personally I think the problem is that in their enthusiasm to build a strong and diverse community out of what was basically an assortment of tiny populations of very different conditions, the transgender builders defined a term so broad and inclusive that it lost any useful ability to illuminate, and thus lead to understanding of the person to whom it was applied.
The problem with applying such a broad label to oneself is that it carries a great number of firm expectations and understandings, within those who even know what it is, most of which simply won't match the reality of ones life as it has been. So for example if I apply the label, people might assume that I have had some negative feelings about my gender at one time or another, which would be incorrect.
Or people assume that it is an ongoing thing, - which is also wrong, my journey of discovery ended many many decades ago.
Or people assume that I must have had loads of therapy and "issues" - which I haven't.
Or maybe someone might assume that I have faced hostility, prejudice and powerlessness... Well some of that is right, but again in a completely contrary way to the expectation, because as a member of the uk upper middle class I have actually lead a life of immense entitlement, privilege and unfair advantage. So while I have faced hostility and prejudice, it was mainly because of my social class and power, and not because I have ever been dis-empowered or excluded. In short I've been (wrongly) accused of being an arrogant oppressor, but not of being a powerless misfit.
So the problem with the label is that it has so many connotations which simply don't apply that if I were to own it, most people who heard it about me would run away with completely false expectation about what my life has been.
Now once a label gets THAT misleading I think it's probably time to scrap it completely, admit that the attempt to be all inclusive was a bit of a disaster, and go back to smaller and better defined individual labels which allow people to understand the very real differences that exist between the various groups that have been lumped together to form this so called condition.
In other words the aspiration to build an inclusive catch all term dealing with sexual identity and gender expression may have been nobly motivated, but it simply hasn't proved helpful to a huge number of people, and so many of us have simply opted out, as indeed I have (see my signature below).
That isn't intended as any sort of slight, it's merely that I want people who "hear about me" to go away with an concept in their mind which bears some relationship to what my life has actually been like.
In my case I had a glorious adventure when I was young, and with full support and encouragement of my family, I was so ridiculously privileged and lucky that I got to make up my own rules, and choose aspects of my identity, by experiment, which most unfortunate people are simply born with.
That is how I define my experience of developing my sex and discovering my gender. I have not been gender dysphoric so much as gender euphoric, and that I think you will agree is just too far away from the normal connotations of the term transgender for it to be usefully applied. I suspect that many others have similar problems with it, and that is why it is not a popular term.
Exactly. Erasure. Every single persons experience is unique, labels are only useful descriptors if their meaning is clear and agreed upon. I'm totally willing to accept that my experience falls under the transgender umbrella, but only insofar as it refers to sociological conditions. It's not a useful term to describe my experience as an individual because it has no medical connotations. I'm a woman with a transsexual past. That medical term implies treatment of a condition. People can identify as transsexual and not undergo any medical procedures at all, that is absolutely fine and in no way contradicts a persons right to identify as transsexual (I prefer the term transsexed, if we're being picky)
A perfect example of this happened to me the other day, I had to out my transsexual past to someone. She looked at me with total confusion and asked "Are you a hermaphrodite?" I laughed and said "No, and people don't really use that word anymore...." My point is, I explained I have a transsexual past. I've had medical interventions that have altered the physicality of my body. This is not the same experience as a drag performer or recreational cross dresser or an intersexed person or a genderqueer or a butch or a femme or any other descriptor one cares to use.
I'm not for a second saying that takin hormones or having surgeries excludes or includes anyone. The point is saying "I have a transsexual past" is shorthand for "I've undergone, or perhaps intend to undergo, various medical interventions to make my body more closely aligned to how I feel as a human"
It's not political, it's not separatist, it's not exclusionary, its simply using language to acknowledge someone's right to self definition and actualisation.
As a scientist and medic I and my colleagues use terms to describe conditions. The use of them is that we can understand what each other means without debate.
If I say a patient has type 1 diabetes I know what it means. If I say I am transgender they know what it means.
It does not invalidate me as a woman or a transgender man as a man. I just describes a condition I was born with.
Reading anymore than that into it is banal IMO.
Quote from: Stochastic on December 19, 2013, 05:10:43 AM
I find that the term "transgender" rolls off of the tongue much easier than "much stronger feelings than crossdresser but have not transitioned and still trying to find a functioning place in society". That is why I prefer the term.
Julia
:police:
Please be careful with these comments. Cross-dressers are very welcome on this site as are all people. We have no judgement values on validity.
Cindy
Quote from: Cindy on December 19, 2013, 05:52:15 AM
:police:
Please be careful with these comments. Cross-dressers are very welcome on this site as are all people. We have no judgement values on validity.
Cindy
One of issues is that actually there seems to be that cross-dressers actually are another sort of umbrella term which has no specific criteria... I can pretty much imagine some sub-types of cross-dressing which would most probably not be welcome on this site at all... I mean the category which is absolutely not into anything related to gender identity or should we rather say gender expression? but rather, when the activity becomes a sort of sexual orientation. I was very surprised when I read the classic description of a cross-dresser, because it totally did not match my perception, which has been made by media as well as from what I am seeing on a daily basis on various trans*related advertisment boards. Or is there any specific difference between CD and gay/bi ->-bleeped-<- - the latter being only into this for purpose of sexual intercourse with guys?
And the same can be said about transsexuals as well (also, anything *
sexual immediately has that immediate connotation).
Quote from: ♡ Emily ♡ on December 19, 2013, 06:05:14 AM
One of issues is that actually there seems to be that cross-dressers actually are another sort of umbrella term which has no specific criteria... I can pretty much imagine some sub-types of cross-dressing which would most probably not be welcome on this site at all... And the same can be said about transsexuals as well (also, anything *sexual immediately has that immediate connotation).
Speak for yourself, please, I welcome anyone here. Hugs, Devlyn
Quote from: Devlyn Marie on December 19, 2013, 06:09:06 AM
Speak for yourself, please, I welcome anyone here. Hugs, Devlyn
Would You also welcome an explicitly straightforward ->-bleeped-<- (not an admirer!), who is open about only being into pre-op girls with all the following?
Besides, there is a huge difference between accepting individuals and groups. One might be very accepting with a group, per se, but still have issues with specific individuals - which is perfectly normal and acceptable too, because we all are human beings with our own flaws and benefits. But it is perfectly OK to be accepting and non-accepting at the same time.
Quote from: Cindy on December 19, 2013, 04:38:10 AM
As a scientist and medic I and my colleagues use terms to describe conditions. The use of them is that we can understand what each other means without debate.
If I say a patient has type 1 diabetes I know what it means. If I say I am transgender they know what it means.
It does not invalidate me as a woman or a transgender man as a man. I just describes a condition I was born with.
Problem is Cindy, as I have tried to point out, it doesn't, or at least not very well, and/or to the level of detail that might be conveyed by the Type 1 Diabetes label that you cited.
The inclusion of a vast range of different conditions under the TG term, has made its precise medical application rather uncertain, and in fact in discussions we've already had in our course, the conclusion is that broad terms like this have quite limited application.
I suppose the nearest equivalent might be cancer, but again the differences between say a papilloma, a sarcoma, a myeloma, an adenoma, and a carcinoma are quite extensive. To merely say "cancer" may broadly define the disease as one of improperly regulated cell division but there is also much that it does not tell one... and quite a lot of that is stuff one needs to know before concluding that one understands.
Thus it is with transgender. It is so broad a term, that application of the label may even lead to more questions and misapprehensions than one might have had before one started. Thus my contention that it is not a terribly useful label either medically or in any other way, because it mainly seems to promote confusion.
Quote from: ♡ Emily ♡ on December 19, 2013, 06:13:12 AM
Would You also welcome an explicitly straightforward ->-bleeped-<- (not an admirer!), who is open about only being into pre-op girls with all the following?
Sure, as long as they follow the rules, which state that we aren't a dating site. Here is the first sentence of the TOS:
" Every one is welcome at Susan's Place provided you follow a few basic rules"
You can brush up on the rules here: https://www.susans.org/forums/index.php/topic,2.0.html
Hugs, Devlyn
We protect members from ->-bleeped-<-s. We ban trolls. We ban haters.
The Mods work pretty hard to keep this site free for people of any gender issue.
I was publicly loathed when I worked the streets as a cross dressing prostitute. I'm only now dealing with it.
I advise great caution in continuing this conversation in public.
PM me if you have issues
Cindy
Quote from: Devlyn Marie on December 19, 2013, 06:18:24 AM
Sure, as long as they follow the rules, which state that we aren't a dating site. Here is the first sentence of the TOS:
" Every one is welcome at Susan's Place provided you follow a few basic rules"
You can brush up on the rules here: https://www.susans.org/forums/index.php/topic,2.0.html
Hugs, Devlyn
One of paradox with all kinds of rules is that they can be easily bent and manipulated by knowledgeable and enthusiastic person. Also rules cannot provide an exhaustive set of replies to all kinds of situations, thus allowing to disregard going into the substance of issue.
Also, I am not going to post anything more in this thread, because this is one of those threads, which we most probably wont see in the next morning...
Quotetransgender... ...is so broad a term, that application of the label may even lead to more questions and misapprehensions than one might have had before one started. Thus my contention that it is not a terribly useful label either medically or in any other way...
Quoted for truth and justice.
And yes I am close to locking this thread.
It upsets me to do so.
Why are transgender/transsexual whatever people so unaccepting of each other?
Cindy
Quote from: Cindy on December 19, 2013, 06:41:28 AM
And yes I am close to locking this thread.
It upsets me to do so.
Why are transgender/transsexual whatever people so unaccepting of each other?
Cindy
I will post contrary to what I stated before.
We are. We are accepting towards each other as a group. It is the individual experience and individual representatives which have issues. I have no issues with cross-dressers, drag-kings, androgynous and many others. I have issues when people say that they are Z and act in Z-manner, whereas they are clearly X - and this is because they they dont know themselves where they are at - which is mostly because term "transgender" is too broad, loosing its edge and purpose. And the biggest issue is - that they - and others - will assume that because of example of "Z", everyone else - X, Y, W - are the same.
And btw, term "transsexual" has no value or meaning as well. I have seen many examples of people considering that they are transsexuals or tgirls - but they are essentially not.
Quote from: Cindy on December 19, 2013, 06:41:28 AM
And yes I am close to locking this thread.
It upsets me to do so.
Why are transgender/transsexual whatever people so unaccepting of each other?
Cindy
Forgive me Cindy but I honestly can't see how questioning the specificity and usefulness of a definition amounts to lack of acceptance...
I do understand that some in this thread have wandered into other areas and personally I don't want to go there, but I do think there is a valid question here if we can just steer away from the emotive stuff about validity.
The fact that I do not perceive myself to be the same as someone else does not mean that I see them as invalid - just different - and to quote my late partner "to be different is not wrong." However to quote myself "I don't mind being hated for what I am, but I'm damned if I want to be loved as something I am not."
OK.
Thank you Emily.
I'm always happy to listen to an explanation.
Cindy
Quote from: Doctorwho? on December 19, 2013, 06:49:58 AM
Forgive me Cindy but I honestly can't see how questioning the specificity and usefulness of a definition amounts to lack of acceptance...
I do understand that some in this thread have wandered into other areas and personally I don't want to go there, but I do think there is a valid question here if we can just steer away from the emotive stuff about validity.
The fact that I do not perceive myself to be the same as someone else does not mean that I see them as invalid - just different - and to quote my late partner "to be different is not wrong." However to quote myself "I don't mind being hated for what I am, but I'm damned if I want to be loved as something I am not."
Honey you know how much I love you!!
But I have to draw a Moderators line.
That is my job.
Cindy
And also, when we at least have - very questionable - medical definition of transsexualism (ICD F64.0) - which is, btw, bound to be changed by next edition of the ICD, I would assume that "tgirl" is also covered by umbrella term. Honestly, I have totally no clue as to who/what is considered to be a tgirl.
So, how about gender-varianted people / gender-identity-varianted-persons (and dont kill me for abusing English language - it is not my native tongue and for that reason I dont care ;) ). GVP... almost sounds like GDP...
Dr who you make a point, but the broad problem with broad terms is laziness. People use them and will always and forever use them cause they are easy, no ones gonna remenber millions of health conditions just to be politically correct, just like no ones gonna remenber all the terms under the umbrella of transgender.
Huh. Homosexual, heterosexual, bisexual, pansexual etc. are all descriptive scientific terms. I think.
I assume the same with transgender. I mean, what else do I use? I mean, I assume that transgender means having a psychological gender different from the bodily gender, at least at birth.
I actually prefer the term "transgender" to "transexual". In my opinion, transexual sounds too sexual and doesn't sit comfortably in my head. But that's just me! The rest of you are free to apply whatever terms you like to yourself :)
This topic bothers me because some of my close aquaintances are very comfortable, and live unique lives as pangender, or gender fluid. And I routinely visit with at least a dozen wonderful pre-hrt individuals in the SF bay area who may never be able to overcome their social and emotional fears of transition. I worry for some of those individuals, and I'm happy and proud to be included under their umbrella. So I use the term Transgender freely to explain why I stand in a larger group with those friends.
However, I personally identify as Transsexual, and I use that term to explain my current life path. I'm not sure what term will be comfortable for me in a post op world. But I damn well don't want people judging me on a description, or demeaning me for making a descriptive choice. After all I had only one choice when I started transition, and that was life or death. I chose to live, and so don't tell me what to call myself, or what terms my friends should use.
It's that simple for me girls. I'm sorry to vent on this.
K
I often use "Trans" in conversation with cis folks.
It is more of a blanket term, less specific, but it doesn't plant sex or gender in the mind. Gender is preferable to sexual, but it still seems to plant genitals in the mind of a person who hears the term.
I actually prefer the word when talking about my condition. I don't feel like the term transsexual completely fits my situation. Sure, I've transitioned and am legally male and all that, but I kept my genitals so I don't feel I have really 'trans-ed my sex'. I'm more of a hybrid now (no offense to anyone in a similar situation who doesn't feel that way). I think the term transsexual puts images of genital surgery in people's minds and that's not accurate in my case.
That said, it's not like I wear the term transgender. I just use it when talking about my condition. I really don't see the point in dropping the term or the term 'transsexual' if that fits someone best. People say 'I'm not trans, I'm a woman' or 'I'm not trans, I'm a man'. Well, of course you are. So am I. The two aren't mutually exclusive. No one's saying one has to describe themselves as a trans man or woman. But to be honest, whenever someone who has transitioned vehemently insists that they are 'not trans OMG', it gives off an air of poor self-acceptance. Yes, you are 'just a man' or 'just a woman' but if you have transitioned, you are also trans. Doesn't mean you have to wear the label.
Quote from: Mogu on December 19, 2013, 07:15:18 AM
Huh. Homosexual, heterosexual, bisexual, pansexual etc. are all descriptive scientific terms. I think.
I assume the same with transgender. I mean, what else do I use? I mean, I assume that transgender means having a psychological gender different from the bodily gender, at least at birth.
Ah but that's where it actually gets a little tricky because you see it doesn't always completely mean that.
For one reason, someone decided to try to include intersex people - now we don't necessarily have a "problem with our gender", its just that by and large we see ourselves as being free to as it were pick and mix... seeing as how that's kind of how biology made us.
Add to that the people who like me were not only intersex, but had accepting families who were cool with our exploration and I can honestly say that although my gender and physical sex has altered since birth I have never had a problem with it because it just all happened quite easily... and so at any given time I was in a comfortable place, albeit not always the same place...
Now I eventually settled down as female after starting androgynous, then growing up mostly female, back to androgyny, then trying being male, back to androgyny, and then finally following genital surgery permanently back to female... some people however never settle down, and good luck to them. It doesn't follow that are unhappy with their gender.
So in fact you've just very neatly demonstrated my point. The term is now so diverse that almost anything you could assume might be a defining feature will have some members of the group who don't exhibit that characteristic. Whereas for example all bisexual people (and I am one) have the ability to be attracted to men and/or women. So that group easily and tightly defined.
I've now lived for over 90% of my life as a female of one sort or another, and at all times I have been comfortable with where I was at - so to me my experience fits best as a kind of "special case" of cis - but technically simply the fact that I have divergent chromosomes from my phenotype would, in the eyes of some, force me into the transgender label. My point is simply that whilst I accept that is what some would contend, I don't think it fits, and I'm sure there are others who feel similarly for other equally valid reasons.
Thus my thesis is that while there is absolutely nothing wrong with any form of gender expression or divergence, we need a few terms which are more tightly defined. Even diabetes, which Cindy mentioned as an example of a valid medical label, has two variants, type 1 and a type 2...
And to pick up FA's comment which was posted while I wrote... just because one doesn't feel that the label is helpful does not always mean rejection - sometimes a cake is just a cake... in other words sometimes its genuinely just means that the label does not helpfully describe the process by which we got to where-ever we are, no more.
Quote from: Doctorwho? on December 19, 2013, 12:20:28 PM
And to pick up FA's comment which was posted while I wrote... just because one doesn't feel that the label is helpful does not always mean rejection - sometimes a cake is just a cake... in other words sometimes its genuinely just means that the label does not helpfully describe the process by which we got to where-ever we are, no more.
That comment wasn't directed at anyone or any post in particular. I just wanted to point out that there is a difference between 'identifying' as something and denying it. There's also a difference between saying 'I don't feel like that term adequately describes my situation' and 'I'm Not Trans ZOMG'. Not saying you or anyone in this thread was necessarily saying that.
Good point, OC.
Just to chime in, I believe labeling yourself as homosexual, bisexual, transgender, etc is for your own sake, for your own convenience. For me a label is something that is just handy to have depending on the situation. I personally label myself as queer as it can best describe my gender and sexuality but I only use that within the community and those who know me best. Depending on the context will depend on what I say. One moment I'll say I'm queer or transgender, btw I don't really consider myself part of the gender binary, and the next to a different group I'll just say I'm a woman. I just think labels should just really be used lightly and for convenience.
The issue I am dealing with is less about gender than my sex/body/being and that is why I don't like using the term for myself. If simply being feminine was all I had to do to be comfortable and feel authentic, my life would be 100% simpler.
I also don't like the term transsexual though because it implies it has something to do with sexuality. If I have to use an adjective to describe this part of my history it would just simply be trans, as in "trans woman," with the space, like you would with other adjectives, e.g., white woman or tall woman. It's a convenient shortcut for some conversations, but I usually do just prefer not talking about it with the outside world though.
I thank everybody I think I understand better
Quote from: Orange Creamsicle on December 19, 2013, 02:13:16 PM
Just grasping at straws or playing devils advocate here but someone could identify as bisexual and not be attracted to men. Bi just implies 2, not specifically that the 2 are male and female. Any two genders could be implied.
I'm not sure if this is in response to my point or not, but if so, I don't think sexual orientation makes a good comparison. Someone going through a transition (physically and legally) to a sex or gender opposite to what they were assigned at birth and then denying they are trans is a lot different to someone talking about sexual orientation. There's a physical, tangible difference there. Someone who was assigned a different sex at birth who once possessed the genitals and other physical characteristics of that sex and physically and legally transitioned to another sex/gender and then making the statement that they are NOT trans* - is more in line with denying other physical traits than behaviors or internal attractions such as sex orientation.
Someone who went through physical and legal transition like the rest of us actively and vehemently denying they are trans to other trans people is more akin to denying one's race to other members of that race.
Ok - all my ancestors are European and my skin is lily white, whiter than this copy paper next to me. I burn quickly in the sun and have a very hard time getting a tan. In the sun my skin sparkles like white marble. But I'm going to go in a space with a bunch of white people and declare that I'm not white. I have this burning need for all these other white people to know I'm NOT white. I am NOT like them.
I may cite the fact that my grandfather came from the Ukraine and at the time it was part of the USSR and so, I am not completely European. See? I'm not white. Or perhaps I have a very distant ancestor from Ethiopia (I don't but for argument's sake). See? I'm not white even though my skin is very much white and I look like the rest of you, I need to make the point while I'm with you that I am NOT white and NOT one of you.
Or I may count the fact that I grew up poor and in an inner city neighborhood (not entirely true, but again for argument's sake) as 'proof' that I did not have the same experiences as other white people and so this means I am not white.
This is the kind of thing I hear when a trans person comes on here trying to make it very clear they are not one of us.
Nobody 'identifies' as white. Have you ever heard someone identifying as white? No one lets 'being white' define them. And yet, how ludicrous would it be for a blond, blue-eyed, lily white person with all white European ancestors to deny it? There is a big difference between letting a personal characteristic define you and actively denying it to other persons sharing that characteristic.
Oh wait - my folks let me wear pants and pretend I was a boy as a child and well after transition (after hitting middle age) I was diagnosed with a very minor intersex condition - so all you poor trans folks need to know that I am NOT one of you. Even though I went through a female puberty (and even though my physical appearance shows clear signs of having gone through it) and had the same surgeries and hormone treatments you had and was assigned the wrong sex at birth and everything I am not one of you! I am cis! I am 'NON_TG!'
Thank you for that, FA. I pretty much feel the same way. And I have known at least one person that denied being white... it was rather annoying. >_>
Quote from: FA on December 19, 2013, 04:30:22 PM
I'm not sure if this is in response to my point or not, but if so, I don't think sexual orientation makes a good comparison. Someone going through a transition (physically and legally) to a sex or gender opposite to what they were assigned at birth and then denying they are trans is a lot different to someone talking about sexual orientation. There's a physical, tangible difference there. Someone who was assigned a different sex at birth who once possessed the genitals and other physical characteristics of that sex and physically and legally transitioned to another sex/gender and then making the statement that they are NOT trans* - is more in line with denying other physical traits than behaviors or internal attractions such as sex orientation.
Someone who went through physical and legal transition like the rest of us actively and vehemently denying they are trans to other trans people is more akin to denying one's race to other members of that race.
Ok - all my ancestors are European and my skin is lily white, whiter than this copy paper next to me. I burn quickly in the sun and have a very hard time getting a tan. In the sun my skin sparkles like white marble. But I'm going to go in a space with a bunch of white people and declare that I'm not white. I have this burning need for all these other white people to know I'm NOT white. I am NOT like them.
I may cite the fact that my grandfather came from the Ukraine and at the time it was part of the USSR and so, I am not completely European. See? I'm not white. Or perhaps I have a very distant ancestor from Ethiopia (I don't but for argument's sake). See? I'm not white even though my skin is very much white and I look like the rest of you, I need to make the point while I'm with you that I am NOT white and NOT one of you.
Or I may count the fact that I grew up poor and in an inner city neighborhood (not entirely true, but again for argument's sake) as 'proof' that I did not have the same experiences as other white people and so this means I am not white.
This is the kind of thing I hear when a trans person comes on here trying to make it very clear they are not one of us.
Nobody 'identifies' as white. Have you ever heard someone identifying as white? No one lets 'being white' define them. And yet, how ludicrous would it be for a blond, blue-eyed, lily white person with all white European ancestors to deny it? There is a big difference between letting a personal characteristic define you and actively denying it to other persons sharing that characteristic.
Oh wait - my folks let me wear pants and pretend I was a boy as a child and well after transition (after hitting middle age) I was diagnosed with a very minor intersex condition - so all you poor trans folks need to know that I am NOT one of you. Even though I went through a female puberty (and even though my physical appearance shows clear signs of having gone through it) and had the same surgeries and hormone treatments you had and was assigned the wrong sex at birth and everything I am not one of you! I am cis! I am 'NON_TG!'
I don't mean to speak for anybody, and i might get this wrong, but I think the 'I'm not trans' thing comes from the idea that they feel the prefix trans (which means go across or something like that) doesn't apply to them anymore because they have finished crossing over.
I guess that is one way to look at it, for me though, tense doesn't matter. If you ever had to cross, or if you will one day get there, or if you feel like you should but don't know if you can—past present, future– if crossing over the gender/sex divide is part of your situation,"trans" applies to you. Just my opinion though, people can call themselves whatever they want as far as I'm concerned.
When somebody feels like they are better than you because of whatever specific category they fall into, that is just their tendency toward tribalism speaking. Tribalism is wired into our dna, it causes so many problems, and I kind of hate it, but it is part of our nature. Sometimes, though, people just come across like they think they are better than you, but don't actually feel superior. That is where we need to mind our words and be careful how we phrase things, also for the listener, try not to project your insecurities on what somebody else says. Look for context and try to actually understand the meaning of the message.
Quote from: Jen on December 19, 2013, 05:00:14 PM
I don't mean to speak for anybody, and i might get this wrong, but I think the 'I'm not trans' thing comes from the idea that they feel the prefix trans (which means go across or something like that) doesn't apply to them anymore because they have finished crossing over.
I guess that is one way to look at it, for me though, tense doesn't matter. If you ever had to cross, or if you will one day get there, or if you feel like you should but don't know if you can—past present, future– if crossing over the gender/sex divide is part of your situation,"trans" applies to you. Just my opinion though, people can call themselves whatever they want as far as I'm concerned.
When somebody feels like they are better than you because of whatever specific category they fall into, that is just their tendency toward tribalism speaking. Tribalism is wired into our dna, it causes so many problems, and I kind of hate it, but it is part of our nature. Sometimes, though, people just come across like they think they are better than you, but don't actually feel superior. That is where we need to mind our words and be careful how we phrase things, also for the listener, try not to project your insecurities on what somebody else says. Look for context and try to actually understand the meaning of the message.
I'm not against anyone wanting to leave the past (and the term) behind. But like I said, there is a difference between not letting a label define you and actively denying a label which is a physical fact.
*I'm not talking about people who are stealth refusing to tell, wanting privacy, etc, but people who have gone through transition denying they are trans in trans spaces .
Gotcha :)
Quote from: Ashey on December 19, 2013, 04:48:44 PM
Thank you for that, FA. I pretty much feel the same way. And I have known at least one person that denied being white... it was rather annoying. >_>
I'm not sure if the "white" thing is a dig at my earlier post where I said I don't like being called white. I'm not denying my European ancestry. I'm proud of it. My ancestors came from north western Europe, and have we have rich cultural traditions. Being called "white" is a term that lumps a truly enormous portion of human kind together for no reason or purpose other than lazy simplicity. Its like taking the peoples of Mongolia, China, India, Japan, Korea, Indonesia, Laos, Thailand etc and saying they're all "yellow"
We don't do that, because it is stupid and offensive.Its offensive because its unreasonable to lump all of those cultures, histories, languages together with a contrived label of "sameness"
Its offensive because its a term that is being applied by others, to lump a group together that occasionally bare passing similarities.
Its offensive because it denies an individuals right to their individuality.
Quote from: Isabelle on December 19, 2013, 05:27:08 PM
Quote from: Ashey on December 19, 2013, 04:48:44 PM
Thank you for that, FA. I pretty much feel the same way. And I have known at least one person that denied being white... it was rather annoying. >_>
I'm not sure if the "white" thing is a dig at my earlier post where I said I don't like being called white. I'm not denying my European ancestry. I'm proud of it. My ancestors came from north western Europe, and have we have rich cultural traditions. Being called "white" is a term that lumps a truly enormous portion of human kind together for no reason or purpose other than lazy simplicity. Its like taking the peoples of Mongolia, China, India, Japan, Korea, Indonesia, Laos, Thailand etc and saying they're all "yellow" We don't do that, because it is stupid and offensive.
Not at all hon. I didn't even see that post. :)
Quote from: FA on December 19, 2013, 05:14:37 PM
there is a difference between not letting a label define you and actively denying a label which is a physical fact.
The problem -ro at least my problem- is that the labels do not make sense at all...
transgender is an umbrella term for so many life-styles, and so I refuse to label myself with it..
transsexual is an old medical term that is well... incorrect.... unless we are referring to the brain..get my drift?
so that leaves me with the old GID which is a diagnosis... should I define myself as : "Hi, I am Peky, I have GID" ?
So, that just lives me with the "I am a female, period." I define myself as just miss-gendered!
Quote from: peky on December 19, 2013, 05:30:58 PM
Quote from: FA on December 19, 2013, 05:14:37 PM
there is a difference between not letting a label define you and actively denying a label which is a physical fact.
The problem -ro at least my problem- is that the labels do not make sense at all...
transgender is an umbrella term for so many life-styles, and so I refuse to label myself with it..
transsexual is an old medical term that is well... incorrect.... unless we are referring to the brain..get my drift?
so that leaves me with the old GID which is a diagnosis... should I define myself as : "Hi, I am Peky, I have GID" ?
So, that just lives me with the "I am a female, period." I define myself as just miss-gendered!
I'm more getting at the fact that there's a difference between not identifying as trans (not letting or feeling like the term defines you or your situation) and actively denying and proclaiming one is not 'one of us' to other trans people.
Quote from: Jen on December 19, 2013, 05:00:14 PM
I don't mean to speak for anybody, and i might get this wrong, but I think the 'I'm not trans' thing comes from the idea that they feel the prefix trans (which means go across or something like that) doesn't apply to them anymore because they have finished crossing over.
I guess that is one way to look at it, for me though, tense doesn't matter. If you ever had to cross, or if you will one day get there, or if you feel like you should but don't know if you can—past present, future– if crossing over the gender/sex divide is part of your situation,"trans" applies to you. Just my opinion though, people can call themselves whatever they want as far as I'm concerned.
When somebody feels like they are better than you because of whatever specific category they fall into, that is just their tendency toward tribalism speaking. Tribalism is wired into our dna, it causes so many problems, and I kind of hate it, but it is part of our nature. Sometimes, though, people just come across like they think they are better than you, but don't actually feel superior. That is where we need to mind our words and be careful how we phrase things, also for the listener, try not to project your insecurities on what somebody else says. Look for context and try to actually understand the meaning of the message.
This ^^ particularly the last bit... For example my refusal of the label has everything to do with the context on my life. I'm working in a scientific and clinical context where its important to get as precise a diagnosis as possible, and so general catch all terms just won't do. I need greater precision... So its certainly not a case of any sort of superiority, rather a search for language which accurately and clearly conveys my experience of life.
Oh and I don't deny having changed my physical sex, but again the idea of transition doesn't seem to cover the experience very well... I would describe my life experience as more of a gender evolution...
Ultimately the only things which really changed were my genitalia (and they aren't really anyone's business but me and my lovers,) and my visual style. As far as my "gender," as in the soft presentation of my personality, is concerned I don't think that really changed all that much if at all.
I kind of evolved it, emphasizing different aspects of myself, as I moved through the various phases of my life, but the fundamentals have always remained the same. I was playing around in a very small notional space which exists between total androgyny, a soft and sensitive man, and a practical down to earth woman... They really are only different shades of the same thing. To use a colour analogy one is blueish purple, one is and purple purple and the other is pinkish purple - but they are all purple!!
Now forgive me but this seems to me to be at least qualitatively different from someone who, for example transitions from blue all the way to pink, if you get my drift...
Anyway I think we are all more or less on the same page here...
QuoteSometimes, though, people just come across like they think they are better than you, but don't actually feel superior. That is where we need to mind our words and be careful how we phrase things, also for the listener, try not to project your insecurities on what somebody else says. Look for context and try to actually understand the meaning of the message.
That is very well put. People on this site seem to love to get their knickers in a twist...
Transsexual itself is an umbrella term.
there's primary and secondary Transsexuals
There's Pre-ops, Post-ops, Non-ops etc
Child transitioners, teen transitioners, early transtitioners, late transitioners etc
All of these terms describe unique experiences. We have different words for these things, because they mean different things.
I simply feel that umbrella fits my experience better than the much more broad "transgender" umbrella
I'm a woman with a transsexual past.
Quote from: Doctorwho? on December 19, 2013, 05:35:52 PM
Quote from: Jen on December 19, 2013, 05:00:14 PM
I don't mean to speak for anybody, and i might get this wrong, but I think the 'I'm not trans' thing comes from the idea that they feel the prefix trans (which means go across or something like that) doesn't apply to them anymore because they have finished crossing over.
I guess that is one way to look at it, for me though, tense doesn't matter. If you ever had to cross, or if you will one day get there, or if you feel like you should but don't know if you can—past present, future– if crossing over the gender/sex divide is part of your situation,"trans" applies to you. Just my opinion though, people can call themselves whatever they want as far as I'm concerned.
When somebody feels like they are better than you because of whatever specific category they fall into, that is just their tendency toward tribalism speaking. Tribalism is wired into our dna, it causes so many problems, and I kind of hate it, but it is part of our nature. Sometimes, though, people just come across like they think they are better than you, but don't actually feel superior. That is where we need to mind our words and be careful how we phrase things, also for the listener, try not to project your insecurities on what somebody else says. Look for context and try to actually understand the meaning of the message.
This ^^ particularly the last bit... For example my refusal of the label has everything to do with the context on my life. I'm working in a scientific and clinical context where its important to get as precise a diagnosis as possible, and so general catch all terms just won't do. I need greater precision... So its certainly not a case of any sort of superiority, rather a search for language which accurately and clearly conveys my experience of life.
Oh and I don't deny having changed my physical sex, but again the idea of transition doesn't seem to cover the experience very well... I would describe my life experience as more of a gender evolution...
Ultimately the only things which really changed were my genitalia (and they aren't really anyone's business but me and my lovers,) and my visual style. As far as my "gender," as in the soft presentation of my personality, is concerned I don't think that really changed all that much if at all.
I kind of evolved it, emphasizing different aspects of myself, as I moved through the various phases of my life, but the fundamentals have always remained the same. I was playing around in a very small notional space which exists between total androgyny, a soft and sensitive man, and a practical down to earth woman... They really are only different shades of the same thing. To use a colour analogy one is blueish purple, one is and purple purple and the other is pinkish purple - but they are all purple!!
Now forgive me but this seems to me to be at least qualitatively different from someone who, for example transitions from blue all the way to pink, if you get my drift...
Anyway I think we are all more or less on the same page here...
What does this mean? "Non TG female"
I feel like you are misrepresenting yourself. Several posts talk about what 'you all go through' and then you talked about how medical school was 'no doubt a more significant transformation' (not exact quote, but I can find it) than 'what you all go through'. Ok, no doubt medical school is a noble and worthy endeavor and I'm not challenging that, but I find what you said pretty presumptuous. And 'you all'? like you're not one of us?
I was very excited when I saw that you had returned, only to be quickly disappointed by your attitude towards 'us'.
QuoteWhat does this mean? "Non TG female"
I feel like you are misrepresenting yourself. Several posts talk about what 'you all go through' and then you talked about how medical school was 'no doubt a more significant transformation' (not exact quote, but I can find it) than 'what you all go through'. Ok, no doubt medical school is a noble and worthy endeavor and I'm not challenging that, but I find what you said pretty presumptuous. And 'you all'? like you're not one of us?
QuoteSometimes, though, people just come across like they think they are better than you, but don't actually feel superior. That is where we need to mind our words and be careful how we phrase things, also for the listener, try not to project your insecurities on what somebody else says. Look for context and try to actually understand the meaning of the message.