Apparently this guy rushed into things and decided that since he made a mistake we all have.It seems only he gets to do it.I just thought it was funny that he did twice what many of us would kill to do once.Oh the joys of being rich and careless. The comments are amazing it's nice to see so much support from bio folks.
http://jezebel.com/5684519/man-who-had-two-sex-changes-says-they-should-be-outlawed (http://jezebel.com/5684519/man-who-had-two-sex-changes-says-they-should-be-outlawed)
Look's like someone who commented on the article had it right
Quote from: link=topic=87008.msg620357#msg620357 date=1289274866
It sounds more like this guy thought a gender reassignment surgery would change him on the inside, rather than making the outside match what was already in.
I think he's wrong, just because it didn't work out for him doesn't mean it won't for everyone. Seriously, this guy decides he isn't a woman and suddenly he forgets the struggle of what he felt before he got his surgery?! These are the kind of things that make people think we can live without transitioning and that transition is bad for us :(
Sounds like a typical richy rich that can find themselves. Just because he bought his way through the process, does not mean that is should be illegal.
He should be declared Non compos mentis, and his money put in the hands of someone who has half a brain.
Quote from: Janet Lynn on November 08, 2010, 11:33:31 PM
Sounds like a typical richy rich that can find themselves. Just because he bought his way through the process, does not mean that is should be illegal.
He should be declared Non compos mentis, and his money put in the hands of someone who has half a brain.
You said it. /high five ;D
Quote from: Janet Lynn on November 08, 2010, 11:33:31 PM
He should be declared Non compos mentis, and his money put in the hands of someone who has half a brain.
Hell to the yes.
Coming from a libertarian: hands off my body, a-hole.
Well honestly, it's clear that he didn't follow proper protocols in obtaining his SRS. He came out, began taking hormones, and had GCS/BA all in the span of a single year; saying that the system is broken is bull->-bleeped-<- when you yourself didn't actually participate. Quintessential demonstration of the importance of therapy for transgendered individuals.
Quote from: long.897 on November 09, 2010, 01:55:54 AM
Well honestly, it's clear that he didn't follow proper protocols in obtaining his SRS. He came out, began taking hormones, and had GCS/BA all in the span of a single year; saying that the system is broken is bull->-bleeped-<- when you yourself didn't actually participate. Quintessential demonstration of the importance of therapy for transgendered individuals.
Not really - in a way you are making the same mistake as kane is, and trying to apply a universal set of rules to people who are as different as chalk and cheese.
I too broke the system - but I have always been happy with the result. Forcing me though unwanted therapy would have been pointless and would merely have made me antagonistic. I, and others like me, should not be forced through a system just because there are a few idiots.
It is just as wrong to put me through needless suffering and delay to protect him. I am not him, you do not help me by protecting him. I am equally valid, I should have equal rights to treatment that meets MY need - which was at that point to get on with it after a childhood which had been largely spent in target gender anyway.
One size does NOT fit all in this world.
If anything it's actually a demonstration of two things:
1. You have to be prepared to take responsibility for you own choices in life and not try to use your mistakes as a justification for trying to do the impossible and protect people from themselves.
2. We need a proper medical diagnostic test for the condition and not all this psycho waffle which is far too easy to confuse. Brain activation pattern scanners, genetic tests etc can, and ultimately will yield the results we seek, not endless psychobabble.
In order for it to have been the wrong thing he had to lie to get through the process. That's why they make us jump through so many hoops because a sex change isn't something to do lightly. The process only works if you are honest with yourself, honest with your therapists, and honest with your doctors. So there is no reason to outlaw a process that helps the people who genuinely need it, just because someone lied to get it.
Quote from: rejennyrated on November 09, 2010, 02:17:54 AM
2. We need a proper medical diagnostic test for the condition and not all this psycho waffle which is far too easy to confuse. Brain activation pattern scanners, genetic tests etc can, and ultimately will yield the results we seek, not endless psychobabble.
I can see that being wildly unpopular.
It's the political position of the transgender community that anybody who states they feel female or male, IS female or male. And that there is no such thing as transgender people who are 'more real' than others.
The problem is I highly highly doubt that is actually true (and I'm not outright saying it is or it isn't.... because of course the very existence of this political position is evident in the prohibition on this forum from making any comments to that effect).
Psychobabble solves the political problems science would likely raise.
Quote from: Ashley4214 on November 09, 2010, 02:37:59 AM
I can see that being wildly unpopular.
It's the political position of the transgender community that anybody who states they feel female or male, IS female or male. And that there is no such thing as transgender people who are 'more real' than others.
The problem is I highly highly doubt that is actually true (and I'm not outright saying it is or it isn't.... because of course the very existence of this political position is evident in the prohibition on this forum from making any comments to that effect).
Psychobabble solves the political problems science would likely raise.
I suspect that with hopefully no exceptions a valid test would validate anyone who was being truthful in their responses, because as Susan says, if you are not lying to get what you want then you should not be stopped from having it!
This isn't about elitism. Its about establishing truthfulness.
Basically if you take the view that people are what they say they are then you also have to accept that some will either delude themselves or they will outright lie to get it.
Personally I don't give a monkeys if someone does that and ruins their life, but I DO care very much if such people then create a backlash amongst Cis people and thus result in the many for whom this treatment is a life saver, being needlessly and wrongly obstructed.
My view is that the treatment should be easier to obtain, not ever more difficult as is the current trend.
When I went through RLE was one year, only one signature was require for surgery and hormones were routinely prescribed on informed consent. Since then the path has become progressively more difficult to the point where I KNOW I would not have made it under the current system.
I also KNOW that the treatment was right for me and after nearly 30 years I really don't think anyone has the right to question that - therefore I think that I have a basis for saying that the current system is flawed and needs a better system of diagnosis.
That isn't elitist. It's just fact. If your current diagnostic system drives many people who would benefit from surgery, to suicide because they can't get it, and allows others who are self deluded like Kane, to access it, then that system is clearly flawed. Period!
lols!
Congratulations Charles Kane:
(https://www.susans.org/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fmedia-files.gather.com%2Fimages%2Fd53%2Fd860%2Fd745%2Fd224%2Fd96%2Ff3%2Ffull.jpg&hash=529508e3f4fc266a2fab67f8272c3ee8bf8948ae)
Not that it's anywhere close to comparable, but...
"OMG, I wanted to get an amazing tattoo, but it turned out I didn't want Tweety Bird inked on my back so I had to have it removed! TATTOOS SHOULD BE ILLEGAL, LOLZ!"
What kind of logical flatulence would lead one to advocate restricting others' life decisions because of one's own bad judgment?
Jenny - the problem is that any diagnostic test has a nonzero rate of both false positives and false negatives. There's no such thing as a perfect test. Even ones you'd think would be simple and definitive - bacterial cultures, blood tests for chemical concentrations - fail sometimes. Remote imaging tests (CT, MRI, X-ray), which are what we'd almost certainly need to rely on if brain structures were found to be the determining factor, have much higher failure rates. Complex conditions involving a number of different structures are easy to miss or misdiagnose. And if there were a genetic test, there'd the the issue that there are often quite a few different gene variants or combinations thereof that produce the same condition; we couldn't ever be certain that we'd identified them all.
Would it be nice to have a lab test that could help confirm a clinical diagnosis? Sure it would. But I'd hate to see it used as the definitive diagnostic tool. Measuring, say, patients' BSTc to determine their brain sex might work really well...but then, measuring infants' penis/clitoris to determine their sex works pretty damn well too. "Good" isn't the same as "infallible."
Quote from: kyril on November 09, 2010, 03:30:59 AM
Jenny - the problem is that any diagnostic test has a nonzero rate of both false positives and false negatives. There's no such thing as a perfect test. Even ones you'd think would be simple and definitive - bacterial cultures, blood tests for chemical concentrations - fail sometimes. Remote imaging tests (CT, MRI, X-ray), which are what we'd almost certainly need to rely on if brain structures were found to be the determining factor, have much higher failure rates. Complex conditions involving a number of different structures are easy to miss or misdiagnose. And if there were a genetic test, there'd the the issue that there are often quite a few different gene variants or combinations thereof that produce the same condition; we couldn't ever be certain that we'd identified them all.
Would it be nice to have a lab test that could help confirm a clinical diagnosis? Sure it would. But I'd hate to see it used as the definitive diagnostic tool. Measuring, say, patients' BSTc to determine their brain sex might work really well...but then, measuring infants' penis/clitoris to determine their sex works pretty damn well too. "Good" isn't the same as "infallible."
Fair point Kyril. There is no such thing as perfection, but in that case I would rather see a hundred Kanes allowed to ruin their own lives by their own decisions than one person commit suicide because a therapist wrongly obstructed them.
My problem was that my first "therapist" in 1976/77 decided that as I was only 16 going on 17 it was his job to "protect me from myself" and thus he lost me the golden chance to avoid all of the pain that goes with this situation. As I was PAIS I was a late developer and by 16 I had not gone through any real puberty... If I had transitioned and begun HRT then I would not have needed any electrolysis for a start.
That is why when I went for my second try in my early twenties I was absolutely determined to bust the system and avoid therapy delays completely. Thankfully I did. These days I might not have done and I find it frightening to think that I might not have survived. Trouble is, for every one like kane, there are several like me, but somehow the gutter press and many of the cis public don't seem so keen to acknowledge that statistic.
Instead they want to use the ONE failure as a justification to put the rest of us through prolonged and ever harsher pain. :(
The underlying truth is that either a person must take responsibility for their own actions or we accept that it is okay to let someone else make the decisions for us. (I know where I stand!)
A sane and reasonable person will do anything and everything they can to ensure they are making the right decision when the consequences are as massive as this one.
In the "old days" that is exactly how things worked - you made your decision and "the doctors" simply assessed your capability of making an informed and considered decision - they did not make the decision for you. I was "assessed" in one day, in about 4 hours of interviews, and the result was support for 'whatever course I chose' and that was it.
(In fairness, I had chosen my path years earlier and was always pushing 'the leading edge' so I would have done what I did no matter what the shrinks said.)
This guy is a fruit cake.
He actually looked stunning as a woman but he obviously has a psychiatric issue.
There is always one in every group.
Caroline
He/She/He is a uber-selabriity-sensationalist chasing tw#t!! >:-)
And comes to media attention every few years or so, when he gets yet another film company to shadow his dubious life story....
The last movie of his I glimpsed briefly had him buying a super-yacht which he tried to pilot down the estuary and made a real hash of.... he then never visited the boat again...
And tried to sue all involved....
Kane obviously has the attention-span of a gnat.... and is a serial sensation seeker.... on that score I feel very, very sorry for his third or is it his fourth decades his junior wife?
And it just goes to prove kids money cannot buy you happiness... if a restless soul you be....lol
if only there was a surgery that could turn a persons arrogance and ego into a brain.
I mean seriously you mangle yourself because your an idiot and don't go for the proper psychological checks, pay private doctors over £100,000 to say whatever you want to hear, Then guess who's fault it is... Of course it's not his. It's the medical community! and the Trans community and anyone else as long as he doesn't have to take responsibility he is like the worst stereotype of a wealthy individual.
I'd feel sorry for what his mistake had put himself through and pain he'd suffered... if he was human enough to empathize with.
Seriously why is that moron trusted with money he couldn't be trusted with a spoon.
I cannot believe he went through the real life experience without having doubts and if so, why did his therapist not spot it. I am aware of cases where people change their mind but that is prior to surgery.
A hint of caution. This article appears in the Daily Mail, the house journal of the British equivalent to the Tea Party!
I don't believe this story. There are just too many anomolies. I suspect an agenda, frankly.
This is something this guy is reported as saying, as reported in a BBC News article:
Quote"When I was in the psychiatric hospital there was a man on one side of me who thought he was King George and another guy on the other side who thought he was Jesus Christ. I decided I was Sam."
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/6923912.stm (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/6923912.stm)
I'm trained in psychiatry. This is utter nonsence. The sort of thing that would be written in some trashy book in the early part of the last century. It was a done in an attempt to explain the symptoms of people who suffer from depersonalisation which happened post WW1 quite a bit. But the symptoms are never as frank as that.
This guy claimed that his mental illness came as a result of his divorce and alienation from his family. Yet if he was alienated from his family, he must have been a pretty bad sort. In any case, to suffer a complete depersonalisation crisis from divorce, he would have had to have had a pretty weak personality in the first place. He clearly didn't since he was a property developer with connections with the ME.
But, even assuming he did suffer a depersonalisation crisis. he would definately have been precluded from gender reassingment surgery. Simply because any conscent he would give would be completely invalid.
But as I said, this seems to be part of an agenda. And a pretty flawed one at that.
He hated the way female hormones made him moody and emotional. Shopping bored him and sex was a disappointment.
Well... that should've been a big tip off right there. :D
Lynn Conway wrote some stuff about Charles in this page:
http://ai.eecs.umich.edu/people/conway/TS/Warning.html (http://ai.eecs.umich.edu/people/conway/TS/Warning.html)
Basically, according to these informations, he made a gender change cause he thought life as a woman would be easier, shopping all the time spending your husband's money, getting doors opened for you etc. instead of having so much responsability like needing to provide money for your family. Or something like that. I must add that the marriage he was in at that time was very traditional, and he seemed to be somewhat clueless about what a woman's life is like outside of his millionaire circles, where trophy wives, whose lives are not very representative for women's lives in general, abound.
I don't like the fact that he over-generalizes at our costs, don't think he is/was a very mature personality and doubt if he tells the truth about the details of his transition and detransition. However, it must have been very hard for him to find out that he had just messed with his body without any need, and that he had ended in a situation comparable to an FTM's situation before/without transition. And him being in the media? Maybe because he seeks attention, maybe because he wants to be able to at least tell his point of view so he has at least a bit of influence on what gets reported, maybe because it does not matter as he's out anyway. We don't know.
I wish him and his fiancée good luck, a great relationship, an accepting environment and all the best for their future and the kid(s), no matter how excentric Charles may be. We shouldn't be so mean to him. He's just a guy who made a big mistake in his life and tries his best to have a decent future in spite of that mistake. And I'm sure he already got enough sh*t thrown at his face in his life, for both transitioning and detransitioning.
If you made everything illegal that people make stupid mistakes with, pretty much everything would be illegal.
What a twit!
Because it didn't work out for "him" he wants to ban it for everyone!
He did it before there were such stringent guidelines. If he had tried today he would not have gotten permission. At least not from any reputable therapists. Renee Richards had much the same to say. She too did it before WPATH.
-Sandy
He sounds like one of these morons who jumps over the restraining barriers, falls in, and then sues because they didn't protect him from his own stupidity.
He is also making the assumption that too many people make - everyone is exactly like him. Because he circumvented the system he didn't find out transition wasn't for him, so he assumes it is not for anyone and therefore should be illegal. He needs remedial lessons in compassion and logic. >:(
I see him telling his story as an attempt to justify what he did. (Maybe I need a remedial course in compassion. :()
- Kate
Ah, just wait until he goes for his next one!
But I suggest, with respect, that the intersting point is that this matter is being dredged up at all.
The original report came from 2007, backed by our UK representive of the feminist facsist movement. I susepct this may have been part of a general hoohaa over a surgeon who was diciplined by the General Medical Council because of some of the SRSs he performed,.
Now the Mail and it's eager cousin, the Telegraph, have resurected it.
Perhaps the think its more intresting than their previous campaign about foxes eating babies.
That guy is delusional but not a transsexual
We can debate this and take a look at it from all different angles and opinions, but the fact of the matter is that it is proven by the medical community (those that specialize in it at least) that HRT and GRS/SRS/GCS is a proven therapeutic method for treating GID/Gender Incongruence. A couple of nut jobs like this (isn't there also another in California?) aren't going to bring down our right to change our gender/sex. Sucessful stories way outnumber these idiots.
Quote from: girl_ashley on November 09, 2010, 12:55:32 PM
We can debate this and take a look at it from all different angles and opinions, but the fact of the matter is that it is proven by the medical community (those that specialize in it at least) that HRT and GRS/SRS/GCS is a proven therapeutic method for treating GID/Gender Incongruence. A couple of nut jobs like this (isn't there also another in California?) aren't going to bring down our right to change our gender/sex. Sucessful stories way outnumber these idiots.
It very well is a fact that the successes outweighs the failures. But the failures get the press. And they are what our detrackers point too, not that Mary Louise went on to live a productive life.
as has been said in the past;
if you are not transsexual when you start transition, you will be when you finish
Well, there you have it... Money can't buy good sense
Quote from: Susan on November 09, 2010, 02:36:52 AM
In order for it to have been the wrong thing he had to lie to get through the process. That's why they make us jump through so many hoops because a sex change isn't something to do lightly. The process only works if you are honest with yourself, honest with your therapists, and honest with your doctors. So there is no reason to outlaw a process that helps the people who genuinely need it, just because someone lied to get it.
Quote from: rejennyrated on November 09, 2010, 03:46:26 AM
That is why when I went for my second try in my early twenties I was absolutely determined to bust the system and avoid therapy delays completely.
Quote from: Northern Jane on November 09, 2010, 04:20:24 AM
A sane and reasonable person will do anything and everything they can to ensure they are making the right decision when the consequences are as massive as this one.
I think these three posts highlights the problem with the gatekeeping system. It makes people lie! And when people lie they are not in a position to freely reflect upon their choices. That's very well documented as per the quotes attached to this post.
I'd much rather remove the diagnosis entirely in favor of counselling and support perhabs in a system where one simply needs to apply twice with a one year lapse in-between: everyone who applies the second time proving that they spent time RLE i.e. through statements from their school or work place should be granted the permit. That's the only way to ensure people are in a position to be truly honest and I believe that's absolutely crucial.
I really, really want to be honest myself. I hate to lie and I think it is stupid in a process such as this, yet when the law specifically requires that I 'feel good' on hormones I cannot afford to tell about side-effects. When I know that only 8% of the applicants get a permit over here I cannot afford anything less than a perfect presentation. When I know that family issues have resulted in persons being rejected just like that how can I possible share the distress of not speeking with my mother for several months with my therapist - if instead of compassion and support - telling her will only result in rejection on top of what rejection I've faced from my mother already? Remember we are speaking about a GIC who have explicitly declared in their official program that their task is to determine whether there is any reason for them to go against sex reassignemt and that they are never able to actively recommend the procedure! Gatekeeping means that the transgender person and the therapist are working in different directions rather than collaborating on making the best decission.
In fact it's quite common over here to act for a couple of years until you're allowed your surgery permit. Only then people open up and start work towards clarification and readiness and many people drop out after they got their permits without using them. Now tell me what's the point in those years of acting then instead of being open to discussions from the beginning. It seems like a complete waste of time. In fact I'd say it's even counter productive, because many transgenders seem to need to let themselves out of a long life of acting (a different gender) to become finally free to be who they are themselves, but instead of supportting that development the gatekeepers just push them into even more acting. Sometimes even having to beat-about-the-bush on intimate issues, because they cannot afford to risk the rejection by being honest.
Now, here are the quotes:
From Standards of Care for Gender Identity Disorders:
"Belief in the true transsexual concept for males dissipated when it was realized that such patients were rarely encountered, and thatsome of the original true transsexuals had falsified their histories to make their stories match the earliest theories about the disorder." (5, s. 3).
further
"Ideally, psychotherapy is a collaborative effort. The therapist must be certain that the patient understands the concepts of eligibility and readiness, because the therapist and patient must cooperate in defining the patient's problems, and in assessing progress in dealing with them. Collaboration can prevent a stalemate between a therapist who seems needlessly withholding of a recommendation, and a patient who seems too profoundly distrusting to freely share thoughts, feelings, events, and relationships." (5, s. 12).
From Counselling and Mental Health Care for Transgender Adults and Loved Ones:
"Clinicians conducting assessment prior to initiation of hormones or surgery are in a "gatekeeper" role that involves a power dynamic which can significantly affect therapeutic rapport (Rachlin, 2002). The client often perceives the evaluation not as a desired tool to help them therapeutically determine a plan of action, but rather as a hoop that must be jumped through to reach desired goals, a frightening loss of physical and psychological autonomy, or a type of institutionalized transphobic discrimination – as psychological evaluation is not required for non-transgender individuals requesting hormones, breast augmentation, or hysterectomy (Brown & Rounsley, 1996). In BC, surgery assessors are appointed by the BC Medical Services Plan, further reducing clients' sense of choice about the assessment process.
(...)
Normalizing emotional reactions clients commonly have (e.g., anger, anxiety, fear) and also the common behaviours (e.g., trying to tell the assessor what the client thinks they want to hear, being belligerent/uncooperative, being manipulative) helps frame this as a systems issue rather than a personal power struggle. Discussion about what the assessment process involves (discussed in the next section) is imperative as client anxiety or anger is often heightened by inaccurate understanding of the process." (7, s. 19).
Madeline H. Wyndzen, Ph. D. writes:
"At one time you couldn't transition if you weren't completely 'homosexual' because *obviously* a 'real' female is completely heterosexual. As transsexuals discovered this bias, they lied in order to get surgery. Fortunately today most gender clinics accept sexual orientation and gender identity are distinct." (32).
Yolanda LS Smith, Ph. D. states:
"In most SR applicants the motivation for engaging in psychotherapy is very low. For some because they expect that all their problems will disappear after obtaining SR. Others do not confide in the therapist because they, sometimes correctly, expect to be denied SR, when they are open about their problems."
[Smith, YLS. Sex Reassignment: Predictors and Outcomes of Treatment for Transsexuals. Universiteit Utrecht, 2002. s. 23. URL: : http://igitur-archive.library.uu.nl/dissertations/2002-0808-103443/inhoud.htm (http://igitur-archive.library.uu.nl/dissertations/2002-0808-103443/inhoud.htm)]
Anne Lawrence, Ph. D. declares:
"postoperatively collected data may be more accurate in some ways than data collected preoperatively, because it is less likely to be distorted by selective reporting or deliberate dissimulation, which transsexuals sometimes believe are required in order to obtain surgery (Lawrence, 1997; Walworth, 1997)" [Lawrence, AA. Factors associated with satisfaction or regret following male-to-female sex reassignment surgery. Archives of Sexual Behavior, Vol 32, 2003. pp. 299–315.] (s. 312).
Johnsson and Wasserzug writes in a study:
"Cohen-Kettenis and Pfafflin noted that such individuals ''seek contact with medical professionals to have surgical or chemical castration only.'' What Cohen-Kettenis and Pfafflin did not emphasize was the difficulty that these men face given the available diagnoses in the DSM-IV. Many fit the GID-Not Otherwise Specified (GID-NOS) diagnosis in the DSM. However, it is our experience that an ''NOS'' GID is sufficiently vague that it is more of an obstacle than an aid in obtaining a referral for an orchiectomy in most parts of the Western world. In many places, it will not get them access to hormones either. This leaves the individuals two options: they can lie about the nature of their GID and claim that they are male-to-female (MtF) transsexuals in order to obtain hormones or an orchiectomy, or they can go outside of the established medical system for treatment." (30).
Jay Prosser writes in an antology of transsexuals:
"In effect, to be transsexual, the subject must be a skilled narrator of his or her own life. Tell the story persuasively, and you're likely to get your hormones and surgery" [Prosser, Jay. Scond Skins: The Body Narratives of Transsexuality, 1998.].
Judith Butler writes:
"one has to be gauged against measures of normalcy; and one has to pass the test. (...) The price of using the diagnosis to get what one wants is that one cannot use the language to say what one really thinks is true. One pays for one's freedom" [Butler, J. Undoing Gender, Routledge, New York and London, 2004. s. 91].
From a wikipedia-article:
"Legal needs such as a change of sex on legal documents, and medical needs, such as sex reassignment surgery, are usually impossible to obtain without a doctor and/or therapist's approval. Due to this, many transsexual people feel coerced into affirming pre-ordained symptoms of self-loathing, impotence, and sexual-preference, in order to overcome simple legal and medical hurdles. (Brown 107) Transsexual people who do not submit to this medical hierarchy typically face the option of remaining invisible, with limited legal options and, possibly, with identification documents incongruent with gender presentation."
[Sex reassignment therapy I: Wikipedia, 27. maj 2010. URL: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gender_reassignment_therapy (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gender_reassignment_therapy)]
Marissa Dainton was quoted in The Guardian:
"Dainton says patients encourage each other purposely to avoid discussing issues that might hold up their treatment. "Most people who go to psychiatrists with a view to changing gender have actually researched and know a lot of the things they should say - and some of the things they should stay clear of."
[Batty D. Mistaken identity. The Guardian, Saturday 31 July 2004. URL: http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2004/jul/31/health.socialcare (http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2004/jul/31/health.socialcare)]
Tippe
Quote from: Fencesitter on November 09, 2010, 10:00:45 AM
I don't like the fact that he over-generalizes at our costs, don't think he is/was a very mature personality and doubt if he tells the truth about the details of his transition and detransition. However, it must have been very hard for him to find out that he had just messed with his body without any need, and that he had ended in a situation comparable to an FTM's situation before/without transition. And him being in the media? Maybe because he seeks attention, maybe because he wants to be able to at least tell his point of view so he has at least a bit of influence on what gets reported, maybe because it does not matter as he's out anyway. We don't know.
I wish him and his fiancée good luck, a great relationship, an accepting environment and all the best for their future and the kid(s), no matter how excentric Charles may be. We shouldn't be so mean to him. He's just a guy who made a big mistake in his life and tries his best to have a decent future in spite of that mistake. And I'm sure he already got enough sh*t thrown at his face in his life, for both transitioning and detransitioning.
Fencesitter, I greatly agree with a lot of your post. I just believe that his thoughts that no one should be able to transition due to his mistake is stupid and insensitive on his part. Maybe I read into it too much but from the article I got the impression that he believes that he messed up, so no one should ever be able to transition because they will be making a mistake. Which obviously we know is not true.
Quote from: Janet Lynn on November 09, 2010, 01:16:16 PM
It very well is a fact that the successes outweighs the failures. But the failures get the press. And they are what our detrackers point too, not that Mary Louise went on to live a productive life.
My EXACT point from another thread. Thank you.
Quote from: Michael Alexander on November 09, 2010, 02:53:35 PM
Fencesitter, I greatly agree with a lot of your post. I just believe that his thoughts that no one should be able to transition due to his mistake is stupid and insensitive on his part. Maybe I read into it too much but from the article I got the impression that he believes that he messed up, so no one should ever be able to transition because they will be making a mistake. Which obviously we know is not true.
Agree with you, that's exactly how I read it too. But I don't see a big problem here. Charles is entitled to have his own opinions, even if he tells bull->-bleeped-<-. I don't wish him any bad for that. Lots of people have lots of stupid opinions.
Moreover, he seems to have obvious problems with taking responsability, which might have the effect that his claims will not get taken for serious. As long as he doesn't use his money to force his convictions upon decision-makers, he will be less of a danger for us than any one of those "specialists" which we can really consider to be our enemies. Or than the press that supports his convictions and uses him as a pawn here.
I just ask for a little more respect for him as a human being than has been shown in this thread altogether. For some of the postings, I wonder, if people met him in real life, would they say this to his face? Even if they don't like him? We also ask for respect for our transitions.
Quote from: Tippe on November 09, 2010, 02:52:09 PM
I think these three posts highlights the problem with the gatekeeping system. It makes people lie! And when people lie they are not in a position to freely reflect upon their choices. That's very well documented as per the quotes attached to this post.
err no actually. Counseling would have probably made me lie. As it was I never told a lie, I just avoided the whole irrelevant counseling industry by finding someone who was prepared to believe what I said and let me take responsibility for my own decisions.
That's always been the way I do business. I am the captain of my ship and if anyone doesn't like it they can always get off and swim with my blessing!
I reflected very hard and
freely but without the encumbrance of a counselor who would almost certainly have been less well educated, less intelligent and less flexible of mind than me, to hinder my thinking processes by telling me what I needed to thing say and do in order to get to where I wanted to go.
It may surprise you to hear this but I don't buy a lot of the bull that goes with current theoretical models. What I do know is that I mad a good decision and I have lived a happy life for nearly 30 years as a result, but as Sinatra would put it "I did it my way" and whats more I would unquestionably do so again.
I have seen nothing in the medical protocols and resultant outcomes for those who slavishly follow them to convince me that they are right and I was wrong.
My main point is this. We are all individuals and you can not practice text book medicine. A good doctor takes guidelines as starting points, and as mine swiftly did for me adapts them to the patient in front of them. A bad doctor, or someone of limited intelligence treats those guidelines as rules and allows no departure from the authorised method.
But with respect that is not medicine it is law!
What Tippe has pointed out is that the whole entire gatekeeping system is somewhat outdated & constricting on the choices of the transgendered individual.
I would have to agree with rejennyrated and others who say that the one size fits all method that we have does not work for everyone.
As for Kane, as many of us have already thought of him for many years now, he's just a fruit basket. If he wants to come out to the press, he should be like, "I made a mistake. Perhaps my stubbornness combined with wealth let me do what I wanted without really thinking about the consequences. As for my choices, I stand by them and I am who I am because I went through those events. I was immature not to resolve my psychological issues in a constructive way and to take the decisions of gender reassignment seriously enough."
As for the doctors, they know the system is broken at the moment. They're smart enough to understand that, but they're hesitant to make a move because of societal pressures and other factors. They probably don't want to be known as the next Harry Benjamin or the sort either.
Susan your comment is so true, becoming honest with yourself first is the most important thing that needs to happen. When your honest with yourself then you are honest with your therapist and doctors.
Quote from: Jalene E. on November 09, 2010, 05:08:46 PM
Susan your comment is so true, becoming honest with yourself first is the most important thing that needs to happen. When your honest with yourself then you are honest with your therapist and doctors.
I agree.
Ideally, the system is designed to help us find what we need. There are many conditions that may present as needing GRS but, like with Kane, surgery will
not be helpful. The professionals are there to help us be honest with ourselves and honest with them. A system that requires us to lie is broken and serves no one.
I went into therapy hoping to discover what I needed. I knew what seemed like a good idea - transition - but also knew that I could be wrong. I talked honestly about what I felt and thought. My therapist agreed I needed GRS - in fact was convinced even before I was. Perhaps I was just lucky in my therapist, but it is reassuring to me now to know that several trained professionals agreed that I need to live my life as a woman.
If I had lied to them, had surgery, and then had problems, I would have no one to blame but myself. I am sorry for any of you who are operating within a system that you think requires you to feign a scripted history. You aren't getting the help you need but are fighting against unnecessary impediments. The professionals are there to help us. It is not in anyone's interest to either prevent those who need the cure of surgery from getting it or, alternatively, to allow those who need a different 'cure' to get surgery instead and then be doubly messed up (like Kane).
- Kate
Big warnings - horribly long Fencesitter posting again. I'm sorry folks, cannot put it in less words.
Tippe,
your posting is very good and important. I gave you a "thumbs up" for that. ;)
Just let me ask you a question: which country are you referring to in your description of the "gatekeeper system"? I remember you are from Northern Europe, but I don't remember which country exactly.
And let me add a few remarks as well.
Quote from: Tippe on November 09, 2010, 02:52:09 PM
I think these three posts highlights the problem with the gatekeeping system. It makes people lie! And when people lie they are not in a position to freely reflect upon their choices. That's very well documented as per the quotes attached to this post.
Er, no. Or, at least, not necessarily. If you have to deal with a system which you find stupid and this system requests you to submit yourself to it and "be" and "identify as" a certain kind of person to get what you need or protect your human rights, you may do it and pay "lip service" to it without really buying into their ideology. I know what I'm talking about, I grew up and live in a country which got unified with a Communist country (East/West Germany). My ex-boyfriend was an East German and he told me in detail how they got along with their totalitarian regime, what they really thought about it and when they dared or did not dare to be critical of it. He was 18 when the Berlin Wall crumbled down.
And since I got into the "official ->-bleeped-<- gatekeeping system" here, it reminded me a lot of his experiences. Many East Germans developed something like a "double consciousness" or "double convictions": the 'official one', so that they did not get into trouble with the system, and the 'inofficial one', which was what they really thought. Well, East Germans had to remind themselves what their real conviction and actions were. They had a "second skin" which they had had to develop so that they could respond with the "right" answers spontanoeusly, much like addicted World of Warcraft players being the Level 32 elf in one world and the jobless person in real life. It had become so natural to them that it could sometimes even get difficult to sort their minds out about what they really thought and what was forced upon them by the Communist regime. How do you deal with this "schizophrenic" situation? Resisting to brain-washing without showing that you resisted to it?
That's exactly what happened to me with my gate-keeper as well, after he requested a 24/7 real life test of living in the "new gender role" being addressed as a guy etc. for a year without me passing as long as I had no hormones, as I did not pass before, and "it's absolutely important for diagnosis that you do it at work too so you see if you get along in your new gender role, including being addressed as a male, and it's also very important for diagnosis that you go to male toilets all the time etc."... pffft. I really had to retain myself from laughing out loud there.
And I had no chance to get any hormones subscribed before I did that (or lied to thim that I did that). Transsexuality has nothing to to with this diagnostic test as long as you don't pass. It's a hardship test then, not a test to prove whether you're transsexual or not, or whether you can live as a male or not. And I knew I'd pass after a while on hormones, and yes I do. People tend to not believe me when I tell them I was born female. Well I lied to him and developed a kind of "double consciousness" there. This effect I had was not personally against my gate-keeper, it was just the gatekeeping situation and I couldn't help it, it just happened to me. I wouldn't call that healthy though. Well and I still don't get what diagnostic miracle might come up with me going to the male instead of the female toilets though I've done it for years now. It's just ridiculous. I just went to male loos after I got thrown out of female loos often or looked at there like an intruder, that's all, and during the time when I looked ambiguous, I asked bartenders etc. to tell me where the loo is so in case of doubt, I could always say: "He/She told me...".
A kind of system which is a totalitarian regime, and, to a lesser degree, the "->-bleeped-<- gatekeeping system", produces the following reactions which can be grouped by people:1. sheep. These will follow the system blindly, be naively open about themselves and believe what the docs tell them as "doctors are the experts". And they will follow the doctors' advice on whatever step they take. Docs tend to love that as they often don't like to be in a gatekeeping position, but prefer the "helper" and advisor role. Or they love the power which comes with a "gatekeeper" role and love commanding people. Yeah, and sheeps might believe that the strict standard route is what they have to follow, which may mean they'll get more body modifications than they need to feel okay. Our German SoC don't allow for an orchidectomy without other SRS, e.g., so our public health insurance, which usually sticks to the SoC, usually only pays if you do the whole SRS thing with building a neo-vagina etc. So sheep will do the whole thing. Even if you are willing to pay it yourself, docs in Germany usually won't do an orchi. So you have to find someone abroad or an underground surgeon or do it yourself. Which is all counter-productive.
When everything goes wrong because the RLT without hormones is bull->-bleeped-<- in those cases where you don't pass well before but will pass well after... and the sheep are treated like "men in frocks", the sheep can go whine among their therapists and these can "help" and console them and get the nice feeling that they are useful as "helpers" for poor souls in a bad situation. (If the situation gets too bad, you might get refused HRT though as you don't prove that the 1 year full-time non-hormonal RLT (running around like a guy in a frock) really did you good psychologically. Yes, that's all stupid. We all know that. But it still gets propagated and requested by many many shrinks. Which is why I cannot take them serious - you gotta be pretty clueless about transsexuality to propagate this ->-bleeped-<-. Or you gotta be transphobic or against transitions and not admit it openly, but prefer to see people run into disaster than transition smoothly).
This vulnerability might probably be one of the main reasons why the non-hormonal RLT for
everybody seems to be so important according to so many "specialists" writings, at least in Germany, I think. I'm sure they love to have that role of the "big helper in distress" (distress which they provoked). Yes, it's an unhealthy dynamic, and yes, I think much of it comes from the "helper" role which some specialists love to take up. You needn't help people as much if at least their appearance seems not ridiculous any more, so it seems better to force them to ridicule themselves for a year or so before so they need you to vent and cry on your shoulders, especially if they're just ->-bleeped-<-s anyway - who cares then? Whether the sheep get through with what they tell and finally get the hormones they want after months or years of begging is a question of chance then. Anyway, by then, they may have ruined their job etc. too early, so they have less money to pay epilation. If they get hormones delayed for too long, they might finally change their therapist and become a member of one of the following groups:
2. The Subversives. That's me. These people don't confront the system directly, but try to get through it as well as they can. If they are good liars or the situations forces them to become that, they use the "double consciousness" trick of the East Germans. Often, these people have read up more shrinks' literature than the gatekeepers they deal with, or got second-hand information about it. They know exactly what the state of art is, but have also studied dated shrinks' writings as many of the gatekeepers are not up-to-date.
They know exactly what they can tell and what not, what the differential diagnoses are etc. They want to get the mones, the surgery, and will do anything to obtain them. Or at least the letter for them and then think it over, as free persons. And they know exactly what they have to say where, and what to keep from the shrinks. For them, the whole gate-keeping system is just a nuisance to jump through, pretending they do what the shrinks tell them, like dogs doing tricks to get a piece of sugar. They think it's humiliating but go with the system. They change clothes and put on their make-ups in parking lots before going to the shrinks to prove they do the "real-life test" before hormones. Most of my trans friends fall in this group, as I don't get along with sheep. Many of them impose very harsh delayal times etc. on themselves, even much harsher than our SoC are, but they don't want to get delayals imposed by shrinks.
Or, like in my case at first, as I had not much money to change my wardrobe, I bought two or three sets of distinctly male clothes which I wore for the therapy and bought and used a more and more over the following months. Remember, I had to fake a "real life test without passing" for one year to get the hormones.
My shrink even asked me if I wore male or female underwear. WTF? He was not being naughty, just wanted to know if I really felt male and dressed as a male completely, but honestly, WTF??? Well I had luck as I had always dressed completely male for all meetings just in case, incl. underwear, out of paranoia. So I pulled out a bit of my underwear from under my jeans, a few square centimeters, and told him that was male underwear and that I hoped he did not want me to make a striptease here to see all my underwear, as that would be against my human right for privacy and against therapeutic guidelines as well. Thank you.
And he said, oh god, no, and seemed kinda shocked and offended at my comment. I told him, I did not suspect him to be a peeping tom or a lurker, and my comment might have seemed rude, sure. But his question was rude as well, and I've never been asked about my underwear by anyone but my mom when I was a kid or long-term partners later on. And never asked anybody about their underwear. And it's nobody's business unless they wanna sleep with me. And I'm not in gender therapy here on my own wish, but because the Standards of Care force me to, and it's not a fashion therapy but a gender therapy. So I wanted my private life to be respected. And I did not ask him about his underwear either, so why should he ask me? That worked. :D
In spite of this, he was also satisfied - yeah, it looked like I lived completely "in my male gender role", and he scribbled down some notes on his blocknote. Like if your underwear mattered for that, or even for your gender identity (unless living your male gender role means you undress or ->-bleeped-<- around all the time). Gosh! Even if I wear fru-fru underwear in satin with flowers everywhere every single day, I'm still a guy, plus (almost) nobody sees it. (Plus male underwear doesn't sit well on me cause I lack a penis.)
They just don't know what to do of us, so they use superficial silly questions and criteria in the waste attempt to get some clues and hints, be it for themselves, be it so that they can write something down in their papers as justification for other "experts" - as gender identity cannot be proved or demonstrated in any way. No, I cannot take such an "expert" seriously, not for differential criteria, not for anything. I did not tell him all that, though. I'm a subversive person, not a rebel. However, it was really a hard struggle for me to keep my personal boundaries, not because of some personal weakness, but because of the situation. The German Standards of Care said that you had to write up the "psycho-sexual development" in detail, so he had to ask me lots of questions about masturbation, phantasies, sexual experiences with other people etc., whether he wanted or not, as it was "important for diagnosis".
And yes, I hated that. Profoundly. I don't mind telling anyone about my kinks, but not if I'm forced to. And, gosh, I had not prepared sex phantasy/activity questions for the diagnosis, so I had to improvise there - FAST!!!. What a stress... I had to invent phantasies and sexual acts which did not jeopardize any of my aims, and sounded like something a prude person might be ashamed of but were like pffft for me. I had to seem somewhat embarrassed about telling about these things, and tell him that reluctantly until he was satisfied with my "no, nothing else I could think of". Which was not difficult to achieve, I just had to remind myself that he was a gatekeeper and so, I felt uncomfortable and defensive automatically. Luckily, some things came to my mind fast.
I invented an interest for food-play. Smearing honey, peanut butter etc. on other people's genitals and licking up that mess. It's absolutely inoffensive and playful (I had tried it, but don't like it and never did), doesn't jeopardize your surgery or make them question your gender, being ashamed of it sounds credible enough, and shrinks can try to fit it into some "oral phase" nevrosis or how they call it if they are really into Freudion esoteric stuff. Though as much as I know, that does not make a good impression on Freudians for whatever reasons, but well... I needed to show enough bad sides of me he could concentrate upon if he was an adherant of these weird theories, and I preferred him to fixate on this bullsh*t than on real issues.
And I faked being horribly ashamed for telling him that I used a strap-on. And tried to seem extremely uneasy talking about it so that mentioning it did not seem like a maneuver for convincing him of my transness. As he knew that I was well aware of his gatekeeper role. However, he asked me in detail who I had used it on, males, females, and how exactly, and did they accept that? (Yeah, we bi folks can be pretty confusing here, but that's not our problem, it's yours, dear shrink. And no, using a strap-on does not necessarily mean anything about your gender identity, but you probably don't know that, dear straight shrink. In my next life, I'll give you a Sex 101 lesson.) I answered honestly, as other than the food thing, this was real. He scribbled something into his notebook, frantically. He went on asking for other practices and phantasies, so I tried to find a third whatever sex thing, and tried to gain time by telling that I did not feel at ease telling about it. Pooh, time ran out... SH*T! What could I tell him?
I don't remember exactly what I told him, but it was something boring like "Hm, I love to do hand-jobs on people and watch them come", after as much ado as possible without -hopefully- it seeming fake. Embarrassing enough for a prude, but inoffensive. He asked for details, I answered, and it was okay. After a while, he saw that I seemed to be sooo prude or embarrassed to talk about sex that he gave up. Or bought into me having no other ideas. Thanks God. Got him around my BDSM-scene, -parties and -escapades past without trouble again, and around lots of other sex phantasies, experiences etc. as well. ;D I'd maybe have told him that as a therapist, but not as a gatekeeper. And certainly not as long as I did not feel that it could be of any bad for me. Moreover, all that stuff might get into the gatekeeper's report, and from there, into other people's hands who decide about me, judges, health insurance etc. As long as I don't have the information that my judge is heavily into baby-play, dog-play, likes being whipped up or whatever..., I don't see why I should provide them any information of that kind.
There was also something which my shrink insisted on knowing, and I first refused to tell as I said he had asked me enough about sex stuff. He told me it was very important for diagnosis so he really had to know. The question was "Do you see yourself as a guy or as a woman during your sex phantasies?" So I told him what I thought sounded most suitable for an FTM (yes, I always see myself as a male in my phantasies blabla). The really honest answer would have been, e. g.: "I fancy myself as a guy who fancies himself as a woman and finds the idea to be a woman very sexy, and he masturbates as he finds it attractive to imagine he is a woman. And in his phantasies, this guys sees himself as whatever rocks the boat at the moment, with people of whatever sex." That's crazy as sh*t, but it works, and it's just my personal body dysphoria workaround as my body parts don't do it. But I was too afraid to get the hormones or surgery delayed or denied cause of that, as this answer might have been too exotic and "not found yet in literature".
3. The rebels. They can't or don't want to submit themselves to the system and often end up living a hazardous life as a prostitute or whatever rather than submit to the system, or they have enough money backed up to bypass the system, or get their hormones from the black market (which is considered as a kind of sacrilege by our shrinks, even independently from the health hazards it may cause). Or they try to get the mones prescribed without getting labelled as having an "identity disorder" which is almost impossible here etc. These people may set up a blog where they rant about the system, or even get politically active in real life. In Germany, you cannot even get a name change without 2 (!) shrinks' letters, and in practice, that doesn't work for those who can't deal with being officially labelled as having a "gender identity disorder".
However, getting to your aim most easily by lying, therefore leading a "double life" between your real life and the bull->-bleeped-<- you tell your doc, or considering what you need to keep away from the gate-keeper and what you can tell... as a person from the subvertive group... this all sucks up lots of energy, which you might have used better to question yourself instead, or to get along better with your every-day life. It's a bad and counter-productive dynamic anyway. And it poses problems as you have to keep up this Communist-regime-like double consciousness which makes it more difficult for you to come to terms with yourself and know what you REALLY are and REALLY want, and keep this apart from the gatekeepers' expectations.
------
But this gatekeeping system is even worse if you come from a background where you couldn't be open about how you really feel, who or what you really are, what you could tell whom in which situation, what you lacked or wanted without fearing harsh repressions for what you told - for things you needed, such as compassion, friends, acceptance, attention, whatever.... Which, I think, is especially difficult and can be even retraumatizing for many trans people - as this is the EXACT situation lots of us went through in childhood, teenage years and often even later. And gets repeated by a gatekeeping-system. I'm exaggerating here, but it's a bit like asking a rape victim to undress themselves in front of a bunch of doctors before they get the okay for trauma therapy.
Quote from: Tippe on November 09, 2010, 02:52:09 PM
I'd much rather remove the diagnosis entirely in favor of counselling and support perhabs in a system where one simply needs to apply twice with a one year lapse in-between: everyone who applies the second time proving that they spent time RLE i.e. through statements from their school or work place should be granted the permit. That's the only way to ensure people are in a position to be truly honest and I believe that's absolutely crucial.
Either that, or the two possibilities as alternative solutions. However, without wanting to boast, I'm very good at counterfeiting and already did it, so I'd love to do that instead of providing a shrink's okay whom I cannot trust - neither on his competence, nor personally. And you can always employ an actor if they need "real people", that's what our folks did in the 60ies. However, I see the flaw here.
Quote from: Tippe on November 09, 2010, 02:52:09 PM
I really, really want to be honest myself. I hate to lie and I think it is stupid in a process such as this, yet when the law specifically requires that I 'feel good' on hormones I cannot afford to tell about side-effects. When I know that only 8% of the applicants get a permit over here I cannot afford anything less than a perfect presentation. When I know that family issues have resulted in persons being rejected just like that how can I possible share the distress of not speeking with my mother for several months with my therapist - if instead of compassion and support - telling her will only result in rejection on top of what rejection I've faced from my mother already? Remember we are speaking about a GIC who have explicitly declared in their official program that their task is to determine whether there is any reason for them to go against sex reassignemt and that they are never able to actively recommend the procedure! Gatekeeping means that the transgender person and the therapist are working in different directions rather than collaborating on making the best decission.
I get exactly what you're talking about, and I'm sorry for your mom and you not having spoken with one another for months. Hope it will get better soon. We have better admission quota, but if you have read up the literature, you know exactly what criteria can hinder them from giving you admission for the SRS, and you don't want too many of them to sum up - officially, for them.
Here in Germany, we have to :
- feel better on the "real-life-test" 24/7 without hormones than before (diagnostic criterium no. 1), but not too good, so that we still suffer "enough" for further steps. This is where many sheep fail, as a RLT before passing usually ends in disaster.
- feel better on hormones than without (diagnostic criterium no. 2), but not too good, otherwise no SRS
- feel that therapy does us very good, it's not a necessary diagnostic criterium but helps much better than bribing with money
- insist strongly on HRT or SRS, sometimes even by blackmailing, or by whining, complaining and claiming a lot, in order to get it approved? But not too much, of course, as that might hint at a borderline personality disorder, which requires more diagnosis and delayal. (All that enforces the prejudice that transsexuals are manipulative and irrational, by the way.)
And all that just to prove to the shrinks that going the transsexual path is right for us.
And if you have an alcohol or drug problem, rather don't tell it to the shrinks, as it will delay SRS.
You probably see the contradictions here. How can therapy do you good if it's all about proving that things work exactly as they're supposed to work according to specific German Standards of Care which were agreed upon without contribution from any trans people (cause, obviously, we're too nuts to be worth being asked for our own affairs) and as far from reality as academics often tend to be? How can you speak about real issues if it may delay your trans treatment? That's what's the same situation in your country and mine.
All that means that we cannot talk openly about issues, if that's not the case for us. Uninformed people will fall into that trap, sheep will be open about themselves as well. Subverters will try to dose exactly what they tell their therapists when and hope they'll get along with it.
It's very frustrating if you know you're sitting in front of an expert and cannot ask him/her openly.Sometimes, here, people get their hormones delayed for years as the therapist is not sure blabla, or he will even put it like a carrot in front of a donkey, promitting them over and over again and delaying them all the time. In the latter case, I think, it's rather the therapist having an issue than the patient, and you should change your therapist. As that turns into a power game over time then, ridden by lust for power or transphobia or both.
Quote from: Tippe on November 09, 2010, 02:52:09 PM
In fact it's quite common over here to act for a couple of years until you're allowed your surgery permit. Only then people open up and start work towards clarification and readiness and many people drop out after they got their permits without using them. Now tell me what's the point in those years of acting then instead of being open to discussions from the beginning. It seems like a complete waste of time. In fact I'd say it's even counter productive, because many transgenders seem to need to let themselves out of a long life of acting (a different gender) to become finally free to be who they are themselves, but instead of supportting that development the gatekeepers just push them into even more acting. Sometimes even having to beat-about-the-bush on intimate issues, because they cannot afford to risk the rejection by being honest.
Yeah, the acting problem... I already referred to it. Can be retraumatizing.
And I can perfectly understand people first trying to get their letters no matter what, even lying, hiding away issues etc., and then once they have them, take their time without pressure and consider on their own if it's right for them. It's just so counter-productive that we have to do it this way and get our information on the "black market" instead of being free to ask the expert right in front of us, who gets paid by the social security system for exactly that. What a waste of money!
Your quotes are very interesting, and I've stored them on my computer. They show that some shrinks are exactly aware of the problem. Once I spoke with one of the leading shrinks of our country, and well... she refers to FTMs as "she" and "women" and to MTFs as "he" and "men" even in her recent publications (2009). So that's no respect at all for us folks from her side, and I won't offer her any in return. I asked her why she addressed me as a male at all if she didn't take that seriously. She answered evadingly. But her approaches to various problems I talked to her about were reinforcing the gatekeeper-system rather than breaking it up.
P.S.
You know what alarms me most? There's been a recent Dutch study, trying to figure out post-SRS regret. The aim of it: to gather information from former studies and therefore, from this statistical evidence, not whom they want to warn from SRS - but whom they want to allow or deny surgery. As, statistically, in these cases, the outcomes are not so goo. Read well through this paternalistic ->-bleeped-<-, keep their criteria in mind and try not to ever admit to any of that. Here it is:
http://igitur-archive.library.uu.nl/dissertations/2002-0808-103443/c5.pdf (http://igitur-archive.library.uu.nl/dissertations/2002-0808-103443/c5.pdf)
http://igitur-archive.library.uu.nl/dissertations/2002-0808-103443/c5.pdf (http://igitur-archive.library.uu.nl/dissertations/2002-0808-103443/c5.pdf)
hhmmm me thinks this douche bag is getting way too much acknowledgement :-/
We know he's wrong we know he's a douche.....right?
Just as well all the mixed icecream containers should be outlawed, you pull the lid and then have to choose, you go for vanilla or you go for strawberry and if that wasn't enough they throw in chocolate in between. Maaaan it drives me nuts, it should be made ILLEGAL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! .....................:-)
Quote from: alexia elliot on November 09, 2010, 10:33:43 PM
Just as well all the mixed icecream containers should be outlawed, you pull the lid and then have to choose, you go for vanilla or you go for strawberry and if that wasn't enough they throw in chocolate in between. Maaaan it drives me nuts, it should be made ILLEGAL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! .....................:-)
Don't forget pistachio and who doesn't love spumoni?
Quote from: Muffin on November 09, 2010, 08:23:36 PM
hhmmm me thinks this douche bag is getting way too much acknowledgement :-/
We know he's wrong we know he's a douche.....right?
Yeah, I'm tired of talking about the jackass
You know, as I read this I couldn't help but to think about all the "more-trans-than-you" individuals that I've seen since starting to read about transition online.
You know the type. They tell you that since your end goals, transition path, or even taste in food is different from theirs then you're a "fake" or a "fraud" or.. well, any number of things.
Why did I think of 'em? Well, it's simple.
This guy, and the "more-trans-than-you" crowd are committing the same crime.
They are saying "My experience is more valid than yours."
They are suggesting that their version is the only correct version.
Other people who do the same are fundamentalists of any belief, religious or political.
Funny thing though.
I've seen replies to his statement in a number of places, and in some of 'em I've spotted people who I know belong to the aforementioned "crowd" making exactly the "fake" comments they are known for.
Pot... meet kettle.
Quote from: K8 on November 09, 2010, 06:22:04 PM
I went into therapy hoping to discover what I needed. I knew what seemed like a good idea - transition - but also knew that I could be wrong. I talked honestly about what I felt and thought. My therapist agreed I needed GRS - in fact was convinced even before I was. Perhaps I was just lucky in my therapist, but it is reassuring to me now to know that several trained professionals agreed that I need to live my life as a woman.
How lovely that must be to actually have a team working together with you. Of course that is way different from what I'm ever going to experience with this official declarations from the Danish GIC:
"We can never actively recommend sex modifying procedures, only declare whether we asses the mentioned criteria as fullfilled, so that it is not possible to oppose the wishes of the patient. In our statement we are obliged to explicitly specify whether we are able to oppose the wishes of the patient on these grounds or not, and clearly explain why." [my translation]
Of course nobody wants to give them any reason for opposing their wishes when thats their view to the process.
QuoteIf I had lied to them, had surgery, and then had problems, I would have no one to blame but myself. I am sorry for any of you who are operating within a system that you think requires you to feign a scripted history. You aren't getting the help you need but are fighting against unnecessary impediments. The professionals are there to help us. It is not in anyone's interest to either prevent those who need the cure of surgery from getting it or, alternatively, to allow those who need a different 'cure' to get surgery instead and then be doubly messed up (like Kane).
Kate, it's not about being able to blame other people for your decission. Rather I'd say it's about creating the best possible circumstances for making it. And then taking up the responsibility for whichever path you choose.
If your decission would have been wrong it would still ultimately have been your decission no matter how many doctors padded your back. That's what we face and that's why we need as much freedom to experiment and reflect upon our decissions. For this reason I'm a fund believer of gender play and autonomy instead of gatekeepers.
Tippe
Quote from: Tippe on November 10, 2010, 10:26:22 AM
this official declarations from the Danish GIC:
"We can never actively recommend sex modifying procedures, only declare whether we asses the mentioned criteria as fullfilled, so that it is not possible to oppose the wishes of the patient. In our statement we are obliged to explicitly specify whether we are able to oppose the wishes of the patient on these grounds or not, and clearly explain why." [my translation]
Of course nobody wants to give them any reason for opposing their wishes when thats their view to the process.
I'm sorry that is the system you have to contend with, Tippe. (And here I thought the Scandanavian countries were more forward-thinking about such things. :P) I was lucky in that I got guidance and even encouragement. At the very least you should have someone knowledgable and neutral to tell you if you are getting off track. But to have a system that actively resists is bad.
I think what I envision and experienced was someone to call BS on me if needed but otherwise let me go, rather than what it sounds like your system is of jumping through small hoops regardless of your needs. I had hoped that in this day most advanced countries would recognize that we are all different and have different needs to different degrees. We weren't made in a factory to close tolerances but are living organisms with all the variation that implies. But we
can get off track and think we need GRS when in fact we need treatment for something else. That's where an enlightened therapist comes in.
- Kate