Quote from: Ken/Kendra on June 19, 2007, 09:51:26 AM

QuoteAndrogyne: a person who does not fit cleanly into the typical gender roles of their society.  Androgyne have a unique gender identity which is not of the traditional genders of male or female. Androgynes may identify as beyond gender, between genders, moving across genders, entirely genderless, and as any combination or all of these.

I cant see anything wrong with this definition at the moment.

You better not either, I took it from your Androgyne FAQ and Categorized Posts Version 1.6 specifically the first section

Androgyne: Basics
Androgyne: Definitions, subcategories. https://www.susans.org/forums/index.php/topic,5863.0.html

Quote from: lydiadavis on June 19, 2007, 05:03:00 AM
There are those who would like nothing more than to see us divided and squabbling over labels that were not of our creation. Sadly, they have been succeeding.

True, but in a support forum, it's handy to have some sort of shorthand (labels) to distinguish amongst different motivations, needs and goals. It only seems to get messy when people *identify* with the labels and things become political and personal.

But when used simply to classify similar behaviours and goals, labels are REALLY handy as long as we're all general agreement over what they mean.

~Kate~

Quote from: lydiadavis on June 19, 2007, 05:03:00 AMThere are those who would like nothing more than to see us divided and squabbling over labels that were not of our creation. Sadly, they have been succeeding.

You are right, but that's why I have always used transgender as an umbrella term which covers us all. Defining these terms also helps end the squabbling, which is a major goal of doing this. We all will know the terms, what they mean, and everyone who wanted to will have had a say in their creation. I have already incorporated changes from 3-4 people into the terms as they stand today.

I havn't added the non-op but that's because I havn't been convinced of the need for it yet.

This is a community effort to define the terms which make up the community.

Whoops I revised my statement after you quoted me lol. As long as someone doesnt use the definition as a weapon, I am fine.

Quote from: Ken/Kendra on June 19, 2007, 10:11:20 AM
Whoops I revised my statement after you quoted me lol. As long as someone doesnt use the definition as a weapon, I am fine.

Yep and remember I will smack down attempts to do so. We may not see every post, so if anyone sees posts they feel are in violation of the rules and policies of this site, make sure you use the Report to moderator option at the bottom of each message. We review every report, we might not always agree with you but we will take a look at it.

When I first became involved in the community Non Ops were those who could not go through HRT and/or SRS due to medical issues. It was not a lack of desire or a lack of finances but usually medical reasons that stopped them from continuing the path that they desired.

Where outside of Susan's would I find a definition of Non-Op? 

I unfortunately will probably never be able to have SRS even though I have all the letters and an intense desire for the surgery, very intense.  But medical conditions, which are unfortunately getting worse, have kept me from having the surgery.  I remain on HRT, although under very close medical scruiteny.

This does not keep me from living as a woman and none of my clients or people I come in contact with question that.

I still consider myself to be Pre-Op.

I could easily be wrong, but to my mind the words non op would more indicate a lack of desire for the surgery.  Yes, that is only how my mind defines it.

I am not against it being included in the definitions but it needs to be carefully worded.  These terms get very personel to us, that is why it is hard to come to agreement sometimes.

Sarah L.

Non-ops currently fit in the transgender term and transsexual term. IF they want surgery but can't have it for some reason they would still be pre-op.

I think part of the concern here is that the mention of pre-op and post-op without the inclusion of the words non-op anywhere in those definitions may imply that non-op is not an option. If someone is just starting their journey and they look at this set of definitions, they not be made aware that not getting the SRS is an acceptable option in the community.

I think if you're going to include any op terms, you need to include all of them just so that all possible options are covered. I think we can agree when we're providing resources for people finding their way, we don't want to leave out any paths they might choose to take.

Obviously a number of people in the community want it included, so it must not be an isolated request.

M&M

Quote from: Marq and Mia on June 19, 2007, 12:44:06 PM
I think part of the concern here is that the mention of pre-op and post-op without the inclusion of the words non-op anywhere in those definitions may imply that non-op is not an option.

I agree.

Without non-op being defined, the implication is that pre-op and post-op are the only two valid "types" of transsexuals. Those who don't desire SRS are then excluded from the TS definition, which contradicts with "this is generally accompanied by the strong desire to make their body as congruent as possible." Saying generally allows for non-ops as valid transsexuals.

It might be more consistent to either:

1) Define non-op as a valid option for transsexuals
2) Remove "generally" from the transsexual definition

~Kate~

We are not defining options, we are defining the elements that make up our community. There has been disputes about what postop includes that's why it's here. Pre-op some were defining transsexual as being only post-ops so I added it. A Non-op transsexual is still a transsexual.

Generally is not always, the soc has the word usually. The reason that I used generally instead, is intended to reconize that surgery is not a option for every TS.

May I offer the following information and suggestions for consideration:

People who are Intersex prefer "Intersex individuals" or "people with Intersex conditions/experiences" instead of "Intersexuals". Intersex is strictly a physical disorder, many with the condition find the terms "Intersexual" and "Intersexuality" offensive. Note: The phrase "Intersexual condition" is linguistically correct, but "Intersex condition" is preferred in modern usage.

And:
It should be clarified that Crossdressers are not crossgendered, do not identify as MtF or FtM, and their crossdressing behaviour is a periodic practice - not full-time, and usually done in private - not in public. "Transvestism" is literally the practice of cross-dressing. The word "Crossdresser" is preferred by those who crossdress over "Transvestite" due to the negative association with the clinical term "transvestic fetishism", a sexual fetish. The words 'Crossdresser' and 'Transvestite' are synonyms, defining the words separately is redundant and misleading.

Additionally:
"Transgenderist" is a term in common use in the Transgender Community but not listed. The term refers to people who publicly live crossgender without need for sex reassignment surgery. Transgenderist are crossgendered and identify as MtF or FtM.

"Bigender" is a term in common use in the Transgender Community, coined by the Transgender Community, but not listed. The term refers to people expressing a distinctly male persona and a distinctly female persona. Bigender individuals are transgender but are not the same as Transsexuals, Transgenderists, Crossdressers or Androgynes.

"Neutrois" is a term in common use in the Transgender Community, but not listed. The term refers to people who desire surgery to nullify their body's sexual characteristics.

Thank you.
-Emerald 

I have said several times this is not intended to be a comprehensive glossary of terms.

Quote from: Emerald on June 19, 2007, 05:35:55 PMPeople who are Intersex prefer "Intersex individuals" or "people with Intersex conditions/experiences" instead of "Intersexuals". Intersex is strictly a physical disorder, many with the condition find the terms "Intersexual" and "Intersexuality" offensive. Note: The phrase "Intersexual condition" is linguistically correct, but "Intersex condition" is preferred in modern usage.

I have had no complaints except from anyone except for you. The Wikipedia lists it as Intersexuality. I also searched their article and it's associated talk page for offensive and didn't find it stated once. The dictionary lists intersexuality and intersexual. That is what the term is and that is how it stays.

Quote from: Emerald on June 19, 2007, 05:35:55 PMThe word "Crossdresser" is preferred by those who crossdress over "Transvestite" due to the negative association with the clinical term "transvestic fetishism", a sexual fetish. The words 'Crossdresser' and 'Transvestite' are synonyms, defining the words separately is redundant and misleading.

The term was defined under the ICD-10 and I defined both to recognize that for some crossdressing is non-sexual while for others it is fetishistic. For the purposes of this site, it is not redundant or misleading. Crossdresser for those whose crossdressing is non-sexual, and transvestite for those for whom it is. I am quite sure you offended a lot of crossdressers on these forums with that statement.

Quote from: Emerald on June 19, 2007, 05:35:55 PM"Transgenderist" is a term in common use in the Transgender Community but not listed. The term refers to people who publicly live crossgender without need for sex reassignment surgery. Transgenderist are crossgendered and identify as MtF or FtM.

See Transsexual or Crossdresser they are already covered.

Quote from: Emerald on June 19, 2007, 05:35:55 PM"Bigender" is a term in common use in the Transgender Community, coined by the Transgender Community, but not listed. The term refers to people expressing a distinctly male persona and a distinctly female persona. Bigender individuals are transgender but are not the same as Transsexuals, Transgenderists, Crossdressers or Androgynes.

They would be covered by transgender.

Quote from: Emerald on June 19, 2007, 05:35:55 PM"Neutrois" is a term in common use in the Transgender Community, but not listed. The term refers to people who desire surgery to nullify their body's sexual characteristics.

Not one person has ever claimed to be Neutrois. But they would be covered quite well by Androgyne.

If you have issues with my policies on my forums as an ex-staff member you know to contact me directly in private. This appears to me to have been a public stunt, and I don't appreciate your actions in this matter Emerald, behavior of this nature used to be beneath you.

Quote from: Marq and Mia on June 19, 2007, 12:44:06 PM
I think part of the concern here is that the mention of pre-op and post-op without the inclusion of the words non-op anywhere in those definitions may imply that non-op is not an option... ...I think if you're going to include any op terms, you need to include all of them just so that all possible options are covered.

This is exactly my concern. While Susan has specificly said non-op is still trans, the exclusion from the list of relationships to an operation does lend support to those who say there is no such thing as a non-op transsexual. While with an eye to their future many non-ops may well be more accurately classified as pre-ops. We should lend more support to their "current" feelings.

Ok let me make this clear. Non-op will not be added to these terms. There has been no one on these forums disputing the definition of that term. There has been for both pre-op and post-op and most of the community terms. Second non-ops are covered by the term transgender or transsexual. The definition of transsexual acknowledges that not every transsexual has surgery. I have made my position clear during this discussion, and I and my staff will be backing up that position after the discussion closes. I don't recommend arguing that a non-op transsexual is not a real or true transsexual on these forums.

We have had much debate on the terms, I would ask, isn't it time to post them as final?

Sarah L.

Quote from: Sarah Louise on June 20, 2007, 02:58:46 PM
We have had much debate on the terms, I would ask, isn't it time to post them as final?

Sarah L.

Lets give it a few more days...

Quote from: Susan on June 20, 2007, 02:30:33 PM
Ok let me make this clear. Non-op will not be added to these terms. There has been no one on these forums disputing the definition of that term. There has been for both pre-op and post-op and most of the community terms. Second non-ops are covered by the term transgender or transsexual. The definition of transsexual acknowledges that not every transsexual has surgery. I have made my position clear during this discussion, and I and my staff will be backing up that position after the discussion closes. I don't recommend arguing that a non-op transsexual is not a real or true transsexual on these forums.

I seem to have been too late to have an influence on this decision, I do hope you don't mind me voicing an opinion anyway

I am MTF. I am also currently transitioning and have no plans for HRT or GRS through personal choice. This is what works for me. I am very very pleased to see you state so firmly that the site Moderators will not tolerate the argument that this choice negates my claim to my identity. However I do feel that the proposed definitions do tend to suggest that either I am fooling myself and therefore misrepresenting my identity, or I am fooling those I say that to by misrepresenting the fact of my being transsexual. Specifically the part bolded here:

QuotePre-ops: Transsexuals who desire to to make their body as congruent as possible with their preferred sex, but have not yet had the surgical procedures for whatever reason.

This suggests that it is inevitable that I should want the procedures and that if I say I do not think I do then I am lying either to myself or to those I say it to. Pre-op itself as a category excludes the category non-op (not that I would chose that for myself, transsexual and transgendered are enough labels to make me feel like I should be boxed up on a supermarket shelf!) as it implicitly causes surgeries to be a matter of time rather than choice. If the categories Post- and Pre-op both exclude "non-op" then by implication "non-op" is not in the category transsexual.

I do not have any material objections to how you have defined transexual as a main category as the language does not exclude the possibility of "non-op". It is true to say that it is included subtly, but it is also true to say that by creating sub-categories that exclude it, "non-op" is not sufficiently represented to allow anyone with only passing knowledge of the subject, likely including those newly identifying or seeking help, to realise that it is an available and valid transexual identity.

I hope you accept my opinions as just that, my opinions but I also hope you can undestand why I still wished to post them despite the subject being closed.

In case you would like to know : In life I personally describe myself variously as transsexual, a trans woman or transgendered, depending on the circumstances. The one I feel most strongly about is "trans woman" as I feel this allows me a degree of personal control over the preconceptions of others and is the one that I feel most comfortable with for myself.

Quote from: Mattie E on June 20, 2007, 05:46:01 PMI seem to have been too late to have an influence on this decision, I do hope you don't mind me voicing an opinion anyway

I don't mind at all.

Quote from: Mattie E on June 20, 2007, 05:46:01 PMHowever I do feel that the proposed definitions do tend to suggest that either I am fooling myself and therefore misrepresenting my identity, or I am fooling those I say that to by misrepresenting the fact of my being transsexual. Specifically the part bolded here:

You are reading too much into them. That claim or implication is not in the terms and is not intended to be suggested by the terms.

Quote from: Mattie E on June 20, 2007, 05:46:01 PM

QuotePre-ops: Transsexuals who desire to to make their body as congruent as possible with their preferred sex, but have not yet had the surgical procedures for whatever reason.

This suggests that it is inevitable that I should want the procedures and that if I say I do not think I do then I am lying either to myself or to those I say it to.

That is how the Standards of care defines the term. So we used that.  I did swap out one word, usually, for the much less emphatic word generally.

Quote from: Mattie E on June 20, 2007, 05:46:01 PMPre-op itself as a category excludes the category non-op (not that I would chose that for myself, transsexual and transgendered are enough labels to make me feel like I should be boxed up on a supermarket shelf!) as it implicitly causes surgeries to be a matter of time rather than choice. If the categories Post- and Pre-op both exclude "non-op" then by implication "non-op" is not in the category transsexual.

If i carry your statement above to the level that you have with the definitions I wrote, you are basically saying that all transsexuals choose to seek surgery. I would disagree with that. My path was set on the course for eventual surgery from the time of my birth.

I am sure you didn't intend to say that we choose this ourselves, any more than I implied with my definitions.

Quote from: Mattie E on June 20, 2007, 05:46:01 PMI do not have any material objections to how you have defined transexual as a main category as the language does not exclude the possibility of "non-op". It is true to say that it is included subtly, but it is also true to say that by creating sub-categories that exclude it, "non-op" is not sufficiently represented to allow anyone with only passing knowledge of the subject, likely including those newly identifying or seeking help, to realise that it is an available and valid transexual identity.

People who do not need surgery do not need us to tell them they don't need it. Just as those who do need surgery do not need us to tell them that they do. The terms are not options, this is not a glossary.

Quote from: Mattie E on June 20, 2007, 05:46:01 PMI hope you accept my opinions as just that, my opinions but I also hope you can undestand why I still wished to post them despite the subject being closed.

Discussion is not closed just the drive for the inclusion of non-op as a term which needs defining for the purposes of the site. Not one single person here needs for us to tell them what the word non-op means.

Quote from: Mattie E on June 20, 2007, 05:46:01 PMIn case you would like to know : In life I personally describe myself variously as transsexual, a trans woman or transgendered, depending on the circumstances. The one I feel most strongly about is "trans woman" as I feel this allows me a degree of personal control over the preconceptions of others and is the one that I feel most comfortable with for myself.

And the lack of a defintion here does not stop you from identifying as a transwoman. Just as the lack of non-op being defined here doesn't stop anyone else from identifying as such. Everyone who wishes to should free to add it to their personal title if they like.

As for the control over the preconceptions of others. It's illusory. The best you can hope for, is to get them to understand that sex is something you do, while gender is something you are, and this is about everything but sex.

Susan,

I know it's impossible to please everyone on such things, however I felt your definitions represent what I have come to believe about our community.

Love always,
Elizabeth