Quote from: Hypatia on July 06, 2007, 09:49:25 AM
Nero, I question whether "passing" could count as a criterion either. Plenty of trans people don't pass all that well but have gotten the name change, F on the DL, and all that. Besides, look how many of us--most of us--pass part of the time but not all of the time. Would you set the cutoff at passing 50% of the time? How is this measured? You can't poll everyone you walk by on the street. How is "passing" defined? If it's just a quick glance from a distance? Intense scrutiny from up close? Visual even if not vocal? "Passing" is such a slippery concept. "Passing" is kind of a sore point for many of us, best not emphasize it...

The reason I mentioned the passing issue is the fact that I've been told by other people that an FtM who is doing the exact same thing as I for example - dressing male, going by a male name, without hormones or a name change, is fulltime while I am not, because I don't pass. And this affects how far I can go as to fully living as male - I will not use a multiple stall men's room, I don't feel comfortable with a legal name change because I obviously look like a girl.

Frankly, I think as you do  - fulltime should not be a passing issue. It may be a bit different for MtFs - a non-passing MtF in a dress is obviously presenting as and wanting to be treated as a female, while I am just assumed to be a butch woman.
I won't consider myself fulltime until there's no question I look male.

Quote from: Hypatia on July 06, 2007, 07:38:46 PM

Well, it stands to reason that people who have completed everything would set the bar higher, while those of us who still have a ways to go would prefer a looser definition.

Not at all I consider that the bar is set to one hight for everyone.  When I went full time, I went full time, name change, work home, etc.

Steph

Unfortunately, it seems the better looking you were as your birth sex, the more it hurts your passability as your target sex without medical intervention.

Quote from: Nero on July 06, 2007, 08:06:07 PM
Unfortunately, it seems the better looking you were as your birth sex, the more it hurts your passability as your target sex without medical intervention.

You may have a point.

Steph

tsk tsk tsk 

this is what fulltime means:

Quote from: Steph on July 06, 2007, 07:06:48 PM
Full time is living and breathing in the preferred gender 24/7/365 in every way, shape, and form that includes what goes on inside the home.  Anything less is a copout and you're just fooling yourself.

Steph

period.

I have been thinking of myself as fulltime - by my own understanding of the concept. Just wanted to check what it meant to others. I'm in agreement with those who say it means fully being and identifying as your target gender. I'm there, baby. Like I said elsewhere, I have no "boy mode," I'm all girl.

But I would rather not see it depend on name change or passing. It should mean who you're being, who you know you are and live in integral harmony with your true identity... not on outward signifiers. At home, out and about, 24/7, my whole expression, manner, and consciousness are of womanhood. New people I meet form their first impression of me as a woman. I am doing the maximum possible under my current circumstances and doing it thoroughly and consistently. Because that's truly who I am and that's all there is to it.

Quote from: Steph on July 06, 2007, 08:05:52 PMNot at all I consider that the bar is set to one hight for everyone.  When I went full time, I went full time, name change, work home, etc.

And that is exactly what I meant... that's setting the bar high for everyone... while many of us feel we're fulltime even without clearing all those hurdles.

As far as I know in practical terms, in the sort of transgender care I'm getting, the definition is pretty much a moot point. They can see that I'm psychologically there already... circumstances are getting in the way of some of those hurdles... but they can see my gender identification and expression are unambiguously woman, fulltime. If I were faking it, they could tell eventually, but my genuineness--from the depths of my soul-- is evident and that's what counts.

Quote from: Steph on July 06, 2007, 07:06:48 PM
Full time is living and breathing in the preferred gender 24/7/365 in every way, shape, and form that includes what goes on inside the home.  Anything less is a copout and you're just fooling yourself.

At least for me this is in direct opposition with stealth at times.

Does it make sense to out oneself to random people sending an email to the old address? Personally I think stealth is more important than telling everyone, who may tell others...

I suppose the day I went 'full time' was the day I finally realised any new people I met couldn't understand why I had a boy's name.

After experiencing repeatedly bemused looks for a few weeks I just stopped using my old name and went 'full time'.

MVER XXX

Legal name change and use of the correct restrooms are biggies. Being "femme" at work and using one's male name and the mens room is not "fulltime." This is like going to take a dip and only putting your little toe in the water.

Quote from: Elizabeth on July 06, 2007, 07:58:56 PM
For me it means the moment one gives up living their pretend life and starts living as the person they truly are, for every minute of every day. It has nothing to do with how one is dressed, or makeup, or hormones or surgery. It has to do with no longer hiding who we are for the benefit of others.

I would agree with your statement, except I don't know how "no longer hiding who we are for the benefit of others" applies to people who have gone stealth.

Quote from: Nero on July 06, 2007, 08:06:07 PM
Unfortunately, it seems the better looking you were as your birth sex, the more it hurts your passability as your target sex without medical intervention.

Not necessarily.

Nero,
Actually, it depends what you mean by good looking.
Boyish men are considered very good looking.
Look at holliwood, 80% of holliwood or TV stars are in this mold.
Topher Grace, Keanu Reaves, Brad Pitt, Orlando Bloom, Johnny Depp, etc.
All of those, with very little HRT and a lasered beard, who pass very easily.

The manly man, the one that would pass with difficulty without FFS,
is rarely a leading man, he's the bad guy or the sidekick.

Even Schartnegger who you would think is a manly man, if you really look at him, its mainly muscles that make him look that way (he was a tiny teen), without the bulging masseter he had in his heydays, his face is rounder and rounder.

Quote from: melissa90299 on July 07, 2007, 09:17:48 AM
Legal name change and use of the correct restrooms are biggies. Being "femme" at work and using one's male name and the mens room is not "fulltime." This is like going to take a dip and only putting your little toe in the water.

I disagree. You just don't know me. In fact, your reply might have come across as just a bit insulting. But this is all academic anyway, in my situation. None of my caregivers are even using the concept of "full time" operationally, so what does it matter? I just hear the term being mentioned a lot, so was curious about the different ways people understand it.

Quote from: mavieenrose on July 07, 2007, 03:29:15 AM
I suppose the day I went 'full time' was the day I finally realised any new people I met couldn't understand why I had a boy's name.

After experiencing repeatedly bemused looks for a few weeks I just stopped using my old name and went 'full time'.

So in this description it's synonymous with passing. I've already discussed above why passing cannot be the only criterion. This just shows the term means different things to different people. Hopefully everyone can respect everyone else's different points of view.

Quote from: Keira on July 07, 2007, 12:13:38 PM

Nero,
Actually, it depends what you mean by good looking.
Boyish men are considered very good looking.
Look at holliwood, 80% of holliwood or TV stars are in this mold.
Topher Grace, Keanu Reaves, Brad Pitt, Orlando Bloom, Johnny Depp, etc.
All of those, with very little HRT and a lasered beard, who pass very easily.

Wait... Orlando Bloom isn't full time yet?  Here I was calling him Orla.  *sigh* You just can't tell sometimes!

(Yes, this is a joke.  I find Orlando Bloom incredibly feminine and cannot understand why straight girls would want him because he looks like a girl!)

Quote from: Lisbeth on July 07, 2007, 11:28:02 AM
Not necessarily.

was that you, Lisbeth? wow. I hope after hrt, i'll pass as good as you.

Quote from: Keira on July 07, 2007, 12:13:38 PM

Nero,
Actually, it depends what you mean by good looking.
Boyish men are considered very good looking.
Look at holliwood, 80% of holliwood or TV stars are in this mold.
Topher Grace, Keanu Reaves, Brad Pitt, Orlando Bloom, Johnny Depp, etc.
All of those, with very little HRT and a lasered beard, who pass very easily.

The manly man, the one that would pass with difficulty without FFS,
is rarely a leading man, he's the bad guy or the sidekick.

Even Schartnegger who you would think is a manly man, if you really look at him, its mainly muscles that make him look that way (he was a tiny teen), without the bulging masseter he had in his heydays, his face is rounder and rounder.

Yeah, I'm talking about the 'traditional' beauty ideals for men and women. The more masculine features, the more manly and handsome a man is considered, the more traditionally feminine features, the more a beautiful a woman is considered - that type of thing.
An MtF who looked like Lawrence Olivier would probably require extensive FFS to pass, and an FtM who looked like Marilyn Monroe would probably require a full beard to pass (which in ftm hrt terms usually means about a decade to grow). 

Living as your target gender every hour of the day is fulltime.

But, Nero, even in the old days, most of the leading man where boyish, Cary Grant, not really chiseled compared to the baddies, James Stewart, boyish in his 50's (See Its a wonderful life), there are so many examples.

The fact is that most of the men women are most attracted too are not hyper masculine in any way (except for their muscles, which has nothing to do with the shape of their face).

Look at most male models and tell which one needs FFS to pass, or even look very good, as a women.  Most would pass easily without HRT...

The sophisticated dashing man is always the boyish, charming, rogue. Look at Hugh Grant, boyish completely, its his trademark, no need for FFS there. Do women find him attractive, hey yes they do.

Some on screen men look more manly than those, but only because they're compared to men who look like boys, see Jude Law VS Clive Owen in "Closer". Clive looks more much male (the beard and attitude helps), but only because Jude is the ultimate in non-threatening boyishness. The casting was purposeful. If you look at just facial caracteristics, Clive has a face more boyish than the male average.

Neoteny, child like face, are more attractive in females and males. Women find most attractive the male face that are a more feminine than the male average. There is a German university that has a site that researches facial attractiveness and what traits permit to differentiate gender.

Quote from: Keira on July 07, 2007, 03:29:25 PM
But, Nero, even in the old days, most of the leading man where boyish, Cary Grant, not really chiseled compared to the baddies, James Stewart, boyish in his 50's (See Its a wonderful life), there are so many examples.

The fact is that most of the men women are most attracted too are not hyper masculine in any way (except for their muscles, which has nothing to do with the shape of their face).

Look at most male models and tell which one needs FFS to pass, or even look very good, as a women.  Most would pass easily without HRT...

The sophisticated dashing man is always the boyish, charming, rogue. Look at Hugh Grant, boyish completely, its his trademark, no need for FFS there. Do women find him attractive, hey yes they do.

Some on screen men look more manly than those, but only because they're compared to men who look like boys, see Jude Law VS Clive Owen in "Closer". Clive looks more much male (the beard and attitude helps), but only because Jude is the ultimate in non-threatening boyishness. The casting was purposeful. If you look at just facial caracteristics, Clive has a face more boyish than the male average.

Neoteny, child like face, are more attractive in females and males. Women find most attractive the male face that are a more feminine than the male average. There is a German university that has a site that researches facial attractiveness and what traits permit to differentiate gender.

good to know. I always just assumed that women went for the square, chiseled faced guys. Something I could never hope to aspire to.

Quote from: Nero on July 07, 2007, 02:30:45 PM

Quote from: Lisbeth on July 07, 2007, 11:28:02 AM
Not necessarily.

was that you, Lisbeth? wow. I hope after hrt, i'll pass as good as you.

It was.  But look more closely and you will see how feminine my features were.

Quote from: Nero on July 07, 2007, 03:40:33 PM
I always just assumed that women went for the square, chiseled faced guys. Something I could never hope to aspire to.

No, studies have shown that girls generally prefer men who look more feminine.

Quote from: Hypatia on July 07, 2007, 12:28:16 PM

Quote from: mavieenrose on July 07, 2007, 03:29:15 AM
I suppose the day I went 'full time' was the day I finally realised any new people I met couldn't understand why I had a boy's name.

After experiencing repeatedly bemused looks for a few weeks I just stopped using my old name and went 'full time'.

So in this description it's synonymous with passing. I've already discussed above why passing cannot be the only criterion. This just shows the term means different things to different people. Hopefully everyone can respect everyone else's different points of view.

Actually your comment is really, really interesting as I've never looked to 'pass' as a woman in my life.

Passing to me sounds like acting, like trying to learn a role, like imitating.... and for me my sole aim was to no longer 'pass' as male. 
It was about removing a layer, taking off a mask, it was certainly not about adding one...

I've always known I was female and quite frankly people who've known me since childhood always say I've stayed pretty much the same as I ever was (though much happier of course...)

Clearly we can only ever hope to fully understand our own personal experiences and motivations as we are all so different, and this is indeed why I would never dare claim to speak for others.

All I can say, is that for me the day my male name no longer made sense was the day I realised I broken out of my male prison, and the day I became 'full time' me.

MVER XXX

Quote from: Hypatia on July 06, 2007, 07:38:46 PM

Quote from: Melissa on July 06, 2007, 03:52:54 PMI was living as a female everywhere except work and even wearing female clothes at work, using a unisex restroom, but going by a male name.  For that last reason in particular, I still consider that as living parttime.

Uh... so I guess for me that means "no," huh...

Well, it stands to reason that people who have completed everything would set the bar higher, while those of us who still have a ways to go would prefer a looser definition.

You think I had completed everything when I went fulltime?  Nope.  I had 2 laser sessions beforehand and that was it.  I have been doing laser sessions ever since and have also been getting electrolysis done as well for the past 3 months.  I had been on HRT for only 5 months.  Fulltime is fulltime, not part time or most of the time.  It's as simple as that.

The goal of going fulltime is to be female all the time without ever falling back on the male role so that you can know that you truly can live fulltime as a woman.  If you are still using the male role (by not coming out at work) as a crutch and calling yourself fulltime, then you are circumventing the entire point of the RLE and are thus not fulltime.