I've been invited to serve on a panel called The Gender Agenda Wednesday night at Johns Hopkins University sponsored by their LGBT student organization . I'm given 5-8 minutes to give my answers the these three questions: "How do you understand or perceive genderism? And what does that tell us about what we have been doing to support trans* people? Finally, what can we do in the future to better support trans* people?" The idea is to spark discussion.

What do you think I should say?

Isn't John Hopkins the one that no longer does gender supportive therapy and surgeries? Tell them to get out of the dark ages.

I would, in no uncertain terms, express how hurtful Blanchard's and Bailey's " ->-bleeped-<-" theory is to the MtF trans community, and how destructive Dr Paul R. McHugh (of Johns Hopkins Hospital) has been in his controversial views on sexual orientation and transsexuality.

Johns Hopkins has a long way to go before they can regain the trust of the TG/TS community.

You seriously have only two days to prepare? 

Please realize I am an experimental scientist (chemist/molecular toxicologist) and not a person who does well with those who study thought science.  These are suggestions.

I would start by pounding on the  ->-bleeped-<- theory.  Put four surveys here on Susan's.  I would also find any other related survey and pull that information.  They will not like actual data over precious theories.  Then, pound the difference between sexual orientation and gender.  Then, give examples of the struggles people go through to simply be themselves. 

Do well.

Hugs,

Jen

Jeez, OK, I totally messed this up by mentioning Johns Hopkins.

This is at Johns Hopkins University, not Johns Hopkins Hospital. Easy mistake to make.

Those two institutions are only loosely connected and in two totally different locations. The issue with Trans folks came from Johns Hopkins Hospital. The people I'm speaking to will be members of the JHU LGBT community and allies, probably graduate and undergraduate students.

Quote from: JLT1 on November 18, 2013, 11:10:08 PM
I would start by pounding on the  ->-bleeped-<- theory. 

just asking but what is the  ->-bleeped-<- theory?

Quote from: Natkat on November 19, 2013, 04:13:00 PM
just asking but what is the  ->-bleeped-<- theory?

If I understand correctly it's the idea that a "man" is sexually aroused by thinking of himself as a woman. It sort of redefines trans women as being men with a sexual fetish rather than just being women.

So yeah, it's super offensive and gross.

Quote from: JLT1 on November 18, 2013, 11:10:08 PM
Then, give examples of the struggles people go through to simply be themselves. 

OK, I'd hit the examples.  You can find lots of good examples and bad examples for similar situations here on Susan's. 

Jen

Google it.

I would be polite and demure. Don't argue. Don't yell. DON"T PLAY VICTIM. Kill them with kindness; show em how normal a trans woman is (or can be). Please don't bring up autogynephilla or any of these doctors. Who cares? They are old men who will be dead soon and their theories will die with them unless the trans community keeps bringing it up. But I guess I don't have a dog in that fight since I would be classified as a homosexual transsexual and have a long history of girlish behavior that everyone knows about (and I don't mean campy gay boy. I mean girlish. People always point out the difference to me.)