Quote from: Rebis on September 01, 2007, 08:44:55 PM

   I can't see how you could have offended anyone.  I have the same issue.  I have found, however, that if I associate with the person over time, I begin to see them as the person who they really wish to be.  I guess we have a lifetime of expectations, habit, and training to overcome, but I don't believe it is malicious.  Just the fact that we recognize that we have to put some effort into accepting someone who doesn't easily pass probably shows that we are in a learning process of our own.
  The whole trans deal is a learning process from every angle of our existence.  It was actually easier for me to accept the concept of transsexuality than it's been to live my ideal in how we should think about it.


Rebis

Yes Rebis I know, but it would seem that everytime someone has different views about a subject, some people around here take it as insensitiveness, arrogance, hierarchy, elitism, snobbery, and lack of support  , and frankly I'm TIRED OF IT, so this is why I usually emphasize that what I say is MY OPINION and NOT A LAW.  Thank you very much. 

tink

Quote from: buttercup on September 01, 2007, 02:27:52 AM
As this is a taboo subject, I going to give my 2 cents worth here and bugger the consequences.

For a start, the main topic questions about the 'unpassables' which in itself I find offensive.  It's sort of like the 'unmentionables.'  As we go along we find people have difficulty in their pronouns, he/she.  O.k, so would you prefer to use 'it'?  Maybe you should ask the 'offending' person if they might prefer that title instead because it's just too hard to remember she/he, especially while looking directly at them dressed in their feminine attire .
Also, it doesn't matter how that person expresses their feelings, communicates  in a feminine way etc. they look too male, well that's it then, they're shot!  It's over, they must be ostracised immediately, barred from friendships with others who have a similar past/history.  Perhaps 'real' women would be more forgiving, more tolerant, more engaging.  Yes, I think so....no, I know that to be so.   

I had hoped for a more understanding and unprejudice lot of people here, but I see that was too much to ask. 

   I didn't think the topic of this thread was that we should ostracize, question, condemn, or judge anyone.  The topic was simply; if someone does not pass (no fault of their own) do any of us here have any trouble  reconciling what we see with what we know of the person?
   I took the premise to be that a person who is familiar with and accepting of transpeople might have a discrepancy between what they know and believe of transpeople and how they interpret a specific transperson's gender if they cannot consciously reconcile the appearance of the person with that individual's preferred gender.

  I hope I wrote that in a way that is understandable.

QuoteAgreed. We just don't live in a world with no gender. Instantly categorizing someone as male or female is the most primitive, instinctual, involuntary thing. We blink our eyes without being conscious of it, we breathe without being conscious of the action - same with this. Determining whether one was male or female was essential for our survival as a species. It's ingrained through the countless generations of humankind. You can't turn it off just like that.

But we can unlearn all of our assumptions about gender (and everything else) that we've been taught since childhood, and keep schlepping around with us, unwilling to let it go for new ideas, even if they're better! Oy, all this baggage is really heavy, I'm tired of it. Imagine if every time we saw someone; male, female or unknown gender, black, white, yellow, brown, young, old, etc... and thought, hmmm, fellow human, and we said hi and smiled , and treated them all exactly the same. Not treat the male one way and the female another. I know, this probably sounds like utopia, not the real world in which we all live. I want to recreate and redefine our world.

QuoteUh oh.  If I wanted to be treated like a pumpkin, you'd hack me up and display me on your doorstep.  If ever we meet, I'll need to be cautious around you.

Mmmmmm, pumpkin pie, yum  >

Zythyra

Quote from: Tink on September 01, 2007, 09:03:11 PM

Quote from: Rebis on September 01, 2007, 08:44:55 PM

   I can't see how you could have offended anyone.  I have the same issue.  I have found, however, that if I associate with the person over time, I begin to see them as the person who they really wish to be.  I guess we have a lifetime of expectations, habit, and training to overcome, but I don't believe it is malicious.  Just the fact that we recognize that we have to put some effort into accepting someone who doesn't easily pass probably shows that we are in a learning process of our own.
  The whole trans deal is a learning process from every angle of our existence.  It was actually easier for me to accept the concept of transsexuality than it's been to live my ideal in how we should think about it.


Rebis

Yes Rebis I know, but it would seem that everytime someone has different views about a subject, some people around here take it as insensitiveness, arrogance, elitism, snobbery, and lack of support  , and frankly I'm TIRED OF IT, so this is why I usually emphasize that what I say is MY OPINION and NOT A LAW.  Thank you very much. 

tink

   Oh Tink,  as cute as you are, you are a million times cuter when your tongue is hanging out.   

Posted on: September 01, 2007, 09:09:48 PM

---

Quote from: Keira on September 01, 2007, 08:44:54 PM
Should we become aliens and suppress an autonomous response millions of years in the making!!

Sheeesh. There is such things as reality, even if you are supportive.

I take umbrage to this comment.   

Sorry Rebis, I didn't want to spring it on you like that, reality is such a bitch to deal with.

Since there is no way to say anything on this subject that will not be seen as [ insert personal judgement of me ] I'll just insert a pen through my skull and leave it at for now   

Quote from: Keira on September 01, 2007, 09:29:42 PM

Sorry Rebis, I didn't want to spring it on you like that, reality is such a bitch to deal with.

Since there is no way to say anything on this subject that will not be seen as [ insert personal judgement of me ] I'll just insert a pen through my skull and leave it at for now   

Oh my God!   Now I feel so guilty.   

Maybe we should start passing out blindfolds.

Posted on: September 01, 2007, 10:46:23 PM

---

Quote from: buttercup on September 01, 2007, 01:14:01 AM
I think some comments here are way too harsh.  So basically, if you read between the lines, if you cannot pass as a female, do not transition, because society will not accept you as anything other than a male.  Very interesting...

Nobody's saying that, hon.

Posted on: September 01, 2007, 10:49:16 PM

---

Quote from: buttercup on September 01, 2007, 02:27:52 AM
Perhaps 'real' women would be more forgiving, more tolerant, more engaging.  Yes, I think so....no, I know that to be so.   

I hope to God you are not referring to my mother... Are you insinuating that 'real' (whatever in hades that means) women would never mess up pronouns? Too many non-trans people villify us, let's not come down on those who accept us, and are doing their best, okay?

Quote from: Ell on September 01, 2007, 10:06:33 PM

Quote from: Keira on September 01, 2007, 07:43:21 PM
People are mixing two things here.
Even if you do address the person is the correct gender
are their friend, etc. Doesn't mean you will treat them
as you would a GG.

no, i'm not mixing it up. what i'm saying is that personality is much more important than gender, especially perceived gender.

i am transitioning not just because my gender doesn't match, but because my personality doesn't match. gender is only one aspect of personality.

they will be treated the same as a GG, or better, depending on their personality. therefore i think i have stayed on topic. just ask Nero.

Well, that's actually true. If a woman who doesn't pass well has a strong female aura, it's impossible for me to say 'he' or 'him'. But it wouldn't be automatic upon first meeting her.
And I can't count the times people's demeanor and expressions have changed towards me after talking with me for a while, like say, an hour. They didn't know they were doing it, but they ceased to see a female.
So that does happen, but it depends on how brightly the person's true gender shines through.
But any unpassable person will be seen as their birth gender until they show themselves not to be - through aura, personality, etc.

This thread has devolved into two sets of people who are incapable of hearing one another. It's no longer a discussion, it's a competition between two frustrated groups who are tired of each other's assumptions.

Gina M.

Quote from: regina on September 01, 2007, 11:24:42 PM
This thread has devolved into two sets of people who are incapable of hearing one another. It's no longer a discussion, it's a competition between two frustrated groups who are tired of each other's assumptions.

Gina M.

True. I also hear a lot of denial and judgment in this thread. I'm a realist. I'm also honest. Brutally, at times.
There's also the undertone of ridiculous expectations of all transpeople. That we should be completely blind to gender. At least that's my interpretation of this thread. Don't know though.
Guess I was absent on the day the 'Acceptable Viewpoints and Opinions for Transpeople' handbook was passed out.

Quote from: y2gender on September 01, 2007, 09:09:19 PM

QuoteAgreed. We just don't live in a world with no gender. Instantly categorizing someone as male or female is the most primitive, instinctual, involuntary thing. We blink our eyes without being conscious of it, we breathe without being conscious of the action - same with this. Determining whether one was male or female was essential for our survival as a species. It's ingrained through the countless generations of humankind. You can't turn it off just like that.

But we can unlearn all of our assumptions about gender (and everything else) that we've been taught since childhood, and keep schlepping around with us, unwilling to let it go for new ideas, even if they're better! Oy, all this baggage is really heavy, I'm tired of it. Imagine if every time we saw someone; male, female or unknown gender, black, white, yellow, brown, young, old, etc... and thought, hmmm, fellow human, and we said hi and smiled , and treated them all exactly the same. Not treat the male one way and the female another. I know, this probably sounds like utopia, not the real world in which we all live. I want to recreate and redefine our world.

Agreed fully.  That's how I live my life actually.  I used to have more apprehensions, but one time I was telling a friend of mine about why I didn't want to go swimming because I didn't like how I would look in a bathing suit, and she told me that one of these days she'll paint herself all red and run around naked, just to show it doesn't matter to her.  And I was like....that makes a lot of sense.  Why can't I have that same outlook towards people in my interactions.  Why should I prejudge anyone based on any way they look?  So yeah, now for the most part I just take people as people, I don't spend time worrying about passing vs. not passing, and I just do my own thing, and it feels great.

This isn't really an arguement for me.  It's just how I view things for myself.  And obviously the question the way it was asked goes against my own personal views, so I expressed that.  Just as the people who believe some transwomen are too ugly to be seen in public said theirs.   It's not a strawman thing.  It's a: There are other ways of thinking thing.  Just because some people lead with their outside perceptions, there are plenty of people in the world, who judge people based on how they are, and try to live with an open heart.

Sarah, I take grave offense at the "Just as the people who believe some transwomen are too ugly to be seen in public said theirs", comment.

That's a strawman + villification + assumed motivation (3 of the basest rhetoric methods) of the person arguing with you, since no such thing was ever said in any way and your putting very ugly motivations into my head. Unless you've got a vulcan mindmeld going on, I think you shouldn't attempt this.

For someone who's soooo open minded, that's pounding very hard on my head for something I never said in any way shape or form. I'd ask to retract but its obvious you don't realize the bile your spewing so what would be the point.

Keira I have no idea what you could possibly think the term "unpassable transmen or transwomen" to mean, or what other outlook it could possibly come from.  Follow the logic of the term.  The goal of all transmen and transwomen is to concievably be treated as the gender that they identify with, right?  The notion of passing or not passing is whether you can fool the populace into thinking you are that gender(which is another problematic issue of the term passing is that by it's very definition it is implying that you are trying to be something which you are not, when the whole thing behind being trans is that you, not that you aren't, yada yada).  So it becomes about outwards appearence and perception.  And it becomes if you don't look like X you can't be treated as X, because if you don't look like X, you can't possibly BE X. 

So then we take that mix.  And we toss in this idea of "unpassable".  Passable is an ability.  Able to pass.  Unpassable means you do not even have the inate ability to pass.  You do not have the inate ability to appear as your target gender.

So now we're taking that.

We take that, and we mash it right into what you said about how it's natural to treat GGs as females, and someone you know as trans based on their appearance(not passing) not as a female.

So if the goal of transitioning is to be treated as your target gender.  And how you are treated is based upon how you look.

Then saying that one treats transgender people differently based on their perceived transgenderness, is tantamount to saying, if you are  not up to snuff appearance wise, then you might as well not even leave your home.  Because appearance dictates treatment.  And if your goal is to be treated as X, then you better make sure you aren't ever seen, because you ma'am or sir are "UNPASSABLE".

It's not strawman.  It's not villification.  It's not even really about you or anyone else.  I'm saying what my personal views are, in reaction to the topic.

But obviously the thread is derogatory in it's very setup to me, so I do feel a certain level of stress in responding to it.  If you're just now taking grave offense to this thread, then welcome to the club, I've been here gravely offended since the first post.

You used the words "ugly", I didn't.
And are not talking at all about what I'm talking = strawman.



Even before the whole conscious being comes to play, there is neuropsychology that comes into play. My best female friend is a PHD in this fascinating field so I know quite a lot about it.

If the person automatically sees the person as the sex they are not, how can it be seen as discriminatory unless what you do with it is discriminatory. This automated placing will be different from person to person obviously, some will really only on the clothes and basic presentation while many others brain is more finely tuned and will be able to see fine distinctions at the unconscious level. Once this automatic gendering was done, the brain will also automatically assign a whole slew of characteristic to that person, its a fact of neuropsychology (since my best female friend is a PHD in this field I know quite a bit about it).

So, even before the conscious mind comes into play, and a single word has been uttered, this is the state of the world.

So, now your asking a person to treat that TS as female even though the autonomous reaction ID'd the TS as male. That has to be done at the conscious level, which introduces a whole new variable into the mix.

Since many reactions to different genders are done without going through the filter of the conscious mind, going through it and possibly reevaluating gendering while talking to that person will skew their reactions to them away from the usual response.

The TS, may not know that the response is not the usual one, maybe everyone's they meet are respectful and that's enough for her; for many TS living in the real world, that's all they initially hope for (including me).

But, if the TS is ID's alternatively female and male, she will sense the difference. I did in the beginning. There is a subtle to not so subtle difference in how people react; though that doesn't mean the reaction when ID'd as male is bad, its just different.

If the person is never treated exactly as a GG because nobody id's them as such and there is a long standing atavic response to gender, should people flagelate themselves for "only" being respectful and while using the correct pronouns and the like, not giving them the full GG treatment when much of this happens at an unconscious level!!!!

What is the full GG treatment?  Like how do you treat people differently based on their gender and whether they are trans or not?  Like what does that entail for you?  I don't really understand what you're saying there I think.  And what you are talking about with regards to neuropsychology seems to be more about a base animalistic thing, which I think is less applicable than you are making it.  It's like we have a base animalistic urge to eat meat, and there is fight/flight responses, and a whole littany of urges.  But I think elevating them to the level of an overriding consciousness is giving them too much credit.  Our minds are way more complex than that.  For me I try to remain mindful that perception doesn't always equal reality.  And therefore I don't let snap urges steer my consciousness.  Whether they are there or not.  One thing I'm working on now is overcoming somewhat the power of labels.  Because labels are just words.  But we give them this binding power which compartmentalize and put into heiarchies things which are just as equal as anything else.  Words are egalitarian, labels are authoritarian.  I feel like there is play in the consciousness for how you cloud the intake of your mind.  I mean even if I'm completely wrong, it's still a lot of fun, and I feel better about myself, the world around me, and my place in it.




And I think you've misinterpreted me posting in a thread that you are posting in, as being in arguement with every single thing you've said.  I've certainly got a viewpoint that is somewhat diametrically opposed to your own, but for the most part I've been more interested in discussing the topic questions and what they mean to me, moreso than wanting to debate on a one on one level people's personal whatevers. 

As far as ugly and where that comes from in this thread.  The notion of unpassable is an aesthetic one, and the connotation is most certainly "ugly".  Maybe that's blunt, but I think it draws a nice parallel to the dynamics of the high school lunch room.  And again, I believe the unpassables arguement is more Neros, and the threads.

Sarah,

You may think neuropsychology is at the animal level, but most of our actions are in fact direct input -> output response through our neural pathways. Its very far from being an animal response since even this instant response can go through complex human assessments, like morality, just not a conscious level.

Its not for nothing that habits are so hard to break and I'm not even talking of something as basic as gender identification and reactions to it, which is imbeded in both static pathways (by how the brain works) and learned ones (neural nets created through a learned response).

Quote from: Keira on September 02, 2007, 06:59:56 AM

Sarah,

You may think neuropsychology is at the animal level, but most of our actions are in fact direct input -> output response through our neural pathways.

Then why are we at exact opposite ends of this discussion?  If it's just input-output, and the stimulus is the same, shouldn't we just be parotting the same music?  Where is the responsibility in your system for treatment?  If you mistreat a woman because you think she is an unpassable transwoman, is that your fault, or are you just chalking it up to nature?  Does that also apply to race?  If you lock your car doors whenever you see a black male, is that racism or just a natural response?

This topic is analogous to pretty/ugly women.

In my office there is a slim, petite and very attractive woman. There is also an overweight, strong personality and slightly-below average looking woman.

The attractive woman gets different/better treatment/respect. In fact, all the other women say that if they were lesbian, she'd be the one they'd sleep with.

There is a similarity between passable and non passable. You can equitably modulate your own feelings, but in general, unpassable females will get the shorter end of the stick as do those people who are:

shorter : less attractive : not of the same race : have poorer language skills : have less money : dress shabbily : overweight : etc.

 In my opinion if the person is doing her best to present as female it easier to accept her as such. The thing that bothers me with many of the people on this forum is their elitism and I'm better then you attitude. Unless a ts  has been raised  from birth as a girl, and has never had tester one poisoning their body, THEY WILL NOT PASS AS FEMALE ALL THE TIME. And if you think you are you are  DELISIONAL.

I think a lot of people here are misidentifying their habits of gendering people as 'automatic' in some sort of 'it is an instinct built-in to the human brain' way. As opposed to 'automatic' as in, 'it is a habit, a firmly established habit.'

The former strikes me as quite arrogant, since it supposes that ones perceptions of somebody else's gender are more rooted in 'reality' than the self-identification that the 'unpassable' transperson is trying to express.

There's also a fair amount of evidence that it is indeed habit. It would appear that there is some instinct to sex people, and it usually fuctions pretty accurately, but this doesn't necessarily have a strong influence on how a person is gendered in eir society. One can find a goodly number of anthropologist's reports about 'primitive' societies with social conventions to accept and include transpeople. They tend to include puzzling-seeming comments from cisgendered members of those societies, saying things like, "The reason that woman is so tall and strong is that she is a male." Yet she is seen as and treated as a woman in every respect. And anybody in the group who says she's not a woman is recognised as being mean, and a bit batty. It seems to me that these reports show that human beings will notice one another's sex, but that they can also develop a habit of gendering people based on cues outside of sex, and they can see those cues as more valid than physical sex.

I have lived most of my life as a transgenderist, and somewhat obsessed with gender and how I and other people assign gender. I tend to look at all kinds of people and wonder what aspects of them make them seem male or female and how those aspects add up. One would think that this mental exercise would make me better at sexing/gendering people, but the actual result is that I am now (compared to other people, and compared to myself when I was in my early teens and ignorant of gender-theory and transgender issues) extremely lousy at gendering people. I determine people's sex and gender more slowly than other people do, I spend more time not knowing (and am comfortable not knowing, though I remember the period when it was disconcerting not to know, and I know that most people are uncomfortable not knowing) what gender somebody is. I am also very easily 'taken in' by people's strong deliberate gender-presentations. A few weeks ago I was at a fair where I saw and spoke briefly with this beautiful goth girl with a gorgeous angular face, and a flowey black-lace dress with a matching parasol. A few hours later I saw her again, from an angle which artlessly displayed her prominant adam's apple and with her makeup and hair mussed from the heat. I thought "Oh! Another TG! No wonder she was so friendly with me!" and was shortly after suprised (and a little dismayed) to discover that my friends had 'clocked' her the first time they saw her, when she was talking to me. I am sure that we saw the same things, but that I now have a habit of attributing more gender-significance to demeanor and clothing than to physical sex-characteristics.