Quote from: Keira on September 01, 2007, 08:44:54 PM
Sarah, how can you know?
Once you know someone's not a GG, how can you really say your reactions will exactly be the same. Maybe the difference is subtle or large, but there is probably is a difference; unless the difference passes a threshold, the person in front and even yourself may not see the difference.

And if the difference is small, that person will only see it if there is some level of intimacy between you.  The stronger the emotional connection, the more the difference will be obvious to them.  Lest you think this is mearly theoretical, I know it from the receiving end.

QuoteThere'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.

Yes Doc! Even though we might identify someone's gender or sex as a habit, how we respond or judge is learned, and based on our cultural standards and assumptions. In Will Roscoe's book "The Zuni Man-Woman", when foreigners (whites) asked about We'wha, they were told "he is a woman", or "she is a man". Hir people fully acknowledged hir birth sex as male, and also hir societal gender as female or middle.

Zythyra

Quote from: regina on September 02, 2007, 12:07:46 PM

Quote from: SarahFaceDoom on September 02, 2007, 06:34:43 AM

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.

I really don't agree with this statement. I don't think passability has anything to do with pretty. There are very pretty boys who transition mtf and still aren't passable as women. There are men who aren't attractive who transition mtf and become not especially attractive there either, but they look like women. This isn't theorhetical, I've know people who fit into both of those categories. There are people who are highly androgynous (which a lot of people find very attractive) but don't look female. They look gorgeously androgynous. NOT the same thing. Some of the most passable transwomen I've seen haven't been what would normally be called attractive. Those two are not analogous.

It's not Pretty equals passable.  It's more Pretty is to ugly, as passable is to unpassable.  They are both aesthetic hierarchies imposed in a high schoolish way to create a "haves" "have nots" kind of thing.

Quote from: SarahFaceDoom on September 02, 2007, 06:02:17 PM

Quote from: regina on September 02, 2007, 12:07:46 PM

Quote from: SarahFaceDoom on September 02, 2007, 06:34:43 AM

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.

I really don't agree with this statement. I don't think passability has anything to do with pretty. There are very pretty boys who transition mtf and still aren't passable as women. There are men who aren't attractive who transition mtf and become not especially attractive there either, but they look like women. This isn't theorhetical, I've know people who fit into both of those categories. There are people who are highly androgynous (which a lot of people find very attractive) but don't look female. They look gorgeously androgynous. NOT the same thing. Some of the most passable transwomen I've seen haven't been what would normally be called attractive. Those two are not analogous.

It's not Pretty equals passable.  It's more Pretty is to ugly, as passable is to unpassable.  They are both aesthetic hierarchies imposed in a high schoolish way to create a "haves" "have nots" kind of thing.

Thanks for clarifying. I agree passable vs unpassable, and pretty vs ugly are analogous.

Quote from: y2gender on September 02, 2007, 05:55:15 PM
Yes Doc! Even though we might identify someone's gender or sex as a habit, how we respond or judge is learned, and based on our cultural standards and assumptions.

Well, I think it is more than habit (a learned thing) that makes us notice sex-characteristics in other humans. But I think it is a habit, and is learned, to decide that sex characteristics make a man a man or a woman a woman. So the Zunis, and other native american groups, and other 'primitive peoples' around the world have these people where everybody knows he's female but he's recognised and accepted as a man. Or vise-versa. The ability of these peoples to determine someone's sex without seeing her naked was there, but they determined a person's gender by other cues. Cultural standards about who men and women are and what they may properly do and what they are supposed to be like existed, too. What wasn't there was a specific cultural standard that says that all female people are women and all male people are men. Modern culture has that standard, and teaches it to us firmly and young, and tends to make us practice it, what with the whole annoying 'cross-dressing as a joke' thing. It is this habit, essentially a habit of declaring a male-bodied person's womanhood invalid or a female-bodied person's manhood invalid, that makes it hard for some people to relate to 'unpassable' transwomen as women. I suspect that this habit also makes us see (or rather attribute more meaning to) physical sex markers more strongly than behavioral ones. But I base that last on my own experience -- I've tried to rid myself of that particular habit and assumption, with the result being that I am touchingly naive and need to see an adam's apple that makes her look like she's got a kneecap in her neck to notice that a goth-girl with a strong feminine presentation is a male, and even after I notice it I still can't think of her as a boy.

Quote from: Doc on September 02, 2007, 06:42:10 PM

Quote from: y2gender on September 02, 2007, 05:55:15 PM
Yes Doc! Even though we might identify someone's gender or sex as a habit, how we respond or judge is learned, and based on our cultural standards and assumptions.

Well, I think it is more than habit (a learned thing) that makes us notice sex-characteristics in other humans. But I think it is a habit, and is learned, to decide that sex characteristics make a man a man or a woman a woman. So the Zunis, and other native american groups, and other 'primitive peoples' around the world have these people where everybody knows he's female but he's recognised and accepted as a man. Or vise-versa. The ability of these peoples to determine someone's sex without seeing her naked was there, but they determined a person's gender by other cues. Cultural standards about who men and women are and what they may properly do and what they are supposed to be like existed, too. What wasn't there was a specific cultural standard that says that all female people are women and all male people are men. Modern culture has that standard, and teaches it to us firmly and young, and tends to make us practice it, what with the whole annoying 'cross-dressing as a joke' thing. It is this habit, essentially a habit of declaring a male-bodied person's womanhood invalid or a female-bodied person's manhood invalid, that makes it hard for some people to relate to 'unpassable' transwomen as women. I suspect that this habit also makes us see (or rather attribute more meaning to) physical sex markers more strongly than behavioral ones. But I base that last on my own experience -- I've tried to rid myself of that particular habit and assumption, with the result being that I am touchingly naive and need to see an adam's apple that makes her look like she's got a kneecap in her neck to notice that a goth-girl with a strong feminine presentation is a male, and even after I notice it I still can't think of her as a boy.

Knowing someone identifies as a woman, and treating them accordingly is not the same thing as meeting a person and having pronoun difficulty.
Once I know someone, I'd be used to the pronouns.

Re: Do you find it difficult to think of the unpassables as female? (taboo topic)

I do.  Shall I continue Nero?   Dont want to get the "forcing your opinion" motto.

Quote from: Nero on September 02, 2007, 06:55:06 PM
Knowing someone identifies as a woman, and treating them accordingly is not the same thing as meeting a person and having pronoun difficulty.
Once I know someone, I'd be used to the pronouns.

Once you get it right, you'll have good pronounciation.   

Quote from: Nero on September 01, 2007, 09:57:02 PM
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?

I am not insinuating anything.  What I am saying is that I find this thread offensive, and I was surprised and disappointed that it was brought up.  I live in the real world, I've got a thick-skin to deal with a lot of cr*p, just didn't know I would have to deal with it on here.  I see the villifying going on.  What I was trying to say is that there are some GG's who are more accepting than some trans, and I think that has been made very clear here.  I would not disrespect anyone's mother and I'm sorry if you took it that way.

O.k.  I get the jist that upon meeting someone we try to access them 'automatically' as either male or female.  What has gone asquew is how we continue to associate with the said person.  So we just dismiss someone for not passing, that they were even 'stupid' enough to try?  I can't understand where this is coming from and where it is going??  What will this discussion achieve?  I didn't think we needed convincing, I thought it was society as a whole??   

buttercup   

Quote from: Diane on September 02, 2007, 09:23:53 AM
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.

where i live there are a lot of trans girls who look so great they cannot be read, and lots of them look better than cisgendered girls. some of them have attitudes; some are indifferent; and some of them are really sweet.   

Quote from: Nero on September 02, 2007, 06:55:06 PM
Knowing someone identifies as a woman, and treating them accordingly is not the same thing as meeting a person and having pronoun difficulty.
Once I know someone, I'd be used to the pronouns.

Oh, I don't know the pretty goth girl I keep mentioning. Not even remotely. We exchanged about five words and I got a sultry glance. Because she was wearing a dress and acting like a woman, I thought she was a woman. I still think so, just as strongly, even after seeing obvious male physical characteristics on her. Things like that no longer diminish a woman's womanhood to me.

I could, in fact, be dead wrong about her gender. Maybe she identifies as a man and just happened to feel like cross-dressing that day. Maybe he'd be really pissed off to know that I think of him as a woman. Now that's another story. I'm really tired of people who cross-dress and cross-act and then get angry when people 'incorrectly' call them by the pronouns and titles that go with their dress and demeanor, thus reinforcing the idea that physical sex and gender always match and that cross-dressing is always a joke or a pitiable mistake or a fashion quirk. I'm sure I (and all the 'unpassables' out there) would have an easier time being recognized as ourselves if half the populace hadn't been snarled at some time when they called a butch 'sir' or a glam-rock boy 'miss.'

Quote from: Jeannette on September 02, 2007, 07:00:30 PM
Re: Do you find it difficult to think of the unpassables as female? (taboo topic)

I do.  Shall I continue Nero?   Dont want to get the "forcing your opinion" motto.

Be my guest, doll. Don't mind the touchy types. Everyone's opinion deserves to be heard.

Passability is a huge issue in the community, innit?  or am I the only one that thinks so.  (at least here in France it is)  Either one passes or doesn't

I  find it quite a challenge to respond to someone as woman if that person doesnt pass.  It is an involuntary reaction that comes from within.  Dunno how to help it.  Do I do it purposely?  no, it just shows.  Do I feel guilt?  I do.  Nuff said.

Quote from: buttercup on September 02, 2007, 07:12:27 PMI would not disrespect anyone's mother and I'm sorry if you took it that way.

Good to know. Just very defensive of her. She's a goddess. Just thought her incident illustrated the difficulties people have when someone looks one way, but is another.

Quote from: buttercup on September 02, 2007, 07:12:27 PMWhat I am saying is that I find this thread offensive, and I was surprised and disappointed that it was brought up. 

Why is it offensive? Why are you suprised that a trans issue was brought up in a trans forum?

Quote from: buttercup on September 02, 2007, 07:12:27 PMI live in the real world, I've got a thick-skin to deal with a lot of cr*p, just didn't know I would have to deal with it on here. 

Nobody's giving anyone any crap here. This is a safe place to discuss issues we face as transpeople - all trans issues, not just the warm, fuzzy ones.

Quote from: buttercup on September 02, 2007, 07:12:27 PM
O.k.  I get the jist that upon meeting someone we try to access them 'automatically' as either male or female.  What has gone asquew is how we continue to associate with the said person.  So we just dismiss someone for not passing, that they were even 'stupid' enough to try?  I can't understand where this is coming from and where it is going??  What will this discussion achieve?  I didn't think we needed convincing, I thought it was society as a whole??  

buttercup  

As for continuing to associate with an unpassable transperson? After I got to know them, it would depend on personality. If she thinks and acts female (inherently, not artifically), if her reactions to things are female, if it's crystal clear I'm talking with a female, I will see a female.
Now for an unpassable woman, her female aura would have to be stronger to override appearance than if she were passable.

Upon getting to know a passable woman - if her reactions are male, it wouldn't matter if she were indistinguishable from a GG, I would see a male.

Hey, shoot darn,

I'm in a therapy group where 75% of the ladies are non-passable, with a good 50% in the category of no-way in a lifetime will she reach that stage. Most of the ladies have male voices. Some have transitioned and still retain their masculine voice.

It is their voice--mostly--that causes trouble. People are taken aback by their name, or feminine appearance, that doesn't jibe with the voice.

Whilst listening to them explain their experiences, I view them all as women, even the ones people would classify as truckers in a wig and lipstick.. why? because of the personality.

So with first impressions, I'll see them as male. Hearing their voice: male... getting to know them... female.

I think I am fairly open-minded, and to expect people, even us transfolk, to react (initially) to non-passable females as female is very unfair. Put lipstick on George W and what do you see? female? I think not.

Quote from: Candi Nahasapeemapetilon on September 02, 2007, 08:19:56 PM
I think I have a fairly open-mind, and to expect people, even us transfolk, to react (initially) to non-passable females as female is very unfair. Put lipstick on George W and what do you see? female? I think not.

Can I put the lipstick on his eyeballs?   

I might feel skittish at first but after I know the person, I've got no problems seeing them as women.  The opposite is also true.  I've met ppl that pass but afterwards I dont see them as female.  Maybe their manners are notoriously male and so it overides their female presentation.

    You know, it's strange, but I'm beginning to see everybody as everything.  There is almost no difference for me anymore.  Like all the females are half male and all the males are half female unless someone really stands out.
     I'm talking about real life when I'm at work or out at the mall.

I have been thinking on this and no, I do not think there is any problem as long as she behaves like a female.

Fwiw.

Quote from: Candi Nahasapeemapetilon on September 02, 2007, 08:19:56 PM
Put lipstick on George W and what do you see? female? I think not.

LOL    Actually I had a video posted about our dearest president dressed in several sexy, feminine clothing and wearing a number of different wigs.  And he DID pass.  The video was eventually removed from youtube, so I had to remove the thread as well.

tink