Quote from: Carrie Liz on January 11, 2015, 12:00:25 AM
Okay, I understand what you're talking about now... the "trying way too hard to call attention to their femaleness" type.

Well, I'm not quite sure they are trying to call attention to their femaleness.  Maybe example #1 is sort of like that?  Example #2, on the other hand, was reaching the point that her behavior was sexual harrassment.  Example #3 is hard for me to describe without using words like gentlemanly or chivalrous. 

QuoteI feel bad judging them as that, though... like, for the most part these people seem to be consistently among the happiest trans women I know, because they enjoy celebrating their newfound womanhood so much.

I still don't feel like noticing this is judgmental.  To me, this is no different from noticing that a person is tall or has red hair.  People may wish their traits were different.  Everyone does, I suppose.  Like me being 5'9, but I'd love to be about 5'6". 

I'm not sure why people respond to the idea of having gender incongruous traits as if it's a bad thing.  When I look at trans* people, I'm not interested in hearing about hormones or surgery or clothes.  I've been hearing those stories for around 15 years or so.  So when someone is newly postop or just started HRT or whatever else, I'm happy for them, but I'm afraid that my attention tends to drift off and I tend to tune out those threads/discussions/conversations until the topic changes to something else. 

But if the topic is how trans* identities and expression affect lives in the workplaces the family, or society, then I'm intrigued.  It provides me a window on things I don't experience.  It provides me with perspective on things I do experience.  It gives me a good stock of stories to use the next time I give a talk on trans* issues.  And it's where the diversity of this community really shows.  That diversity is what I think is so fascinating.

So I recognize that people may wish they had fewer of those traits.  But I think those traits are morally neutral.  It's no different from wishing to have a different color of hair or be taller/shorter. 

But I do wish that I were different in respect to the pain it causes me to be put in that situation I posted about earlier.  The one where all the pain of being expected to be "one of the guys" comes flooding back.  Socializing with men is a lot easier now that I'm not expected to be one of the them.  I wish it didn't hurt the way it does. 

And it would be nice idea trans women could drop the expectation that I be able to socialize with them like they did back when they were living as guys.  It would be nice if they didn't accuse me of folding under societal pressure to conform to gender norms when they figure out that I can't. 

Quote from: suzifrommd on January 11, 2015, 04:47:39 AM
You're right ThePhoenix, it would be wrong to say that women are kinder than men. There are men with hearts of gold and some really small, petty women.

But there's SOMETHING there. It seems to me that in general, women are constituted in such a way that makes it easier to be empathetic. Men can be empathetic too, but it seems harder for them - that by their nature not as many automatically tune in to other people's feelings.

Men are taught to close themselves off to emotion and to react to a person's problems by solving them.  from early childhood, the notion of being a "tough boy" is praised and being sensitive is discouraged.  One result of that is that men are much more direct.

Women are taught to feel emotion and to react to a person's problems with empathy.  From earliest childhood, the notion of being a "sweet girl" is praised and toughness is seen as being a bitch.  One result of that is that women can be much more subtle. 

Turning a table full of people against a person without ever saying a negative word about them is a typical woman thing.  Charging in and clobbering them directly is a typical male thing.

Not to say that women don't ever charge in and men don't ever turn people against a person.  But I hope my point is made.

And of course there's the difference between how men are to other men and how they are to women or how women are to other women versus how they are to men.

I'm trying to not write a long post about this here . . . but I'm sure you'll find out what I'm talking about.

Thank you for an amazing conversation.   I am a woman, that I am trans isn't usually relevant.  Still I tend to spend time in the non binary area because I recognize that for nearly all of my life I lived as a queer man, one who did not fit in with straight or gay men well, one who preferred being and socializing with women, and one who was horribly conflicted.

So do I  commit male faux pas and step forward assertively?  Sometimes I do, but I spend most of my time with cis women who liked me before transition and like me still.  I just spent a week with trans folk and felt both accepted and embraced.  I must live an authentic life - else I will die.

For me that means embracing life as a woman but acknowledging that I'm damaged goods.  It has been said here, that we will never be cis.  That is true, but at my stage of life that is not a tragedy either.  No I won't patronize you, nor will I hit on you or touch you without an invitation.  But I will listen.  I always have.  If you are a child, I will play with you.  If you are hurt, I will bind your wounds.  Are these the essence of the feminine experience?  Perhaps, but I think they are more the purview of the human condition - or at least ought to be.

I will never be entirely comfortable around dominant men cis or trans, but I'll let them open the door for me.  Cis men finish my thoughts, or discount my observations more often than I am comfortable with.  Trans women sometimes do also, as do some trans men.  I am ever so careful not to, but the impulse is sometimes still there.  Ever notice how men will invent causation when they don't know how something works?  That is a hard habit to break, but it is a habit and can be broken.

I have so much to learn on my journey to me that I ought not throw stones, but I do insist on respect, and I do demand of my self to be respectful.  It comes down to am I teachable?  Do I have at least a passing flirtation with humility?  Am I willing to love without expectation?  I think that is my goal of transition - the morphological acceptance and genetilia corrections aside, my transition will be complete when I understand and live the prayer of St Francis.

Peace,
Julie

Quote from: ThePhoenix on January 11, 2015, 10:55:47 AM
But I do wish that I were different in respect to the pain it causes me to be put in that situation I posted about earlier.  The one where all the pain of being expected to be "one of the guys" comes flooding back.  Socializing with men is a lot easier now that I'm not expected to be one of the them.  I wish it didn't hurt the way it does. 

And it would be nice idea trans women could drop the expectation that I be able to socialize with them like they did back when they were living as guys.  It would be nice if they didn't accuse me of folding under societal pressure to conform to gender norms when they figure out that I can't.

Yeah... definitely understandable. And yes, I definitely do feel the same way when the same friend that I mentioned, despite constantly talking about how much of a woman she is, goes on long blathering talks about how to tell which train is owned by one company or another, the schedules, etc, every single time we pass a railroad. She CONSTANTLY talks about military weapons and vehicles while focusing on absolutely nothing but the technical details, and yeah, I'll admit, it just makes me roll my eyes and think to myself "God, Dale, why does ANY of this technical detail matter? Why do you think it's interesting?" So yeah, again, I guess I deal with it too, the vibe that I pick up from those long technical rants is very "masculine," and it makes me uncomfortable exactly because it reminds me of being "one of the guys" in high school. And I constantly see cis-guys at work talking like this too, where every single time they talk about football, it's not about rooting for a team anymore even, or just jokingly trash-talking each-other like my female sports-fan friends do. It's always about the over/under, the odds, which players they think are going to do well in fantasy, which players they're starting, and to me it just feels like purposeless blathering with no human connection in it whatsoever.

So yeah, as much as I talk about not criticizing trans women for being themselves, I find myself doing it. It makes me uncomfortable because to myself I'm thinking "God, Dale, you are acting so much like a guy right now," and it brings back bad memories of being expected to talk like that myself and thus constantly being in aimless friendships where I felt like no emotional connection was going on whatsoever, it was just always "stuff, stuff, stuff, stuff."

Quote from: ThePhoenix on January 11, 2015, 10:55:47 AM
Men are taught to close themselves off to emotion and to react to a person's problems by solving them.  from early childhood, the notion of being a "tough boy" is praised and being sensitive is discouraged.  One result of that is that men are much more direct.

Women are taught to feel emotion and to react to a person's problems with empathy.  From earliest childhood, the notion of being a "sweet girl" is praised and toughness is seen as being a bitch.  One result of that is that women can be much more subtle. 

I actually find this a bit funny, because while it is definitely a gender stereotype, (like, one of the biggest points in "Men are from Mars, Women are from Venus" was the "Mr. Fix-it" thing where men give solutions while women are looking for empathy,) I actually haven't found it to be as true in execution. There's definitely gender bias in there, where women are automatically seen as being more empathetic even if they're being every bit as much of a "fix-it" person as men are supposed to be.

Like, my ex-girlfriend Jenny, I actually had a LOT of frustrating conversations with her where I was feeling bad, ranting about something bad that had happened to me, and she immediately offered solutions to my "problems." And I just kind of stopped, not knowing what to say, because I really wasn't looking for solutions, wasn't looking for some way to actively solve this thing that I was whining about, I really just wanted someone to listen to me and understand my pain. She was completely and totally a "Ms. Fix-it." And she's completely 100% cis. So now that I'm thinking about it, maybe it isn't a gender thing at all, maybe it's just a matter of certain behaviors not feeling "right" to us, and we ascribe them to gender when they happen because they're gender stereotypes? I don't know.

Any talk about social gender roles and expectations is going to be dicey by nature because of the fine line between oppositional sexism, automatically gendering certain traits even though both men and women do them in real life, and being realistic with how most members of a sex act.

See my own experience on this subject pretty much falls in line with the G1 group described earlier in this thread.

As Phoenix stated, " There is group one (G1) consisting of people whose brains had minimal or no masculinization, leaving the default female identity intact."

I started the social transition long before hormones so by the time I was on hrt, everything from mannerisms to speech patterns were already there and flowed naturally even better than before cause estrogen just relaxed/eased my dysphoria a lot. I started transition around 19/20 but didn't start hrt till around 21, a few months before my 22nd bday.

An interesting thing I realized the other day was that, looking back on my childhood and teenage years, I was very much like any other girl during that time in terms of overall attitude and social interaction. I tried desperately to be that "hyper alpha male" during high school to hide it but it never really worked. My peers, especially the boys in public school would call me out on being girly so I was constantly failing at trying to mask my female identity. I even had to train myself to walk like a guy back then too, where as walking like a cis girl always came much more natural to me. I guess that was due to my wide hips and overall feminine skeletal structure (another reason why I was always made fun of by boys). I always preferred and did hang out with girls growing up so the socialization factor later on at the start of transition was a very natural process cause most of it was already done.  I always had this habit of absorbing things like a sponge. When it came to female socialization it felt right, where as all the male socialization always felt very forced and practically alien to me. It just felt so odd, like I had this disconnect with it.

In terms of what vibe I give out, its like very feminine I guess. Random women out in public start convos with me and whenever I'm in female spaces I get treated like any other girl or in any place really, guys open doors for me, I'm constantly being called honey and such..So it feels amazing to be at this point in my life where my body and identity are finally unified and everyone around me recognizes me for who I truly am. I went through so many struggles prior in my life that it's just so surreal to be at this point.

Quote from: Carrie Liz on January 11, 2015, 01:47:00 PMI actually find this a bit funny, because while it is definitely a gender stereotype, (like, one of the biggest points in "Men are from Mars, Women are from Venus" was the "Mr. Fix-it" thing where men give solutions while women are looking for empathy,) I actually haven't found it to be as true in execution. There's definitely gender bias in there, where women are automatically seen as being more empathetic even if they're being every bit as much of a "fix-it" person as men are supposed to be.

Well, I'm trying to avoid posting a dissertation about the intricacies of male and female socialization, so I was going for something simple, familiar, easy to see, and which has a lot of sociological backing behind it. 

Of course men can be empathetic and women can sometimes want solutions.  Of course little boys can sometimes get rewarded for sensitivity and little girls can sometimes get rewarded for toughness.  None of that is the point.

The point I'm trying to make is that despite numerous exceptions, there are still generalities that can be observed in the socialization of people based on gender and those general rules of thumb about learned socialization have consequences throughout life. 

Quote from: Lady_Oracle on January 11, 2015, 09:12:54 PM
See my own experience on this subject pretty much falls in line with the G1 group described earlier in this thread.

As Phoenix stated, " There is group one (G1) consisting of people whose brains had minimal or no masculinization, leaving the default female identity intact."

I'm very deliberately not saying anything about which group I would put myself in.  And I am in no way stating a doubt about where you categorize yourself.  However, after having discussed this article here and elsewhere a couple of times, I have noticed something interesting.  So far every single person who has made a comment about it has categorized themselves in G1.  I don't think I've yet seen anyone describe themselves as a G3.  Not even one person. 

If Anne Vitale's observation has any validity whatsoever, then folks who fall in the G3 category exist.  We all seem to observe the existence of trans women who express a substantial amount of masculinity and don't seem to fit the G1 description (read the article if you're unclear on this; the link was posted earlier).  So why does no one recognize themselves as fitting in G3?

I suspect that a lot of people are either unaware of the "vibe" we have been discussing or they just so badly want it not to be there that they convince themselves it isn't.  And I suspect that the unwillingness of even a single person to acknowledge that G3 describes them better is a reflection of the same thing. 

Once again, there is nothing inherently bad or wrong about having various amounts of "male" mixed into one's identity or ones actions or ones "vibe."  But I do wish it were something we could be honest about, recognize it in ourselves, and discuss what it means.  But I would be unsurprised if people who give off the male "vibe" are even aware of it, or whether they genuinely believe that "vibe" does not exist.

On a side note, however, I do wish to join in the thanks that have been expressed to all who have participated in this discussion.  It is a touchy topic for a lot of people and a very hard one to really talk about.  But yet it is an important issue, actually. 

It seems like I am eternally fielding questions about "men in dresses."  And unfortunately, one of the places that notion comes from is cis people's encounters with trans women who they judge to be more like men based on various things, including behavior and "vibes."  (Alas, people are seldom concerned about trans men).  This topic is very useful for me as I am always trying to figure out better ways of responding to that in ways that cis people will understand.

Quote from: ThePhoenix on January 11, 2015, 11:02:55 PM
I'm very deliberately not saying anything about which group I would put myself in.  And I am in no way stating a doubt about where you categorize yourself.  However, after having discussed this article here and elsewhere a couple of times, I have noticed something interesting.  So far every single person who has made a comment about it has categorized themselves in G1.  I don't think I've yet seen anyone describe themselves as a G3.  Not even one person. 

Oh, really? Time to break that pattern then . When I read that article for the first time, I immediately noticed similarities between my life experience and description of G3. Never saw that one as an issue - rather the life cycle described in Vitale's article helped last pieces of puzzle to click in. At the same time, I did not recognise some of difficulties or struggles associated typically with G3 which could be attributed to the main topic of our discussion - masculine vibes or male persona residue. I also never made a deliberate attempt to rid my self of that persona - I was giving him time to fade out and when it did not happen, I just accepted "him". Yet, I have to say that despite descriptions of G3, a lot of things still came out naturally - or at least more natural and easier for someone who had mostly socialised as male. I really dont want to get into that "measuring" mode but in the light of some articles posted here on Susans', as well as picked up on the internet, I asked some of new female friends for honest feedback as to what impressions they had - some of them said that they felt very comfortable and did not feel any of issues which tend to occur when socialising with a guy; another one mentioned that she is getting 50/50 impression, mostly visual and emotional image conflicting with audial (she was referring to voice pitch). As was mentioned above, complete strangers (female) have struck up conversations with on on random places and guys would hold a door to me or say random things to which I often react with a huge internal WTF??? The point I was trying to make, is that You can be G3 and still blend in without much difficulties despite being in that group and despite having stronger male vibe than G1. Do I still have masculine traits? Of course, I do and hence would describe myself as non-binary - I could never be 100% female and I am happy and content with life experience I had, because it gives me a lot of edge and advantages when socialising with both genders - I feel and understand women and I know what motivates men. Besides, I am not afraid and still capable to act masculine when circumstances or danger of situation may require so.

Quote from: ThePhoenix on January 11, 2015, 11:02:55 PM
Well, I'm trying to avoid posting a dissertation about the intricacies of male and female socialization, so I was going for something simple, familiar, easy to see, and which has a lot of sociological backing behind it. 

Of course men can be empathetic and women can sometimes want solutions.  Of course little boys can sometimes get rewarded for sensitivity and little girls can sometimes get rewarded for toughness.  None of that is the point.

The point I'm trying to make is that despite numerous exceptions, there are still generalities that can be observed in the socialization of people based on gender and those general rules of thumb about learned socialization have consequences throughout life. 

I'm very deliberately not saying anything about which group I would put myself in.  And I am in no way stating a doubt about where you categorize yourself.  However, after having discussed this article here and elsewhere a couple of times, I have noticed something interesting.  So far every single person who has made a comment about it has categorized themselves in G1.  I don't think I've yet seen anyone describe themselves as a G3.  Not even one person. 

If Anne Vitale's observation has any validity whatsoever, then folks who fall in the G3 category exist.  We all seem to observe the existence of trans women who express a substantial amount of masculinity and don't seem to fit the G1 description (read the article if you're unclear on this; the link was posted earlier).  So why does no one recognize themselves as fitting in G3?

I suspect that a lot of people are either unaware of the "vibe" we have been discussing or they just so badly want it not to be there that they convince themselves it isn't.  And I suspect that the unwillingness of even a single person to acknowledge that G3 describes them better is a reflection of the same thing. 

Once again, there is nothing inherently bad or wrong about having various amounts of "male" mixed into one's identity or ones actions or ones "vibe."  But I do wish it were something we could be honest about, recognize it in ourselves, and discuss what it means.  But I would be unsurprised if people who give off the male "vibe" are even aware of it, or whether they genuinely believe that "vibe" does not exist.

On a side note, however, I do wish to join in the thanks that have been expressed to all who have participated in this discussion.  It is a touchy topic for a lot of people and a very hard one to really talk about.  But yet it is an important issue, actually. 

It seems like I am eternally fielding questions about "men in dresses."  And unfortunately, one of the places that notion comes from is cis people's encounters with trans women who they judge to be more like men based on various things, including behavior and "vibes."  (Alas, people are seldom concerned about trans men).  This topic is very useful for me as I am always trying to figure out better ways of responding to that in ways that cis people will understand.

Yeah I get what you're saying and I understand the concepts here being discussed. You see I can't possibly categorize myself in the g3 because I blend in within society and its because I transitioned young, plus I spent most of my life around women so the male socialization never took hold or in other words I'd say it wasn't really there to begin with. I didn't spend my adult life in the male side of society.

I mean if I had been an older transitioner then yes I would most definitely identify with g3 because spending so much time in that male role does imo damage the female identity to some extent. Not to say that it can't be repaired or the male socialization undone but I'd imagine its a much more difficult road since the moment you begin transition, you have so many new things to learn about yourself and the new world around you. That's why my heart goes out to the older folk, I can't imagine what they're going through. In fact reading a lot of their stories is part of the reason why it inspired me to transition when I did. So in a way I feel very thankful to them. I see so many of us young trans gals dismiss the older crowd and that just makes me sad honestly. They paved the road for us.

I've seen instances of the g3 here in susans with some of the older folk that have come and gone or with the new transitioners that are prehrt. I have yet to experience what its like hanging out with an older trans woman or a trans woman that doesn't pass or is in the early stages of transition so I can't really comment about real life experiences. Either way I'd be more than happy to hang out with any trans person passing, older, pre everything cause I've always been the kind of person to have empathy and look past the physical stuff. I should try going to a support group. I never went to one before. I guess whenever I do, I'll chime back in.

Having read the previous post by Lady_Oracle, made me think about something else with regard to classification of transsexuals proposed by Dr.Vitale (sorry )
What are exactly the criteria by which we decide whether we belong to G1 or G3? Age? It seems, at first, because it the first and most apparent distinction which was also made by Dr.Vitale (and which made me think about analogy with Blanchard - young vs. old). Blending in? Is blending in really that much dependant on age? Yes and no. In some cases, early transition helps to blend in because the damage by testosterone over the years and decades is prevented. In other cases, the damage is not that extreme - I have seen transfolks at the age of 30-40 and even older who do not present any explicit masculine facial features (and lets be honest, face comes the first when we try to gender strangers).  And then again there are cases when early puberty creates a lot of damage before something can be done.
Life experience? One can spend years and decades making point of not enhancing or strenghtening the male persona and when finally decision to transition is taken there is not really much to unlearn.
Or is it a bit about exclusion - like, I am too old to fit into G1, so I must (MUST) be in G3? It is either one or the other, with no shady borders. Or is it not?
Another thing (sorry about bringing in personal perspective) - when I frst read about Blanchard, I figured out that I must be ->-bleeped-<- then, because I was not homosexual during my childhood (maybe I was rather bi, but I never let myself to explore that part). Except, I could not identify with other strong features attributable to ->-bleeped-<- (and I have read why Blanchard was hated and the opposite views - that a lot of folks who would fall under the ->-bleeped-<- category were in deep denial and thus would hate that term) - I had no extensive or prolonged experience of cross-dressing and it was not sexual. Yet, again, according to him, those who transition at older age must be ->-bleeped-<-s, so... Go figure .

And I have to stress and repeat once again that I feel very fascinated and amazed about the depth of this discussion - so far it has been great intellectual pleasure to follow it .

Quote from: ThePhoenix on January 11, 2015, 11:02:55 PM
I'm very deliberately not saying anything about which group I would put myself in.  And I am in no way stating a doubt about where you categorize yourself.  However, after having discussed this article here and elsewhere a couple of times, I have noticed something interesting.  So far every single person who has made a comment about it has categorized themselves in G1.  I don't think I've yet seen anyone describe themselves as a G3.  Not even one person. 

If Anne Vitale's observation has any validity whatsoever, then folks who fall in the G3 category exist.  We all seem to observe the existence of trans women who express a substantial amount of masculinity and don't seem to fit the G1 description (read the article if you're unclear on this; the link was posted earlier).  So why does no one recognize themselves as fitting in G3?

Because until being trans is de-stigmatized by society, NOBODY wants to admit that their brains might even be partially masculinized. Strictly according to biology, it doesn't matter what happened, each person is just being who they're biologically programmed to be. But in a society where a trans woman's validity as female is based on how well she blends in as cis, admitting that your behavior might be less than traditionally-feminine is akin to admitting that you're a lesser person.

I'm probably guilty of deliberately avoiding the G3 label myself... like, I'm technically a late-onset "heterosexual" trans person who didn't even have dysphoria until I was 13-14 years old, but I choose to not associate myself with the G3 that I'd probably technically be placed in due to my age and sexual orientation, and rather place myself somewhere in the middle between G1 and G3 due to my childhood gender-nonconformity, my naturally-effeminate mannerisms, CONSTANTLY getting read as gay by people all through my life, my high volume of female friends as a kid, the severity of my dysphoria to the point of self-mutilation once it started, and the fact that I never cross-dressed or got sexual gratification from it. Because I'll be honest, my age makes me question myself. (IE, "if I didn't know as a kid, but all of these people knew since their earliest memories, does that make me somehow "less trans" or mean that my gender identity is less valid?") And I'm constantly scared that my behavior is somehow not "female enough."

So yeah, this is a bit of an emotionally-charged topic.

Quote from: ThePhoenix on January 11, 2015, 11:02:55 PM
However, after having discussed this article here and elsewhere a couple of times, I have noticed something interesting.  So far every single person who has made a comment about it has categorized themselves in G1.  I don't think I've yet seen anyone describe themselves as a G3.  Not even one person. 

Interesting. Now I'm developing an unhealthy curiosity what group you would place me in, given that we've met IRL.

Quote from: ThePhoenix on January 11, 2015, 11:02:55 PMIf Anne Vitale's observation has any validity whatsoever, then folks who fall in the G3 category exist.  We all seem to observe the existence of trans women who express a substantial amount of masculinity and don't seem to fit the G1 description (read the article if you're unclear on this; the link was posted earlier).  So why does no one recognize themselves as fitting in G3?

Wonder if there's a selection bias. My experience with G3 folks is that, as a rule, they don't dwell on their masculinity/femininity the way G1 folks do. Could it be that those of us who've put effort and angst into cleansing ourselves of masculine traits (I include myself in this category) would find a discussion like this interesting?

Quote from: suzifrommd on January 12, 2015, 04:46:03 AM
My experience with G3 folks is that, as a rule, they don't dwell on their masculinity/femininity the way G1 folks do. Could it be that those of us who've put effort and angst into cleansing ourselves of masculine traits (I include myself in this category) would find a discussion like this interesting?

And this is very curious observation, because my understanding always was that it was G3 who were supposed to dwell on those issues (for G1 it should have been all natural and easy) At least that was my impression from reading and re-reading that article countless times. At the same time, I have to admit that I have met very few transfolks in person.

G1 vs. G3: I'd categorize myself as G3, if anything, because of the following passages:

(Apparently talking about G1:)

Quote from: www.avitale.com/developmentalreview.htm
Some boys in particular openly endure the taunts of their peers and castigations of their parents in order to live according to their cross-gender understanding.

I don't think this describes me.  I did not (consciously) think of myself as a girl, not that I had any sisters to compare myself with (I don't think my 9-years-younger sister counts), nor did I engage in obviously girl-only behavior.  I didn't engage in much boy-only behavior, though, despite a lot of pressure, ostracism, and outright punishment.   I remember that the idea of a boy becoming a girl (something that crops up in children's literature) made me very anxious, which now makes me suspect that some part of me was really attracted to the idea.

(Apparently talking about G3:)

Quote from: www.avitale.com/developmentalreview.htm
Unable or uninterested in competing in organized boys' activities and having been shuffled decidedly away from playing with the girls, many became reclusive. To add to their confusion, and counter to behavior typically reported in openly gender dysphoric boys, many cloistered boys actually preferred solo play with boys' toys and had little or no interest in girls' toys. ... The more academic of this group report little or no interest in sports and rough and tumble play. To avoid castigation from their peers, they report spending a lot of time reading and studying.

This pretty much describes me (except maybe the studying.)  We didn't have any girl toys, so it's not like I would have had the opportunity to show any interest in them even if I'd been so inclined.


Of course, we need to keep in mind that G1, G2, etc., are rather like borders in the Middle East -- an attempt by outsiders to divide up a mixed and varied reality into a few discrete states.  Nobody (well, almost nobody) is going to fit neatly into one box.  And the existence of these boxes encourages those who end up in one to adjust who they are and how they see themselves to fit what they think people in their box are supposed to be.

Quote from: suzifrommd on January 12, 2015, 04:46:03 AM
My experience with G3 folks is that, as a rule, they don't dwell on their masculinity/femininity the way G1 folks do. Could it be that those of us who've put effort and angst into cleansing ourselves of masculine traits (I include myself in this category) would find a discussion like this interesting?

I don't have enough experience with trans people, especially trans women, to even speculate as to who is G1, G2, or G3.

I do notice that a lot of cis men do dwell on their masculinity, as do M2F crossdressers.  I'm concerned with "masculinity" sort of like the way I'm concerned about muggers -- they're both unpleasant things that I'd rather didn't come over and afflict me.

As for femininity: I'm mostly interesting in seeing which of the things tagged as "feminine" I'd like to (and can) adopt and make a part of myself.  But I wouldn't see adopting them as making me more of a woman -- in fact, most of my life, I've been protesting the way things I think are (or should be) gender neutral get gendered, e.g., liking babies, cooking, sewing, being supportive and nurturing, being assertive (something I'm not good at), being strong and someone who can be relied upon, etc.

Quote from: ♡ Emily ♡ on January 12, 2015, 01:42:00 AM
Having read the previous post by Lady_Oracle, made me think about something else with regard to classification of transsexuals proposed by Dr.Vitale (sorry )
What are exactly the criteria by which we decide whether we belong to G1 or G3? Age? It seems, at first, because it the first and most apparent distinction which was also made by Dr.Vitale (and which made me think about analogy with Blanchard - young vs. old).

With respect, I think that you and Lady_Oracle are kind of getting sidetracked by an observation that Anne Vitale made about the two categories.  The article is about gender identity, not age at transition.  What she is proposing is that there are folks who are assigned male who have a basically intact female identity (G1) and thekre are folks who are assigned male who have a female identity that has been experienced a substantial amount of masculinization (G3).  She believes this to be because of brain development in the womb.  It is not an article about age at transition and it is not about the impact of earlier/later transitions on a person's transition, although she does posit that a G1 person is more likely to transition earlier than a G3 person.  That does not mean that people who transition earlier are G1 and those who transition later are G3.

I would suggest that if distinguishing between G1 and G3 is important to people, they should look to the question of identity rather than age, blending in, etc. 

QuoteAnother thing (sorry about bringing in personal perspective) - when I frst read about Blanchard, I figured out that I must be ->-bleeped-<- then, because I was not homosexual during my childhood (maybe I was rather bi, but I never let myself to explore that part). Except, I could not identify with other strong features attributable to ->-bleeped-<- (and I have read why Blanchard was hated and the opposite views - that a lot of folks who would fall under the ->-bleeped-<- category were in deep denial and thus would hate that term) - I had no extensive or prolonged experience of cross-dressing and it was not sexual. Yet, again, according to him, those who transition at older age must be ->-bleeped-<-s, so... Go figure .

There are trans* folks who identify as ->-bleeped-<-.  They are, unfortunately, heavily stigmatized by trans* people, so it is difficult for them to come out with it.

Quote from: Asche on January 12, 2015, 08:05:49 AM
Of course, we need to keep in mind that G1, G2, etc., are rather like borders in the Middle East -- an attempt by outsiders to divide up a mixed and varied reality into a few discrete states.  Nobody (well, almost nobody) is going to fit neatly into one box.  And the existence of these boxes encourages those who end up in one to adjust who they are and how they see themselves to fit what they think people in their box are supposed to be.

I completely agree with you that this divides a mixed and varied reality into various boxes.  But I should point out that in addition to being a well known psychologist, Anne Vitale is also a trans woman.  There's an interview with her where she talks about her transition here, for anyone who may be interested:

http://www.wpath.org/uploaded_files/140/files/UPDATE%20Fall%202010%20-%20Final.pdf

QuoteI don't have enough experience with trans people, especially trans women, to even speculate as to who is G1, G2, or G3.

Well, trans women are by definition not G2 because G2 refers to a group of trans men.  G2 is the ftm equivalent of G1.  I thought it was interesting that there is no G4 ftm equivalent to G3.  She explains why and I don't want to sidetrack the conversation, so I'll just say I'm not sure I agree with her on that part and leave it at that.

Many thanks to Asche and Emily for breaking the trend of no one being willing to say they might be a G3. 

Quote from: suzifrommd on January 12, 2015, 04:46:03 AM
Interesting. Now I'm developing an unhealthy curiosity what group you would place me in, given that we've met IRL.

I'd apply my usual practice and squirm to avoid answering the question.  I might ask why the answer is so important to you.  Maybe I'd suggest that you should decide on your own answer rather than asking me.  You'd probably have to really box me into a corner and push the issue to get me to answer it.

Serously, I never mind talking about things in the abstract.  But I always tend to balk when it comes to specifics.  I want to talk about controversial and emotionally charged things, but I don't want to hurt anyone.  So I avoid commenting on people specifically, especially about things like presentation and identity and passing.  I avoid commenting on everyone so that people can't infer from my passing on the question that the answer would be something they wouldn't like.  I don't comment for good or for bad.  Besides, why should it matter what I think?  I'm no fount of wisdom.

You can comment on me if you want to.  I like to keep my gender history and identity nicely confusing and vague for people, especially trans* people.  It helps to force them to take me more at face value for who I am instead of doing that "one of the guys" thing to me that I described earlier in this thread.  Plus people come up with all sorts of theories about me and they make me giggle.

Anyhoo, the thing I take away from Anne Vitale's article is that maybe saying "I identify female" is not a complete description of a person's gender identity because there are lots of blends.  My "contribution" if any is just to suggest that this blend of masculine/feminine identity probably finds expression.  And maybe it helps to explain the male "vibe" that people so often describe from transwomen. 

Quote from: ThePhoenix on January 12, 2015, 09:46:45 AM
I'd apply my usual practice and squirm to avoid answering the question.  I might ask why the answer is so important to you.

I know how I see myself, but it's only by hearing how others see me that I truly know how I come across.

And you're one of the only people whom I could ask who would truly understand the question.

Quote from: suzifrommd on January 12, 2015, 10:48:52 AM
I know how I see myself, but it's only by hearing how others see me that I truly know how I come across.

And you're one of the only people whom I could ask who would truly understand the question.

You come across as a person with a kind heart who is still trying to find your place in the world and is doing the best you can.  You seem like someone with much love to give, but who is blocked from doing it by the fact that you have not given enough of it to yourself.

I see your posts here.  I listen to what you say when we run into one another face to face.  I think you're good people and your heart is made of gold.  I think that is a fact that transcends gender identity or gender expression. 

The only advice I could give you is to try less and be more.  That might seem like strange advice.  But one of the advantages cis people have over trans* people is that they don't try to be their gender.  A cis woman is not out there giving a lot of thought to whether it is okay for a woman to be a certain way.  She just is what she is.  These discussions about "vibes" or how to learn body language, etc. are unique to the trans* community.  And they are about people who want to have something they don't have and want to be something that they are not--namely an idealized version of femininity that probably does not even exist in reality.

I know that the world is a harsh place.  But I still believe that trans* people would be happier if they spent less time trying to be one thing and more time just being who and what they are.

You, Suzi, come across as a person with much love to give.  But perhaps you need to give some of that love to yourself.  Don't try to be something.  Just be who you truly are.  That includes all the sadness and the loneliness and the depression.  Don't hide it.  Share it.  Give enough of your love to yourself to accept that you need not be anything other than what you are.  Take a listen to this song until you can internalize its message that you already are what you are and what you are is beautiful, and strong enough, and bright enough:



I am filthy stinkin' rich in friends.  I also speak very freely about how bad my life is these days.  It's sure not a secret.  Lately I have been pretty honest with folks in telling them that I don't want to go out with them because I am not able to be good company because I'm too much of a wreck to be cheerful because of the situation I'm in.  The response from people has been to insist on coming over to visit me.  And I would submit to you that those two things are related.

Love is a funny thing that grows greater the more you give it away.  So don't forget to give some to yourself,;at least enough of it to not withhold yourself--your real self--with all the joys and sorrows that come along with it.  I think you'd find more people willing to embrace you than you might realize. 

I'm sorry.  I know that is not the answer you're looking for.  But I do wonder if it might be an answer to the real question.  And it's much more important than where anyone fits in some categories that some psychologist came up with in an academic paper somewhere. 

Quote from: ThePhoenix on January 12, 2015, 09:46:45 AM
With respect, I think that you and Lady_Oracle are kind of getting sidetracked by an observation that Anne Vitale made about the two categories.  The article is about gender identity, not age at transition.  What she is proposing is that there are folks who are assigned male who have a basically intact female identity (G1) and thekre are folks who are assigned male who have a female identity that has been experienced a substantial amount of masculinization (G3).  She believes this to be because of brain development in the womb.  It is not an article about age at transition and it is not about the impact of earlier/later transitions on a person's transition, although she does posit that a G1 person is more likely to transition earlier than a G3 person.  That does not mean that people who transition earlier are G1 and those who transition later are G3.

Sorry about getting side tracked but I should of just said its because of my biological identity that I never could fully immerse myself in "being male"  and when I tried to be, it never really worked because my female identity was so strong that it would manifest no matter what I did to try to suppress it.

Quote from: ThePhoenix on January 12, 2015, 12:31:14 PM
...  But one of the advantages cis people have over trans* people is that they don't try to be their gender.  A cis woman is not out there giving a lot of thought to whether it is okay for a woman to be a certain way.  She just is what she is.  These discussions about "vibes" or how to learn body language, etc. are unique to the trans* community.  And they are about people who want to have something they don't have and want to be something that they are not--namely an idealized version of femininity that probably does not even exist in reality.

Um, it's news to me that cis people don't worry about their gender.  I'm constantly seeing men who are worried about their masculinity and there are whole movements devoted to teaching men how to be more "masculine."  Boys are trained not to do anything which might be seen as "effeminate."  Etc.

I'm less acquainted with the extent to which (cis) women worry about their femininity.  Women's worries about femininity don't dominate the media the way men's insecurities about masculinity do, but that might simply be because the male-controlled media don't consider how women feel all that newsworthy, except as it affects men.

I hang around in a number of feminist on-line spaces (feminism has been a big part of my world view since before I had ever heard the word), and the sort of things I'm thinking of when I mention male vs. female "vibes" are a common topic, although they don't use the word.  One such topic is how men relate to men vs. how men relate to women in terms of emotions -- basically, most men feel they can't talk with other men about their emotions, especially ones that they fear would make them seem less masculine; they end up only talking about them with their wives or SOs -- or else no one.

This is one reason I find I can't really relate to virtually any men I know.  (My previous therapist -- male -- was like that, only it took me a while to realize that the problem wasn't me.)  I want to relate to people on a more emotional level, and most men simply can't or won't, at least not with me.  I don't know to what extent it's because I present as male and that turns on their "man talk" mode, or because they can't do it with anyone.

Even though I relate better to women, there's still a barrier.  I know that there's a different way women relate to men that to women, and that they don't relate to me the way they do to other women, but I don't know how much is because I present male and how much because I give off some "vibe" that triggers the warier, slightly more defensive "talking to men" mode.  If it's mostly the former, then transition will presumably solve the problem.  If it's more the latter, then I have a lot more work to do on myself.

Quote from: Asche on January 12, 2015, 03:54:31 PM
Um, it's news to me that cis people don't worry about their gender.  I'm constantly seeing men who are worried about their masculinity and there are whole movements devoted to teaching men how to be more "masculine."  Boys are trained not to do anything which might be seen as "effeminate."  Etc.

Admittedly, there's a lot I do not know about men.  But I did a quick Google search about teaching me to be masculine and I came up blank.  Maybe I tried the wrong search words, but if there is such a movement, I'd love to learn more about it.  Any links would be appreciated.

I've never known a cis man or cis woman to worry much about passing.  I've never heard them train their voices to sound like their gender.  I've never known them to sit and study the movements of people to try to emulate gender appropriate body language.  Etc, etc, etc.

Of course most men don't want to be effeminate and most women don't want to be masculine.  But they also don't spend a great deal of time worrying about whether hat thing they did yesterday might have seemed masculine.

Of course children learn to behave too.  They learn it so well they don't have to give it much thought.

Quote from: ThePhoenix on January 12, 2015, 10:23:15 PM
Admittedly, there's a lot I do not know about men.  But I did a quick Google search about teaching me to be masculine and I came up blank.  Maybe I tried the wrong search words, but if there is such a movement, I'd love to learn more about it.  Any links would be appreciated.

Asche definitely isn't joking about that... these articles on becoming more masculine are EVERYWHERE. There's a reason why testosterone-boosting drugs have become so popular as TV commercials recently... lots of men are worried that they're not masculine enough or that they're somehow losing their manliness by being forced into domestic roles and the like.

http://reclaimourrepublic.wordpress.com/2014/02/25/the-war-on-men-10-ways-masculinity-is-being-castrated/

http://www.wikihow.com/Be-Manly

http://www.mazermedia.com/news/mens-psychology-becoming-masculine-sexually-attractive/

http://elitedaily.com/life/why-this-generation-needs-to-make-being-manly-cool-again/

http://www.amazon.com/Step-System-Becoming-More-Masculine-ebook/dp/B00GG5I7F8


And cis women do indeed worry about not being "female enough" too. The only difference is that in their frame of mind, they're not worried about not "passing" as women, they're worried about feeling unfeminine, unattractive or "mannish." LOTS of women who are taller or larger-built or athletic feel really awful about how they feel unfeminine. Here's a few links on that:

http://www.goddessdeeva.com/2013/01/tall-tales-internalising-being.html

http://community.scarymommy.com/thread/762/516723-tall-feel-giant-unfeminine

https://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20090131142146AA923Qw

http://www.->-bleeped-<-.com/r/AskWomen/comments/2du9eg/how_do_i_stop_feeling_so_ugly_and_unfeminine/

http://www.self.com/life/health/2013/10/athletic-body-regret/

Quote from: ThePhoenix on January 11, 2015, 11:02:55 PMOnce again, there is nothing inherently bad or wrong about having various amounts of "male" mixed into one's identity or ones actions or ones "vibe."  But I do wish it were something we could be honest about, recognize it in ourselves, and discuss what it means.  But I would be unsurprised if people who give off the male "vibe" are even aware of it, or whether they genuinely believe that "vibe" does not exist.

I don't believe it exists. Or rather I do. But I don't believe it exists in my body as actor, I believe it exists in your head as observer. I don't see behaviours as inherently gendered, any more than colours or clothes or well, anything. Gender is an idea that we attach to the thing, and then proceed to socially enforce as normative.

When I sit with my legs crossed above the knee, I am not "sitting like a girl." I am sitting with my legs crossed. People observing me perceive the action of sitting with my legs crossed above the knee as "sitting like a girl." Or to put it simply, gender is frequently less of an adjective and more of a verb. We gender people, we gender actions, we gender speech and behaviour and ideas and emotions and every little thing. Because we have been trained to do this, and we have been trained to do it from a young age in a very precise manner.

When I was going to an electrologist back in the day, she commented that I was unlike other trans women she had treated. (Well for one, I don't ID as a woman, but she didn't know that...) I was "serious"; I was "so obviously female." Whatever. What she really meant is "you sound female and you look female and you speak quietly and listen attentively and passively and you BEHAVE like a good girl." Or rather "congrats for conforming to the patriarchy, you win a gold star." Hilariously I was dressed in men's clothes at the time (as is my wont), but it didn't matter because my "natural femininity shined through" (comment from my gender therapist under similar circumstances; GAG). I.e. I was young and pretty and she couldn't see any man in my face or body.

It's nonsense. And sexist, heteronormative nonsense at that. I am an andro queer female. I present masculine-of-centre. I've never worn a dress or dangly earrings or high heels in my life and I have no intention of starting any time soon. I have as much "natural femininity" as the average banana. All these people are noticing is that I am conventionally attractive for a lady-equivalent person, I was socialized to be polite to strangers, I read people well, and I'm shy.

But that isn't the only thing that's going on. The other thing is, many, many trans folk are kind of bat->-bleeped-<-. I mean, sorry, but we are, self included. Dysphoria is vile, society treats us like lepers and it all takes a definitive mental toll, so a lot of us deal with various kinds of being a screwed up mess as a result. My experience of living in a house of trans women recovering from SRS for a week was a fascinating display of everything from major depression to extreme narcissism to social dysfunction to crippling anxiety to actual delusions and disconnect from reality. My arms are covered in self-inflicted scars from back in the day, I'm medicated for anxiety... and I'm relatively sane compared to many. And those that are worst off are the ones who gravitate to support groups, while creatures who are more stable vanish like ghosts. Am I surprised you encountered a bunch of people lacking social grace in that environment? No, not really. I have too. The only difference: I would describe them as irritating and obnoxious rather than "male vibes."

And yet you are correct, I would more often ascribe that kind of behaviour to males than females. Because men can get away with that ->-bleeped-<-, and women can't. Because of power imbalance. Not because of some inherent characteristic, but because "bitch" is so easily attached to any female who exercises any degree of power or autonomy. And good girls aren't supposed to be like that. I'm simplifying obviously, but that is the core of it.

What you are seeing is most likely people who are or were in a lot of pain and didn't learn how to behave well because they weren't forced to. Just people. Nothing special. You can call it "male vibes" if you like. But the gender is in your eyes, not in their bodies.

Because the truth is, those people were women. So their "vibes" were the vibes of women. Their actions were the actions of women. Their behaviours were the behaviours of women. Gender identity isn't about how you are perceived, it's about how you self-perceive.

And I had to giggle at the suggestion that the "male vibe-y" be ditched into the non-binary spectrum. Yesh, I'm as non-binary as the next but I like to think I've got some semblance of social grace, maybe even a dash or two of sweetness on a good day!

Basically, Asche, you met some trans folks who you didn't get on with. S'cool. Bet I could totes charm your socks off though and I'm about as "masculine" as trans females get.