Quote from: Keira on December 20, 2007, 04:09:25 PM
At the base, I come back to the FACT (one of the only ones mentioned in this thread)
that all classification system of TS are very weakly supported by empirical evidence,
and thus all theories are unsupported. Not surprising since TS have been studied
mostly by hacks in the last 40 years!! The amount of money spent on us is infinitely
small compared to the immense diversity of our community.

Exactly. And it seems like people are using different scales on the degrees of being TS.
* the age of transition
* the age of first having GID
* the age when first had problems due to GID
* the amount of GID
* the amount of suffering due to GID [this is quite different from the amount of GID]
* what kind of GID is it? which combination of physical, social, ...

Is there any point in the classification? Would the categorization have any positive effects?

i cant find the post you refer to kiera, sometimes i write a post, go away, come back, find it lagged, repost and find 2-5 people posted again, and i loose track.
And to those who would prefer a categoryless society: sorry, it doesnt work, we need definitions to speed things up, to ease communication, and to generally organise. with no organisation, there is no society.
Life in the world, or make your own imo.

R

Quote from: taru on December 20, 2007, 04:39:19 PM
Exactly. And it seems like people are using different scales on the degrees of being TS.

* the amount of GID
* the amount of suffering due to GID [this is quite different from the amount of GID]
* what kind of GID is it? which combination of physical, social, ...

For me, it's definitely more wanting to be seen as the gender I am than a profound need for GRS, thus the social aspect is more important to me than the physical. Not that I haven't also felt considerable angst over that aspect.

y2g

Wow!
Just read all that happen today on this thread. I was shaking my head as I could see both side not really connecting and being hurt.
I feel the hurt on both side and poor Nero who feels sadden by what happen to his honest intentions to ask a heart felt question. And I want to say if I hurt anyone with my postings that I am sorry.
Nero I'm sorry for anything that I posted that cause this to happen to the thread.
There enough hurt in this world already and exspecailly if we are TS. Let help each other, yes be straight but be kind about it.

Jillieann

Quote from: Rachael on December 20, 2007, 04:43:59 PMAnd to those who would prefer a categoryless society: sorry, it doesnt work, we need definitions to speed things up, to ease communication, and to generally organize. with no organization, there is no society.
Life in the world, or make your own imo.

To clarify my point: I'm not against classifications in general, but in our case they have only led to trouble.  For example in the 70's people had to lie to fit the stereotypes required of early gender programs.  Lots of honest people were denied treatment because they didn't fit into the classification system of the time.  Then there are tons of stories of individual therapists doing essentially the same thing.  One could even go so far as to argue that our past oppression was as a result of these classification systems, there abuse and the resulting stigmatization.

What I am arguing for is more focus on the transitioner and less on the stupid labels and their accompanying stereotypes.  Maybe you need to bone up a bit on our history.  "How Sex Changed" by Joanne Meyerwitz is a good primer.  Things have gotten much better, but some people still focus too much on labels and stereotypes.  Patient centered care is the way to go.

And it goes on.

Rachael, you built a straw argument there.
Refusing to accept one category doesn't assume anything
about other categories, or semantic definitions.

And also, for categories to work, they've got to be agreed on.
If they're based on your own feelings, well that's not a category.
I'd be happy Rachael if you could actually read what is said,
rather to answer on what you wish was said... 

Jilieann,
I predicted this mayhem very early.
This subject ALWAYS leads to hurt feelings.

I wish people had more empathy
and logic (seems contradictory, but it isn't).

im sortof confused, after reading Kieras post, and the rest of this, WTF IS THE PROBLEM...? we dont need this to turn into another primary secondery debate, i cant honestly remember how it came up now >< but what is its relevance ?

ARE THERE DEGREES OF TRANSEXUALITY? AND GID?
personally, yes there are , there are those more aflicted with gid, and those less so, there are people who transition further than others, non ops etc dont get grs... some dont get hrt, so what is the debate about?
primary: transitioned pre 32
secondery: transitioned after 32
is my understanding of the statements, nowhere does it qualify whos better, whose worse, or any sort of statistic. if your age bothers you, well sorry, you cant change that, nomatter how offended you get...
R

That's not the definition of secondary VS primary.

These words are LOADED with very bad feelings and unsupported
allegations. They should not be used for this reason.

Why not just say transitioned at age X.
Why is the before or after someone else so important.
Both secondary/primary and late/early transitioner,
make it a centerpiece in defining motivatiojn when
again there is little evidence either way.

I've locked this topic on request.

And because the arguments go round and round and round.