Well I often have a choice about who I am working with, as do some of my other friends, and we always choose each other first.  In part that is because we like each other, and have been working together for decades, and its also because we know and trust the work the other can do.

Brandon Teena is a very strange case.  I have no doubt that being trans led to his murder, but I do not think it was the only reason.  If it was, I think they would have killed only BT - and might have got away with it.  But three people were killed.  And where most hate crimes are crimes of passion, the three were executed, which is a whole other level of murder.  I've always thought Meth (very big business out in that area), but there was a lot of crime going on with that group (the two killers were already two-time felons, not the best choice of running buddies - and charging them with rape would have been a third strike in a three strikes state, so that was a mandatory life without parole, which of course is part of the problem with the 'get tough on crime 3 strikes stuff, at that point you have almost nothing to lose, which is why most police do not favor them).  His troubles really started with the arrest for check forging, (which is not smart in a very small town,) and he was in Fall City to begin with because of legal trouble in Lincoln.  So the Hollywood version (shocking) was not the full story.  But it also may be that BT just got caught up in what a friend of mine once called "Twin Peaks on the Paririe" because that little section of the country is very, very weird.

As for the standards, and the law like a 'bright line' something they can test and point to, what you are proposing is that everyone is TS if they say they are, in that case, would not all TG people simply claim to be TS?  To say she was "highly passable" does that become the standard?  Because that would really skewer things, I know lots of people who after HRT and SRS are not achieving that goal.

And, at some point, if your talking about a legal deal, you are talking about evidence.  About a standard of proof.  About a way to define who is - and who is not - in the class you are trying to protect.

And, under our system of federalism, there are differences between the states, and people do have differing rights from state to state.  Trust me, getting caught smoking marijuana is a lot different in SF (where they might tell you to put it out, maybe) and Texas, or South Carolina.

First of all the penalty for pot is a ticket with a possible $500 fine.  I once said to an SF cop "To get a ticket in this town you'd have to walk up to a cop, blow smoke in his face and insult his mother."  The cop replied "That might not do it either."

My point in mentioning Gwen and Brandon was that normal criminal sanctions were severe enough without hate crime enhancement.  Gwen's killers got 2nd degree murder because the crime lacked premeditation which makes it no less monsterous in my mind.

I don't know of any specific behaviours that are common to all transsexuals other than there own declarations.  Whether or not they're telling the truth or not is something the court can decide.

Yes federalism does apply at present.  That's why a federal standard that mandates equity is needed in recalcitrant states like Texas and South Carolina.

The reason for federal hate crime law that covers transgendered is basicallly to fill in when the local juridiction has not done its job. That's what happened in the 60's with civil rights laws that allowed the federal government to intervene down south and which probably cost the democrats their solid southern base (which the republicans were very happy to fill).

To be perfectly clear: There is no such a thing as a non-op transsexual by CHOICE.

If someone transitions and wants to keep willy......they are not (maybe somewhere in the TG spectrum but not transsexual) a transsexual.  The term transsexual is a medical one and the drive to bring the body and mind into congruence defines the condition.  I believe that some peeps have gone to a lot of trouble to try and blur lines to excape from their association with their fetishistic drives and coattail medical legitimacy.

Quote from: Pia on January 03, 2008, 01:01:02 PM
To be perfectly clear: There is no such a thing as a non-op transsexual by CHOICE.

If someone transitions and wants to keep willy......they are not (maybe somewhere in the TG spectrum but not transsexual) a transsexual.  The term transsexual is a medical one and the drive to bring the body and mind into congruence defines the condition.  I believe that some peeps have gone to a lot of trouble to try and blur lines to excape from their association with their fetishistic drives and coattail medical legitimacy.

i concord.   "non-op" is a term that's becoming increasingly difficult to justify.  in the past it referred only to those people who were born transsexual but were unable to have surgery for clinical reasons.
yet improvements in surgical and anaesthetic techniques and procedures now mean that there are very, very few people who are genuinely unable to have surgery for those reasons, so it's being increasingly used by the transgender community to further blur the distinction between "transgender" and "transsexual".

Quote from: Keira on January 01, 2008, 04:51:44 PM
The reason for federal hate crime law that covers transgendered is basicallly to fill in when the local juridiction has not done its job. That's what happened in the 60's with civil rights laws that allowed the federal government to intervene down south and which probably cost the democrats their solid southern base (which the republicans were very happy to fill).

I wrote to Bush the answer was the local people can handle it. I wrote to the State Senator he said he supports "Family Values" go figure.

also, the term non-op transsexual is an oxymoron. the term "transsexual" was coined by a reporter in the late 50's after christine jorgenson had her surgery. at that point in time, there were only 2 terms. ts for those who got/wanted surgery, and tv for those who didn't. the term tg was coined in the late 60's around the time of the stonewall riots and was first used for those who lived as the other sex without the surgery. so it was for someone who was more serious than a crossdresser, but without the desire for a complete transition. that is what a non-op is, not a preop who must stay there. non-op is in one's head, not in their circumstances.

if a person cannot have the surgery, they are a preop, rather than a non-op. If they could get the surgery, they would. a non-op is one who would never get the surgery even if you wrote them a check for a million dollars.

furthermore, for me, can't-op or "perpetual preop" is not the same as non-op. a non-op has nothing against their original parts below. non-op is a mindset rather than a condition. what i call a can't-op is someone who is too disadvantaged, sick, or elderly to get the surgery.  so there is a big difference between having the non-op mindset and simply being unable to get the surgery.

btw i do not attach ts onto the end of non-op. i consider the non-op a variety of tg and to be honest, i find it (the term) degrading. if you want the surgery at all, you are preop. "pre" means before.  i'm sure you already know that, don't cha?

I found this whole discussion interesting - I have been stearing clear of this - but glad we are trying to get down to people feelins at last

Quote from: Kate on December 29, 2007, 02:12:40 PM

Quote from: Claire de Lune on December 29, 2007, 09:59:16 AM
Transsexuals wish to be and consider themselves to be the opposite sex. Crossdressers do not. That is the sole distinction. It is a matter of intent only, and not action or behavior.

Isn't that a bit like equating guys who play paintball on weekends pretending to be warriors for fun and relaxation... with professional soldiers who put their lives on the line every second of every day to do what they do?

~Kate~

I so relate to the quote of Claire. Given that terminolgy I am still a cross dress. My thoughts now are 'when I become female I will be able to .....'. Yeap - that is right - with a male body I still consider myself to be male. OK - I accept my brain acts in a female way but that fact of the matter is I have a perfactly functioning male body which is why I need/want to transistion.

I am a very logical person - being a programmer by trade I use logic all the time. I started to cross because 'I wanted to be female' and that want is only getting stronger as the years goes by. I now know it is possible and hence I start the process hoping my life will become better as my body will match my brain.

I have had to look outside of Susans for support as there are very few people in here who would understand what I have just said. I know there are people out there that feel the way I do and I am satisfied I am taking the right steps (even if I do get scared sometimes).

Alice

PIA

What if indeed GID was a continuum due to the interaction of multiple genes and environmental
factors. Then, why should TS be more magical than whoever's on the scale. There's
also the whole issue of somatic and social dysphoria.

There's very little theory devellopped beyond clinical psychology (and most of it it the big
public sector clinics); which only looks at the extreme of GID
so this is a very skewed view of the possible actual population of those that have
GID and even TS in general (since the street population and those who go the private route
are not well counted).

At the biological level, the originating phenomena could be much
broader.

Considering the varying levels
of GID even amongst TS that want the operation. Some are plainly suicidal about doing it, even going to the extreme of self-mutilation, while others can wait 2-3 years till all their eggs are in a row. For some TS wanting the op, the social aspect is by far more important than the physical aspect, which is more like the cherry on the sunday.

I feel that many TS resist vehementally the possibility that there is actually a gradation of GID along the somatic and social aspects. The classical TS is the one where the somatic dysphoria crosses a threshold. But, why would a TS feel such a need to seperate oneself from others with less dysphoria if its indeed part of the same phenomena.

Quote from: Keira on January 03, 2008, 07:23:43 PM

PIA

What if indeed GID was a continuum due to the interaction of multiple genes and environmental
factors. Then, why should TS be more magical than whoever's on the scale. There's
also the whole issue of somatic and social dysphoria.

There's very little theory devellopped beyond clinical psychology (and most of it it the big
public sector clinics); which only looks at the extreme of GID
so this is a very skewed view of the possible actual population of those that have
GID and even TS in general (since the street population and those who go the private route
are not well counted).

At the biological level, the originating phenomena could be much
broader.

Considering the varying levels
of GID even amongst TS that want the operation. Some are plainly suicidal about doing it, even going to the extreme of self-mutilation, while others can wait 2-3 years till all their eggs are in a row. For some TS wanting the op, the social aspect is by far more important than the physical aspect, which is more like the cherry on the sunday.

I feel that many TS resist vehementally the possibility that there is actually a gradation of GID along the somatic and social aspects. The classical TS is the one where the somatic dysphoria crosses a threshold. But, why would a TS feel such a need to seperate oneself from others with less dysphoria if its indeed part of the same phenomena.

Excellent points, Keira. Thank you.

And as long as we are talking about 'real' this and that. Perhaps we want to look at other statistics as well.

One I can think of that I almost never see discussed on internet forums is that statistically 'real Tses' are white, middle to upper class people living in the United States, Canada, Australia, New Zealand and Western Europe.

Most especially that could be said if "post-ops" are counted exclusively. Statistically speaking, I would think that someone, Focus on the Family, say, might well focus on the idea that in their parlance: "Transsexualism is a mental disorder that arises in white males of western European culture and relatively wealthy socio-economic status and is not particularly prevalent anywhere else in the world nor among other socio-economic classes."

I think that statistically speaking Pia, Natasha, or any one else would have a tough time of building a factual argument against such statistics.

And no, I don't think you are gonna find any support by bringing up the Hijras in India, most of whom never have a surgery other than an orch, nor the katoey in Thailand who reside in much that same social class and end result as do the Hijras.

Now we could actually have that discussion, but wouldn't that make everyone rather uncomfortable? I know it does me. So, maybe we could just realize that when we discuss 'real' this and 'real' that we tend to 'blur' the fact that we may also be thought of as 'unreal.'

Given that, perhaps the problem might be solved were I to simply embrace the reality of myself without seeing any need in making some rather pointless comparison with anyone else at all.

For me that might just mean that I had found some self-acceptance and had no further need to try to find my acceptance through comparing myself to someone else who I 'a priori' classify as 'unreal.'

But, that is just me and my thoughts about myself and the way I view the world. Maybe, though, I have no point at all. Perhaps someone else might decide that?

Nichole

Quote from: Pia on January 03, 2008, 01:01:02 PM
To be perfectly clear: There is no such a thing as a non-op transsexual by CHOICE.

To be perfectly clear, you're absolutely wrong.

QuoteIf someone transitions and wants to keep willy......they are not (maybe somewhere in the TG spectrum but not transsexual) a transsexual.

How is that? 

They want to be percieved and appreciated as a woman.  They want to live, act, behave, and love as a woman.  Just because someone wants to hold onto her libido does not make her any less of a woman!

Let me reiterate:

I want to be a woman.  I want to see someone else staring back at me in the mirror, a female.  I want to be seen as, spoken to, known as, flirted with as, and accepted in every single aspect of my life as a woman.  I have been doing that, it's been my mission.  I will not, however, sacrifice my one means of a truly satisfying libido.  I will hold onto my drive as long as I can until it doesn't function anylonger.  Even then, I will happily do things to keep it as functional as possible in the interests of preserving length and sensetivity which can be transferred to depth and recovery after surgery.  I am not disgusted by what'd down there and in no way view it as something in my way to womanhood.  A deep voice, a bad frame, rough skin, those I could view as physical obstacles.  But not this thing.  I'm just happy with my penis and I will be just fine with it as a woman.  I'd rather have a functioning penis than a nonfunctional vagina any day, any time.  If I could have a functional vagina, then I'd go for it 100%.  But until then, I'll stick to what I've got and enjoy it.  Oh and yes, I won't be the only one either.

This dogma of who's a TS and who isn't is holding this community back as much as any rednecked political group is.  If we can't even figure it out, and we lash out at those who don't conform to your tiny images of what's classified as, "standards for joining our group," then how do you possibly think anything will ever get better?  The facts are that genitilia to not define gender.  This is the core of transgender acceptance.  And yet, here you people are, sneering at it, ridiculing it, hating it, because it's different, because it's not like you.

Anyone with me?  Is anyone on this site going to step outside of the box, instead of just running away from one into another one?  Is anyone NOT going to look in the mirror and pass judgment, thinking, "I'm more of a woman than she is, because if I change my external appearance then I'll look more like one."  Hrrm?  Is the path of a MtF's journey to become a true woman really just who can spend the most money on operations, or is it something deeper?

Quote from: kalt on January 03, 2008, 09:57:14 PM

Anyone with me?  Is anyone on this site going to step outside of the box, instead of just running away from one into another one?  Is anyone NOT going to look in the mirror and pass judgment, thinking, "I'm more of a woman than she is, because if I change my external appearance then I'll look more like one."  Hrrm?  Is the path of a MtF's journey to become a true woman really just who can spend the most money on operations, or is it something deeper?

Hey - I am with you all the way. I have never been on the inside of the 'susans' box. If fact if you read what I wrote earlier today you will of seen me say 'I am male until my body is female'. Everyone else has been saying they are female from the start despite their body.

Stick arround Kalt so we can split open the gender box so everyone who has gender issues can enjoy being here.

Alice

Kalt, wanting people to step out of the box, is as oppressive as people wanting people to choose a box. There's NO BOX. Almost nothing is know about why we feel gendered or not, where does the whole classification system come from!!

Can you really classify something tha'ts on a continuum (If its the case); its like calling number 1 better than 9, what's the point of it!

What I think we all should do is just treat everyone as human beings, respect their humanity and that will be wonderful. There's so much beauty in the human condition that chopping it in little pieces with labels seems insightly. Those labels are needed to communicate abstractly, when the object's not there, but it rarely fits reality perfectly even in cases unlike ours, where definitions would seemingly be unequivocal.

Quote from: kalt on January 03, 2008, 09:57:14 PM
I'd rather have a functioning penis than a nonfunctional vagina any day, any time.

See How much risk of loss of orgasm would you be willing to take for SRS? for reference...

~Kate~

Also depends what you mean by functioning.
What freaks me is becoming incontinent; that not a swap I'd be ready to go for.
Lack of sensibility, that I can live with since its possible to get orgasm other ways...

Quote from: Keira on January 03, 2008, 10:14:03 PM

Kalt, wanting people to step out of the box, is as oppressive as people wanting people to choose a box. There's NO BOX. Almost nothing is know about why we feel gendered or not, where does the whole classification system come from!!

Can you really classify something tha'ts on a continuum (If its the case); its like calling number 1 better than 9, what's the point of it!

What I think we all should do is just treat everyone as human beings, respect their humanity and that will be wonderful. There's so much beauty in the human condition that chopping it in little pieces with labels seems insightly. Those labels are needed to communicate abstractly, when the object's not there, but it rarely fits reality perfectly even in cases unlike ours, where definitions would seemingly be unequivocal.

I agree with you.  I'm not in any way proclaiming one 'type' of transsexualism being better than another, I'm simply combatting the highly judgemental oppression facing anyone who doesn't jump to fit in, even inside a community that has meetings, campaign and other such methods to bitch about how left out they themselves feel.

I quite agree with you Kate.

Cindy

Quote from: cindybc on January 03, 2008, 11:53:40 PM
I quite agree with you Kate.

Cindy

Argumentum Ad Populem.

Catering to the dogma of susans.org doesn't really sway my will.

Females who have a desire to keep their male genitilia have no right to judged by other transwomen.

Quote from: kalt on Today at 19:57:14

Quote
Anyone with me?  Is anyone on this site going to step outside of the box, instead of just running away from one into another one?  Is anyone NOT going to look in the mirror and pass judgment, thinking, "I'm more of a woman than she is, because if I change my external appearance then I'll look more like one."  Hrrm?  Is the path of a MtF's journey to become a true woman really just who can spend the most money on operations, or is it something deeper?

I'm with you.  I'll go so far as to say GID is not a disorder.  Transgenders are just a variation of the norm.  The gender binary is largely a social construct and gender identity is linear.  I know many psychiatrists and psychologists that treat TG/TS people that share that a opinion.  When I came out to my own shrink he asked me if I was happy.  When I replied that I was he said. "Then don't worry about it, if you begin to have difficulty we'll talk about it."   I didn't and we never did.  In my posts on passing legislation I was talking about a political strategy, not a core belief. 

When I hear of people having thorasic surgery (rib removal) to enhance there figure I wonder about their sanity.  All surgeries have risks and openning up your chest just isn't a good idea.  How does one live as woman if she spends most of her time recovering from surgeries?

Well I aint got one of them anymore anyway, yuk why would I want to have one again?

Cindy