Just curious if the trans population would be a lot happier if all comparison with the cis population became no existent . I was talking to my health care provider today and it dawned on me that she was just referring to me as trans not male female or anything in between , but rather as a transgender. I personally always reference myself as trans. It is just something that seems normal for me. I'm just wondering if  it's really so important to the trans population to constantly be into to eternal struggle to be and look and act cis gender. We are what we are , a very unique breed of human being.

I like the idea.

I don't identify as trans, but as female: a woman transitioning towards a female body. But that process doesn't define me. Transitioning is a verb, but that doesn't mean I accept the noun "transgender".

Quote from: stephaniec on November 04, 2016, 11:47:47 PM
Just curious if the trans population would be a lot happier if all comparison with the cis population became no existent .

As a new "trans-grandparent" (six & 18 months) there is no comparison - I fought hard for my kids and they are the best!! Living ones "family dreams" can often be just as gratifying as forever "wishing for the walk".

I voted 'yes'!

I'm with Naomi on this one -- to me "trans" was a transitory state of being. 

Out in the big bad world, to be identified as "trans" is primarily to be misgendered, in the "Oh, they're really a..." sense.

I'm ME, dang it!

I do get asked every once in a great while, usually by a child, if I'm a boy or girl. Children are usually innocently curious beings, so I generally answer:

"I'm a human being."

That's as far as it's ever gone.

But yeah, I'm me, a nice person who tries to be kind and helpful to others. There's no reason to fear me, or attack me.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

had that happen to me yesterday , a child and his parents and siblings were on their way to celebrate the Cubs and the male child about 6 stared straight at me and said that's a boy and his sister corrected him saying no that's a girl. there was a poster for super girl right behind me so he could of been staring at the poster , but it sure did freak me.

I think this question illustrates how broad a church we are. Many of us feel we are the opposite gender to our birth gender and many of us feel we are neither or both. I feel like both and would prefer a world where we weren't expected to be or compared to CIS women and men. I am neither and both. Comparisons between me and a man or me and a woman are a bit silly. Others feel very differently though. I think a lot of society, at least here in Europe, accept people who switch completely from their birth gender to the "opposite" gender. Those of us who stradle the line still have a way to go. I'm a coward so I'm more likely to try to present female because I get fewer stares and comments than if I present Queer. So I don't present queer in public. I voted yes. I'd prefer to not be compared to CIS people but be accepted as something "other".

B

I don't want it to just yet, and there's a specific reason why: It will state that transgender people are okay with inferior medical procedures.

"Cisgender" is specifically related to someone's biological sex. That's it, the only factor in determining cisgender and it's counterpart, transgender.  This is what most transsexuals ultimately desire is for the correct biology.  That's why we go to such great lengths to change ours and we can come pretty close, via surgeries and HRT. Hormonal levels and physical characteristics are some of the better indicators of biological sex, but so are reproductive capabilities which tend to elude us at the present time for various reasons. MtF surgeries are greatly lacking in function at the current time and they have changed little since they were created ~80 years ago.

So we have essentially not been getting much when it comes to medical developments due many people being content with being transgender and thinking our surgeries are actually quite sufficient when we could be changing biological sex and become cisgender.

I like the comparisons, to me it means we aren't satisfied with being marginalized.

Quote from: Jean24 on November 26, 2016, 12:43:29 PM
I don't want it to just yet, and there's a specific reason why: It will state that transgender people are okay with inferior medical procedures.

"Cisgender" is specifically related to someone's biological sex. That's it, the only factor in determining cisgender and it's counterpart, transgender.  This is what most transsexuals ultimately desire is for the correct biology.  That's why we go to such great lengths to change ours and we can come pretty close, via surgeries and HRT. Hormonal levels and physical characteristics are some of the better indicators of biological sex, but so are reproductive capabilities which tend to elude us at the present time for various reasons. MtF surgeries are greatly lacking in function at the current time and they have changed little since they were created ~80 years ago.

So we have essentially not been getting much when it comes to medical developments due many people being content with being transgender and thinking our surgeries are actually quite sufficient when we could be changing biological sex and become cisgender.

I like the comparisons, to me it means we aren't satisfied with being marginalized.

If I may.. regardless of the number of surgeries one receives.. nor the complexity or advancement of those surgeries.. nothing changes the fact that one was born and labeled male or female..

Trans is simply a label created out of necessity.. as is Cis. No one is required to use it. 

Contrary to your statement.. unfortunately there are things we cannot change.. I cannot be born-again female.. where my entire history and identity is erased.. Just as much as I can't have a pet Tyrannosaurus Rex. The ONLY way to 'become' cis.. is to be born cis. Unless I have mis-quoted your meaning behind that statement.. then I'm sorry.. simply responding to the context as it has been presented.. (just as I am using the term 'cis' in its official context)

The question posed in the topic is whether we are satisfied with the comparison between Trans and Cis.. Which in my eyes at least.. is just as hurtful as comparing ones skin colour. We are allowed to be different, but by comparing ourselves it means a standard exists.. and no one should ever be expected to live up to a standard.. Sure we can try.. but what happens when it fails.

If biology and biology only determines gender.. what happens when say.. a female-born female (lol ) is born without a uterus. Do we list as 'undetermined' for Gender? or Male?? Biology being used to determine gender is what started the whole problem for ourselves in the first place.

I appreciate your reasoning but only to a limited extent. Further developments in surgical options.. success rates and quality would be fantastic.. but it a completely mute point when asked whether we should be comparing ourselves to cis.

If I can end on what you've laid out as standards.. and why you feel we should want to continue to be compared to cis-gendered people at this current moment;

QuoteHormonal levels and physical characteristics are some of the better indicators of biological sex, but so are reproductive capabilities which tend to elude us at the present time

Not ONE of those factors determines someones gender. Hormonal levels are on an incredibly wide spectrum.. effected heavily not only by biology, but environment as well.. Physical characteristics are also hugely varied.. and cannot be used to determine gender. Reproductive capabilities was just poorly worded in my opinion.. Not all women can have babies after all.

Comparing that of which we have no control over is just far too hurtful.. and not only to ourselves but even to those we are comparing ourselves to.

Identify as male, female, trans or other. It shouldn't matter to anyone but yourself. As Michelle said earlier, call me a human being.. or even better still!! Just call me Jess

I voted Yes.

Quote from: Jean24 on November 26, 2016, 12:43:29 PM"Cisgender" is specifically related to someone's biological sex. That's it, the only factor in determining cisgender and it's counterpart, transgender.  This is what most transsexuals ultimately desire is for the correct biology. 

A quibble -- because gender is socially constructed from biological embodiment, I think it's more accurate to say that "cis" indicates an alignment between identity, embodiment, and social gendering. 

Which helps to illustrate some of the schisms in trans spaces -- some desire to change their bodies, and don't care about the rest of the world... and some just want to be socially gendered, but aren't particularly dismayed by the embodiment in of itself... and of course some want it all.   

All that said, yes, we don't yet have a magic pill to rewrite our DNA, to grow our own uteruses and ovaries (or penises and testes for the men)... and if such a magic pill were ever to come down the pike, it'd probably confer functional immortality as well. 

Comparing yourself to other women is part of being a woman. I can't get myself to stop, so I see no problem with others doing it. I'm sure it would be easier on non-binary people,  but they're not me.

Quote from: Jess2Impress on November 27, 2016, 08:25:23 AMIf I may.. regardless of the number of surgeries one receives.. nor the complexity or advancement of those surgeries.. nothing changes the fact that one was born and labeled male or female..

Another quibble.  You're equating how one was "born as" with embodiment and conflating that with gender, which privileges those things over identity.  I was born female, despite my initial embodiment and social assignment. 

Secondly, the present is what matters, not the past.  The past no longer exists. 

QuoteContrary to your statement.. unfortunately there are things we cannot change.. I cannot be born-again female.. where my entire history and identity is erased... The ONLY way to 'become' cis.. is to be born cis. Unless I have mis-quoted your meaning behind that statement.. then I'm sorry.. simply responding to the context as it has been presented.. (just as I am using the term 'cis' in its official context)

Mmm... no. 

Might I offer another paradigm?  To be "born again" comes to us from spiritual traditions.  Whether you believe in them or not, they do point to a psychological experience of death and rebirth.  So I do think it's possible to "become cis" if we understand that "cis" indicates a state of being without any dysphoria -- when identity, embodiment, and social gendering are all aligned.  In this case, it's the "trans" identity that dies, the identity that's dysphoric... while an identity that's not dysphoric comes into being.

And not to be solipsistic, but this would include the reflections of that identity that are held in the heads of all the people we keep in our lives, and among those relationships that we make anew. 

Not that that's easy to accomplish.

QuoteNot ONE of those factors determines someones gender. Hormonal levels are on an incredibly wide spectrum.. effected heavily not only by biology, but environment as well.. Physical characteristics are also hugely varied.. and cannot be used to determine gender. Reproductive capabilities was just poorly worded in my opinion.. Not all women can have babies after all.

Comparing that of which we have no control over is just far too hurtful.. and not only to ourselves but even to those we are comparing ourselves to.

Gender is a category. Categories, as it turns out, are not cut and dried.  They are fuzzy.  When it comes to the category of gender, and how we assign it every day, automatically, subconsciously, it's primarily embodied characteristics (including voice) that come into play.  Each person is compared to a "prototype" of "man" or "woman," and gender is assigned based on how closely one aligns with one or the other. 

So there are no singular "necessary" characteristics, because in truth it's a gestalt of characteristics that come into play.  Rather, there needs to be a sufficient number of characteristics, and some characteristics are more influential than others (voice is hugely influential, for example, as is facial hair and facial shape and the presence or absence of breasts), that tips the scales in one direction or another.  If the scales are too balanced, there is ambiguity, and then the conscious mind is engaged to make a decision. 

If one's dysphoria includes the social dimension, then this is hugely important to understand, because for most of us it is entirely possible to tip the scales in our favor. 

I identify as female, but also understand where I come from. Biology is what it is and I just cannot deny it. So, with that said...have done what I can over the course of my life to address 'it'.

Fast forward to today and I still identify in the feminine, but also as non conforming. As the changes have moved along through HRT, my identity internally shift more and more female...but I still do not deny my roots. I just happen to be a different type of woman than CIS, and this comes to your question.

Yes, would rather not have to shoehorn myself from one construct to another. I am not entirely female as I have never been entirely male. I have found the binary to be quite boring actually and I celebrate my differences.

The points being made in other posts are interesting and I have enjoyed being enlightened to other people's views...but they are irrelevant as well as my journey is uniquely my own and no path will I follow to attempt to sway 'the system' towards better care. If something does not align with my identity...I need not adopt or pursue. This includes shifting to an opposite  point on a binary scale to which I am so loosely connected.

Sent from Kaity's Fab Phone!

Quote from: Sophia Sage on November 27, 2016, 11:29:23 AM
Another quibble.  You're equating how one was "born as" with embodiment and conflating that with gender, which privileges those things over identity.  I was born female, despite my initial embodiment and social assignment. 

Secondly, the present is what matters, not the past.  The past no longer exists.

Sorry Sophia that wasn't what I was doing at all (or certainly not meaning to). It's a harsh truth, but we are ALL born, and ALL assigned a gender label. Whether that is right or wrong doesn't change the fact the label exists. This means we as a human race CURRENTLY have only 2 label options at birth.. either Male or Female.

My response was regarding corrective surgery.. and the difference between cis and trans. As only one example; To be labeled male at birth, and identify female makes you trans. To be labeled female and identify female makes you cis. Corrective surgery is available to trans to socially align and assist in correcting Gender Dysphoria. Corrective surgery, no matter its advancement or complexity, cannot change the fact that at birth we were supplied a label that did not match our identity.

I can't speak for everyone obviously, however the past to me is just as important as the present.. at least in most cases. The past is my backdrop if you will.. the first chapters that establish the characters and set the scene. The past gave me time to introduce myself.. and I choose to respect it rather than forget it.

Quote from: Sophia Sage on November 27, 2016, 11:29:23 AMMmm... no. 

Might I offer another paradigm?  To be "born again" comes to us from spiritual traditions.  Whether you believe in them or not, they do point to a psychological experience of death and rebirth.  So I do think it's possible to "become cis" if we understand that "cis" indicates a state of being without any dysphoria -- when identity, embodiment, and social gendering are all aligned.  In this case, it's the "trans" identity that dies, the identity that's dysphoric... while an identity that's not dysphoric comes into being.

And not to be solipsistic, but this would include the reflections of that identity that are held in the heads of all the people we keep in our lives, and among those relationships that we make anew. 

Not that that's easy to accomplish.

I understand the spiritual aspect, however again without the context at hand explained.. my words come across very different to their meaning. My response was regarding biology, and the difference between trans and cis. IF we understood cis the way you have explained it would be bliss! But we don't understand it that way.. For that to work would require no gender label at all.. or perhaps.. maybe rather than male or female would be dysphoric and non-dysphoric. Even here there is still a Trans aspect.. AND a method or process of transition. Before we knew it we would be Trans again!

My original point is that labels are subjective.. even in your example they are subjective because.. for the sake of explaining it you are required to use them.. but in living it you don't need to at all. Those around you might to better explain it for themselves.. but thats it.. (also their problem not yours  )

Quote from: Sophia Sage on November 27, 2016, 11:29:23 AMGender is a category. Categories, as it turns out, are not cut and dried.  They are fuzzy.  When it comes to the category of gender, and how we assign it every day, automatically, subconsciously, it's primarily embodied characteristics (including voice) that come into play.  Each person is compared to a "prototype" of "man" or "woman," and gender is assigned based on how closely one aligns with one or the other. 

So there are no singular "necessary" characteristics, because in truth it's a gestalt of characteristics that come into play.  Rather, there needs to be a sufficient number of characteristics, and some characteristics are more influential than others (voice is hugely influential, for example, as is facial hair and facial shape and the presence or absence of breasts), that tips the scales in one direction or another.  If the scales are too balanced, there is ambiguity, and then the conscious mind is engaged to make a decision. 

If one's dysphoria includes the social dimension, then this is hugely important to understand, because for most of us it is entirely possible to tip the scales in our favor.

I responded to this like.. 4 times and couldn't seem to get my words together.. haha BASICALLY I agree.. it didn't seem far separated from my original comment. Ambiguity though exists everywhere.. I've met plenty of cis-gendered people where I've needed to wait for a general social queue like a name or something to tell me their identity. This surely means Ambiguity doesn't need to be seen as a negative, because its entirely normal (in that it exists EVERYWHERE.. Trans or Cis). However in a theoretical world where that gender-comparison didn't exist, the mind would evolve to seek different information to determine gender.. not current standards. I don't speak for everyone of course (again ) but that is a world I'd much rather live in.

Quote from: Jess2Impress on November 27, 2016, 08:07:24 PMMy response was regarding corrective surgery.. and the difference between cis and trans. As only one example; To be labeled male at birth, and identify female makes you trans. To be labeled female and identify female makes you cis.

That make make you trans, but as I pointed out, I see it in a very different light.  Now yes, this definition you offer is likely the more widespread understanding of the terms under consideration, but then at one point in time the widespread understanding of the Earth was that it was flat. 

The word "trans" itself is actually a prefix from Latin, meaning "across, beyond, over," and perhaps derived from "to cross."  But once one has crossed over, once there's no more dysphoria, and identity, embodiment, and socialization are all aligned (assuming you're on the binary), I think it makes more sense to simply say you're a woman or a man.  Because now there's nothing "trans" about it.  I'm not beyond female, I am female.  Gender is socially constructed -- right down to the very idea that an "assignment" needs to be made at birth in the first place.  So to focus on "biology" I think is misplaced, and can lead to unnecessary dysphoria-inducing rumination.  The fact of the matter is, it's one's presentation in the present that elicits gendering. Which is more a function of embodiment than "biology."

And I realize that this might seem like quibbling over semantics, but I find semantics to actually be very important.  I mean, we ask for the correct semantics when it comes to pronouns, right? 

QuoteI can't speak for everyone obviously, however the past to me is just as important as the present.. at least in most cases. The past is my backdrop if you will.. the first chapters that establish the characters and set the scene. The past gave me time to introduce myself.. and I choose to respect it rather than forget it.

My memories have changed.

And obviously, I'm aware of that fact, but nonetheless, when I pull up memories of myself from when I was a little girl, well, in my memories I'm a little girl.  And when my parents tell stories of when I was a little girl, they tell stories of when I was a little girl. My birth certificate now says that I was born a little girl. 

This, as far as I'm concerned, is a blessing.  My memories are no longer a source of dysphoria.

Which, to me, is what's really relevant to all this -- dysphoria (and, consequently, euphoria).  That's how I even came to know who I really was.  I mean, maybe identity is all a fiction, as the Zen koans suggest, there never was a gate or even a self to pass through it, but I do think emotions are real.  It's our emotions that matter.  At least, it's my emotions that mattered when I decided to transition, not any theories on identity or how to define cis and trans.  Back in the day, we didn't even have the word "cis." 

Words are transitory, and change over time, in accordance with usage.  They accrue new meanings that better suit the people who are using them.  We own the words, not the other way around.

QuoteMy response was regarding biology, and the difference between trans and cis. IF we understood cis the way you have explained it would be bliss! But we don't understand it that way.. For that to work would require no gender label at all.. or perhaps.. maybe rather than male or female would be dysphoric and non-dysphoric. Even here there is still a Trans aspect.. AND a method or process of transition. Before we knew it we would be Trans again!

Wait, if you understood it as I understand it, it would be bliss?  Bliss?

That's music to my ears, and it sounds about right to boot.

Just drop the "trans" for a second, and think of it this way.  You're a woman.  No bones about it.  But your body has been poisoned by testosterone, thanks to a genetic error, and this has led to everyone thinking you're a man in some sense (including yourself, perhaps?) and all this brings up feelings of gender dysphoria.  So you engage in a process through which your embodiment is corrected.  Lo and behold, with the appropriate narrative (you were always female) your proper socialization ensues.  Now everyone takes you as a woman!  And at some point down the road, there's no dysphoria at all, in which case you might as well be cis. 

Why on earth would you deny that to yourself if you suffer gender dysphoria?  Why deny yourself bliss if everyone else is willing to give it to you?

QuoteI've met plenty of cis-gendered people where I've needed to wait for a general social queue like a name or something to tell me their identity. This surely means Ambiguity doesn't need to be seen as a negative, because its entirely normal (in that it exists EVERYWHERE.. Trans or Cis). However in a theoretical world where that gender-comparison didn't exist, the mind would evolve to seek different information to determine gender.. not current standards. I don't speak for everyone of course (again ) but that is a world I'd much rather live in.

We live in a world where the categories of gender have been neurologically established due to the dimorphism between two different types of bodies, a binary which is subsequently socially reinforced.  Those categories aren't "trans" and "cis" but "man" and "woman."  Those are the basic-level categories.  For those afflicted with gender dysphoria, there will always be comparisons with "cis" gendering, because it's in that context that the social dimension of gender is constructed.

Which is interesting, because "trans" and "cis" aren't basic-level categories with prototypical "shapes" or "qualia" at their centers -- rather, they are narrative categories. 

At the heart of the cis narrative is the idea that gender is constant and there is no misalignment of embodiment or socialization.  Well, if we realize that we were always the gender of our internal identities, and there's no more misalignment of embodiment or socialization, if there's no more dysphoria, we might as well consider ourselves "cis" at that point.

Narrative is just a fancy word for story.  Which is the real issue here, what stories we're going to tell, and why we're going to tell them.  Now, different conceptual frameworks or paradigms for understanding the world will yield different stories.  And different stories have different effects on people, both listeners and storytellers.  So, given several paradigms, all internally consistent, why not pick the one that produces the desired effect? 

Assuming the desired effect is the alleviation of dysphoria, I would argue that some paradigms are more effective than others. 

Quote from: Jess2Impress on November 27, 2016, 08:25:23 AM
If I may.. regardless of the number of surgeries one receives.. nor the complexity or advancement of those surgeries.. nothing changes the fact that one was born and labeled male or female..

Trans is simply a label created out of necessity.. as is Cis. No one is required to use it. 

Contrary to your statement.. unfortunately there are things we cannot change.. I cannot be born-again female.. where my entire history and identity is erased.. Just as much as I can't have a pet Tyrannosaurus Rex. The ONLY way to 'become' cis.. is to be born cis. Unless I have mis-quoted your meaning behind that statement.. then I'm sorry.. simply responding to the context as it has been presented.. (just as I am using the term 'cis' in its official context)

The question posed in the topic is whether we are satisfied with the comparison between Trans and Cis.. Which in my eyes at least.. is just as hurtful as comparing ones skin colour. We are allowed to be different, but by comparing ourselves it means a standard exists.. and no one should ever be expected to live up to a standard.. Sure we can try.. but what happens when it fails.

If biology and biology only determines gender.. what happens when say.. a female-born female (lol ) is born without a uterus. Do we list as 'undetermined' for Gender? or Male?? Biology being used to determine gender is what started the whole problem for ourselves in the first place.

I appreciate your reasoning but only to a limited extent. Further developments in surgical options.. success rates and quality would be fantastic.. but it a completely mute point when asked whether we should be comparing ourselves to cis.

If I can end on what you've laid out as standards.. and why you feel we should want to continue to be compared to cis-gendered people at this current moment;

Not ONE of those factors determines someones gender. Hormonal levels are on an incredibly wide spectrum.. effected heavily not only by biology, but environment as well.. Physical characteristics are also hugely varied.. and cannot be used to determine gender. Reproductive capabilities was just poorly worded in my opinion.. Not all women can have babies after all.

Comparing that of which we have no control over is just far too hurtful.. and not only to ourselves but even to those we are comparing ourselves to.

Identify as male, female, trans or other. It shouldn't matter to anyone but yourself. As Michelle said earlier, call me a human being.. or even better still!! Just call me Jess

I voted Yes.

Being born biologically one way or the other has absolutely nothing to do with the definition of cisgender. The definition of cisgender relates to biological sex not being born one way or the other. But you are able to change many things such as your history and records. If you live in a blue state, you can even change them and have the court seal or destroy the records. Again, the only way to become cisgender by definition is to alter your biology.

As for your dismissal of better surgical options, that's the norm for transgender people. Most are convinced that the technology to change biological sex is "science fiction" or "decades off" when in reality, it already exists. Biomedical scientists successfully perform gene therapy and regenerative medicine technologies on mammals which could allow for a complete transition.

What it is, is that many transgender people are so concerned with diversity and acceptance that they forget that transsexuality is actually a physiological problem that needs medical attention to be corrected. Nothing is more damning to that argument than radically altering bodies to conform while shouting "You're fine the way you are!"

What the transgender community should do is to advocate for better medical options and let people make up their own minds on their medical decisions, instead of holding everyone hostage (keeping ALL transgender people unpassable enough) to rope us into the "transgender and proud" movement.

Fortunately, extreme progress is being made in a place that desperately needs it: FTM bottom surgery. In 2 years they will start receiving penis transplants from deceased donors. Progress like this will eventually tear down the resistance to the idea of transgender people becoming cisgender and the idea of transsexuality being a curable condition.

Quote from: Sophia Sage on November 27, 2016, 11:21:05 AM
A quibble -- because gender is socially constructed from biological embodiment, I think it's more accurate to say that "cis" indicates an alignment between identity, embodiment, and social gendering. 

Which helps to illustrate some of the schisms in trans spaces -- some desire to change their bodies, and don't care about the rest of the world... and some just want to be socially gendered, but aren't particularly dismayed by the embodiment in of itself... and of course some want it all.   

All that said, yes, we don't yet have a magic pill to rewrite our DNA, to grow our own uteruses and ovaries (or penises and testes for the men)... and if such a magic pill were ever to come down the pike, it'd probably confer functional immortality as well.

Funny you should mention that! This year bore witness to one of the most successful anti-aging treatments ever. A 47 year old CEO of a biotech corporation became biologically 20 years younger after an experimental gene therapy treatment.

Quote from: Jess2Impress on November 27, 2016, 08:07:24 PM
Sorry Sophia that wasn't what I was doing at all (or certainly not meaning to). It's a harsh truth, but we are ALL born, and ALL assigned a gender label. Whether that is right or wrong doesn't change the fact the label exists. This means we as a human race CURRENTLY have only 2 label options at birth.. either Male or Female.

My response was regarding corrective surgery.. and the difference between cis and trans. As only one example; To be labeled male at birth, and identify female makes you trans. To be labeled female and identify female makes you cis. Corrective surgery is available to trans to socially align and assist in correcting Gender Dysphoria. Corrective surgery, no matter its advancement or complexity, cannot change the fact that at birth we were supplied a label that did not match our identity.

I can't speak for everyone obviously, however the past to me is just as important as the present.. at least in most cases. The past is my backdrop if you will.. the first chapters that establish the characters and set the scene. The past gave me time to introduce myself.. and I choose to respect it rather than forget it.


I understand the spiritual aspect, however again without the context at hand explained.. my words come across very different to their meaning. My response was regarding biology, and the difference between trans and cis. IF we understood cis the way you have explained it would be bliss! But we don't understand it that way.. For that to work would require no gender label at all.. or perhaps.. maybe rather than male or female would be dysphoric and non-dysphoric. Even here there is still a Trans aspect.. AND a method or process of transition. Before we knew it we would be Trans again!

My original point is that labels are subjective.. even in your example they are subjective because.. for the sake of explaining it you are required to use them.. but in living it you don't need to at all. Those around you might to better explain it for themselves.. but thats it.. (also their problem not yours  )


I responded to this like.. 4 times and couldn't seem to get my words together.. haha BASICALLY I agree.. it didn't seem far separated from my original comment. Ambiguity though exists everywhere.. I've met plenty of cis-gendered people where I've needed to wait for a general social queue like a name or something to tell me their identity. This surely means Ambiguity doesn't need to be seen as a negative, because its entirely normal (in that it exists EVERYWHERE.. Trans or Cis). However in a theoretical world where that gender-comparison didn't exist, the mind would evolve to seek different information to determine gender.. not current standards. I don't speak for everyone of course (again ) but that is a world I'd much rather live in.

You put an awful lot of stock into your birth certificate. A mere record on paper that can be completely changed. I honestly look forward to using mine as kindling to help my my grill get started next summer

Quote from: Jean24 on November 28, 2016, 02:19:01 PM
Funny you should mention that! This year bore witness to one of the most successful anti-aging treatments ever. A 47 year old CEO of a biotech corporation became biologically 20 years younger after an experimental gene therapy treatment.

Oooooh!  That is promising!

Source?