The latest and greatest Trans Survey in the USA is out today.  The data includes volumes of information and one item stood out for me.  Over a third of the respondents identified themselves as Non Binary.  Rather than the tiny minority of trans people, we are a significant percentage of those standing up to be counted.  Many people here and elsewhere think us to be somehow less than true or worthy of inclusion and the labels are little help.  Even the term Non Binary starts with a negative descriptor. 

It is past time to draw the circle of support and inclusion wider and large enough to recognize each other as valid, real and equally deserving of concern, consideration and equity in rights and responsibility.

We stand stronger together!

Quote from: Tessa James on December 08, 2016, 11:51:23 AM
The latest and greatest Trans Survey in the USA is out today.  The data includes volumes of information and one item stood out for me.  Over a third of the respondents identified themselves as Non Binary.  Rather than the tiny minority of trans people, we are a significant percentage of those standing up to be counted.  Many people here and elsewhere think us to be somehow less than true or worthy of inclusionand the labels are little help.  Even the term Non Binary starts with a negative descriptor. 

It is past time to draw the circle of support and inclusion wider and large enough to recognize each other as valid, real and equally deserving of concern, consideration and equity in rights and responsibility.

We stand stronger together!

That's like saying a regular horse is better than a unicorn! 

Hugs, Devlyn

Interesting.....only 5% of survey respondents identify as cross-dressers. 

For me crossdressing was the relief valve. The desire was always to be a woman. If I had been able to confront the situation years ago I would have. But I'm no pathfinder and it was never a life or death struggle, so I played the social role expected of a person with an appendage between his legs regardless of how small it was. I hated that thing. But I could never be macho, never had prolific hair on my body, never aggressive, never into manly domains like Sports, never developed muscles, or an ego. Now besides HRT, I have no other options open to me. I would so love for full feminization but at this stage it is too dangerous for me.

Having been a crossdresser and knowing a few it does not surprise me that few crossdressers identify with the term transgender.  Most of those I know consider themselves men first and CD second.  That was true when i tried a weak effort at transition in the early 90's.  Guys would let me know where to shop for a bra but did not know any therapists or medical people who could help with HRT.

We have made tremendous progress in terms of visibility, therapy and medical/surgical options. 

TJ

Many thanks for this.  It has always been easier to erase identity than to recognise and to celebrate diversity.  This survey reflects just how far the general, trans and non binary communities have come now that so many of us are more comfortable in accepting and expressing our identity.

This is encouraging and I suspect that future studies will show an increasing number of folk who identify as trans and as non binary.

Safe travels

Aisla

Quote from: Clara Kay on December 08, 2016, 02:16:41 PM
Interesting.....only 5% of survey respondents identify as cross-dressers.

Also it's important to remember too that the 5% figure is misleading in a statistically significant way.  The term cross-dresser rarely applies to faab trans persons.   Which is half of the community.  Maybe drag kings but they are a minority of the drag community.  How many faab people have you ever met who identify that way?  I haven't met any.  It's pretty much a maab thing.

Have we got a link to the survey results?

I took that one I think, and want to see it.

I always wonder.  Some of us say we had a crossdressing stage and then went trans.



I think some of us were trans, dressed as us, and then figured out we needed to accept our true selves.

Not to negate CD's either.   I'm not one so I don't have a clue, nor wish to pass judgement or invalidate that in any way.  Because its not in my life experience.

5% huh.

Isn't the media attention mostly on CD representing that as being trans?  Or is that my scewed understanding because RuPaul has so much focus?

Ehhh.   I'm  not making much sense here.  Probably stirring up trouble I don't intend to create.

I do want that link though.

What I would like to know is what our mortality rate is.  Not suicide rate.  Death rate, from drugs, alcohol, poverty, violence, aids, suicide, all that.

I think its probably horribly high, regardless of if you are nb or ts or whatever else.

I know I barely lived through it all.

So its on Susans front page.

I feel dumb...

Tessa,

What is the link to that survey? The one I googled didn't have that specific information.

http://www.transequality.org/sites/default/files/docs/USTS-Executive-Summary-FINAL.PDF

The full survey report (203 pages) is here:
http://www.transequality.org/sites/default/files/docs/USTS-Full-Report-FINAL.PDF

The Executive Summary (16 pages) is here:
http://www.transequality.org/sites/default/files/docs/USTS-Executive-Summary-FINAL.PDF

The Frequently Asked Questions about the survey are here:
http://www.ustranssurvey.org/faq/

I think the rise of those that identify as NB, and to a smaller extent the percentage of CD'rs, speaks highly of the rise of acceptance of all things "Trans" in society. The definition of sex & gender being equated to what sort of dangly bits you got/had defined gender and, for the most part, imposed a binary of either F or M. Today, much like sex primarily takes place between the ears and not below the belt, so does gender.

Let's face it, even "Cis" people do not always fit neatly into a so called gender binary as defined by biology and society. If non-trans people do not fit perfectly as Non-Binary Cis, how can trans when the gender lines are, by definition, breached?

The desire to be totally passable and/or stealth has a lot to do with obtaining acceptance and feeling accepted by society. Today it is not a requirement in order to function in many locales. The rise of NB demonstrates the general acceptance of TG and now seeing fitting neatly into a gender binary is no longer a requirement to fit in

Quote from: JoanneB on December 11, 2016, 12:45:09 AM
The rise of NB demonstrates the general acceptance of TG and now seeing fitting neatly into a gender binary is no longer a requirement to fit in

That's true. In the old days, when the guidelines were being established, one had to pass as a woman in order to qualify for SRS.  That's where the one year of RLE comes from. It's a holdover from those days where you just didn't just have to live as your assigned gender for a year.   You had to pass as a woman for a year.  There is still a lot of progress to be made in that area however.  Just owing to the reality of the large non-binary composition of the trans community the situation demands reform.  But there are options these days. One can go to Thailand for instance and bypass the RLE requirement.

What is RLE anyway...

Requires I wear a skirt instead of looking like an ambiguous business woman with long nails, a trans ring, and my engagement ring next to my wedding band?

Wearing shirts instead of flowered blouses, while its quite obvious I have breasts?

Who gets to determine what is real life experience enough?  Real life stereotypical binary experience?

Girly girl experience?

LOL I trigger so fast.

WIth the right gender therapists, the right recommendations and understandings, and the WPATH in its correct versions, the nonbinaries can finally get treated right.

But the stats apply so much to us I think.  I want to read through all of this, when I get the time, I've done the public transition, the lost income, the loss of medical benefits, the whole negative narrative of all of this, I have been through a heck of a lot of it as a nonbinary transperson.

I just hope its the leverage we need to stop the bullying at the high levels of office, or at least expose it for what it is.   Deliberate and premeditated harming of a defenseless and innocent population.

Oh yes, I trigger hard on that, those wounds will never heal for me.

Quote from: Satinjoy on December 11, 2016, 01:12:00 PM
Who gets to determine what is real life experience enough? 

I imagine a fictitious conversation with my therapist trying to convince her to approve my RLE.
"Sorry ma'am, those women's jeans and T-shirts aren't cutting it.  I can't approve this! Short skirts. Frills. Flounce.  That's the only way I'm ever signing off on your surgery!
And more lace! For God's sake! MORE LACE!!!!!!

Rofl

You mean this?

*Unbottuns blouse, whatched therapists eyes pop out*

Hummina hummina hummina....

Ah lace.

Yup.  The outer shell is deceptive, look within only a little, and sh'e is staring back.

And so much of this takes us back to early 1950s Transsexual politics when outfits like John Hopkins would let only a very tiny and select group even be considered for medical or surgical transition.  This reminds me of swimsuit competitions for Miss USA!  Back then they signed documents swearing to go back in the closet, move away and disappear.

Not this girl!

Good heavens!
I feel dysphoric just reading those ridiculous RLE rules. What normal mature career woman swears short skirts, extra long nails, flounces, and ruffles?
No woman I know.
Maybe a few silly middle school girls.

OK, here is some of the earliest actual 'real life experience' information, summarized and available here:
https://dspace.library.uvic.ca//handle/1828/4111

The actual PDF document, a 13 Mb scan of the 44 page booklet printed in 1976:
https://dspace.library.uvic.ca/bitstream/handle/1828/4111/EEF_Guidelines_1976.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y

This was put out by the Erickson Educational Foundation, founded by Reed Erickson.  He transitioned in 1963 under the care of Dr. Harry Benjamin, and started the Foundation.

It's actually a remarkable document, with advice on getting through real life, tucking, surgery, dialation, and getting one's Social Security and Drivers License documents.  Quite prescient, really.

The John Hopkins started in 1963 and I think Stanford started shortly after that. I found my group in 1979 and they had been running a less restrictive program for a while so I suspect most of the 70's RLE rules were relaxed. We were expected to do the best job we could blending into society however the function of the therapy group was to certify that we were capable of making our own decision on surgery. A year of RLE was to ensure we had sufficient exposure to what life would be like after surgery to make an informed decision. We had members who were married and divorce was not a requirement however in the days before gay marriage, that was an interesting twist.