The difficulty with this thread: https://www.susans.org/forums/index.php/topic,27302.0.html and with its premise is that the OP forms an argument based on a belief. It then stipulates that in order to prove/disprove the basic presumption "i am a woman born that was born with hbs" can only be made by someone with HBS. That is to set-up a parameter for an argument that is circular, a tautology.

The presumption is that HBS is, de facto, a medical condition that has been as validated as, say, lung cancer. The factual basis for that validation is lacking. In using ICD-10 one cannot find a listing for such a medical condition. One can only find the designation at sites, and in the writings of those that propounded the HBS or of those who agree with that particular explanation of what has been called transsexuality. Proponents are generally not going to sow the seeds, intentional, of disproval within their propagational sites and writings.

I don't disagree at all that a medical/physical reason for transsexuality that might include some of the traits associated with Harry Benjamin Syndrome (HBS) may well be discovered, researched and established at some time. That time is 'not yet.' We may well someday be able to isolate a gene or set of genes that cause an anomaly such as the proposed HBS. As yet, there is nothing to establish such a condition except my belief that I have it, and the belief that it is limited to those who think of ourselves as 'true transsexuals.' Although I will also allow that in the readings I have made of HBS I find that certain limitations to the class of individuals with such a disorder seems to skew on the side of economic, social and ethnic disparities that are socio-cultural and personal, not medical.

There was a time when transsexuals were known as 'unicorns' as well. I might well start a thread that limited participation to transsexuals who defined themselves as unicorns. I might establish that any who disagreed had to show through articles, journals, statements of policy and medical literature that was written and accepted by the unicorns that 'unicorns' were mythological creatures.

I might also limit all discussion of 'unicorns' to those who agreed that they were unicorns. Others could go elsewhere to make their arguments. The unicorns would recognize no commentary that would be made by any who did not accept that they were unicorns.

Provided I owned the printing press, web space, radio station, tv station or whatever media I established as the place for unicorns to discuss the legitimacy of unicorns then I would be able to limit discussions to other unicorns and would, therefore, probably not receive a lot of input from those who did not so identify.

I'm sure that I would be very secure in my ability to view myself as a unicorn, simply because I would see no arguments that unicorns are mythological creatures that were a cross between what others might call a mixture of horse, goat and narwhal.

Inductive and deductive reasoning require certain logical parameters in order to determine 'truth' through words. Logic does not have a one-to-one relationship to what most of us refer to as 'real-life,' a series of events and thoughts/feelings that we experience through the medium of what we refer to as time. Instead such reasoning is founded on words: the symbols and signs we use to approximate descriptions of what we experience as 'reality.' A fairly large collection of 'logical fallacies,' their uses and determinants may be found here: http://logicalfallacies.info/

Alas, I own no space that allows such a discussion to remain the purview of myself and other unicorns. Thus, to make this argument and limit it in the ways I wish I would have to buy such a venue and maintain it, making certain that no one who was not a 'unicorn' was given access to it.

I might obtain 35 or 45 thousand like-minded people and we would all discuss the value and veracity of our existence as unicorns. Or refusing to accede to the demands I made of others I might well venture forth to establish 'unicornism' among the media owned and operated by others.

The 'answers' to questions as laid down in the OP are personal and can be validated only by myself. They may or may not be accepted and embraced by others. But to limit such a discussion to only those who agreed with me on another's space would be a sore breach of etiquette and good taste. Much like the taking over of a worship-grove of a different coven and demanding that the members of the other coven desist from ever setting foot in that grove again.

It's bad form and will generally only lead to hard feelings and a fight. I can do such things, my question to myself is simply this: does the value of the action justify the taking of the action and the sowing of the discord that almost surely will result?

Nichole

Thank you for saying that Nichole, it was well spelled out and spoken clearly (I hope), and I am glad you made notice to the other post on HBS..

As a reply to the fact that it's not in ICD-10, consider that  ->-bleeped-<- has been included in the DSM-IV-TR, despite being debunked as ->-bleeped-<-ty science with little basis in reality and no proveable link to transsexuality.

I think the androgyne  experience comes from somewhere different to hbs.

There are times I think that HBS is merely war by other means. Apologies to Clausewitz.

Although much as the claim resounds that HBS is scientific and medical the paucity of either scientific or medical evidence, limited to one study made on  a handful of subjects fourteen years ago that was indicative of a need for further research, and a preponderance of exclusionary class, ethnic and monetary distinctions instead of any actually scientific evidence beyond that original Dutch research, indicates to me that thus far it is political and personal.   

Sowing divisiveness and exclusion are fairly easy to do things: Dubya can do it. Street drunks do it constantly, racists and sexists have done it for centuries and millenia. It's not a particularly deft trick.

Rather defter is building relationship and some sense that in spite of difference in each of us, there is a similarity that can bring our differences into an ability to live peacefully and with respect for one another.

Nichole

Divide and conquer is a long established tactic, and it does work.  You can see that in here.

From my post on the thread in question:

Quote
To me the real thing is simply this. We are desperate to be accepted by society, and to a large extent we believe that we aren't accepted because of ->-bleeped-<--porn and fetishists and all the rest of it. And we are willing to sacrifice whomever we have to on the altar of respectability as long as they stop hating us.

Thing is. They won't stop hating us. They don't hate us because we're transsexual or ->-bleeped-<- or fetishists or whatever. They hate us because we deviate from the norm. We are different, we threaten the security of the norm, and so we must be destroyed.

To me finding the root causes of gender variance is important because it will allow us to treat people with these conditions better. Too many people seem to want to find out purely for validation.

Quote from: Nichole on February 16, 2008, 08:59:04 PM
There are times I think that HBS is merely war by other means. Apologies to Clausewitz.

Although much as the claim resounds that HBS is scientific and medical the paucity of either scientific or medical evidence, limited to one study made on  a handful of subjects fourteen years ago that was indicative of a need for further research, and a preponderance of exclusionary class, ethnic and monetary distinctions instead of any actually scientific evidence beyond that original Dutch research, indicates to me that thus far it is political and personal.   

Sowing divisiveness and exclusion are fairly easy to do things: Dubya can do it. Street drunks do it constantly, racists and sexists have done it for centuries and millenia. It's not a particularly deft trick.

Rather defter is building relationship and some sense that in spite of difference in each of us, there is a similarity that can bring our differences into an ability to live peacefully and with respect for one another.

Nichole

You know, I've been thinking about this lately.
If they want to sepperate so bad I say let them go.
If they want to consider themselves sepperate then they are maybe.

Alright, so there it is, now how do we find peace between the two groups.
They do co-exist. That's maybe the first start maybe that they both won't go away.
So alright. What are we going to do?
I am not going to stop using the term Transexual as I see fit.
Nor Transgender.
I mean, do we have anything in common?
Some united interests?

I need to understand this situation better, to be honest it still confuses me somewhat.

I realy don't know what they are arguing.
What is their stance? Do tehy even have one as a united community?
Or are they sort of a homogenous blob of people who agree with the HBS definition.
What is with all this exlusion talk?

I mean, if they think that some people who are TS are actually IS then so what?
Maybe it's true and we'll find out in a few years.
But why would they exclude others from that as well?
I mean why would they say that "these"people are not true Transexuals?
And why would they say GID doesn't exist when the practical experiece and emperical evidance says and suggests that it does?

I just don't get the logic. And when I've tried to discuss this with people on HBS websites I've been attacked for it and called all sorts of names as though I  was "one of them" for applying logic.
I mean their conclusions just don't make any sense and when I said so, rather than explain them to me they attacked me.
What gives?

I don't understand why people would do that unless they realy were crazy or they had some real reason they wanted to keep secret, or there was a horrible misunderstanding on some part.

I just don't get it.
And when Ive tried to ask, that hasn't been explained to me.
I mean how the hell did this all get started?
Why on earth is this going on?
Why would some people say that some who are probably transexuals are not?
I mean that makes no sense to me.

Please, if anybody has an explaination for this, I would realy love to hear it.
I am at a loss for words right now.
I just don't know where to go from here.

Sara

There is belief in the HBS community, that scientific data points towards a nuerological cause for TSism, ie a form of IS.

The HBS community states that no scientific data, or that data points toward that other members of the TG community, are not of the Binary or are CD, TV, andro for a non biological reason.

That sums it up simply...

QuoteData points toward TS is Binary
Data points toward TG-TS is not binary...

Its that simple sarah

Whoa, minute, I think I just got it.

They think that all people who are actualy transexual are intersexxed.
As a biological condition.

So therefor if someone is not then they are just a Fetishist?
Like "I have an actual, real physiological problem, and you are just perverted."
So they think that GID doesn't exist, because for them, their "gender disphoria" is caused by biological means.
A "birth defect" or somthing like that.

So that anyone who says that their "gender" is not in allignment with thier body is either wrong, or, is a intersexxed HBS transexual and needs to be treated with GRS.

WOW.

So they think the whole idea of things like "gender being sepperate from sex" is false.

O.M.G.


That's pretty heavy.
So they think the entire "t" movement, and the GLBTQ stuff is a perversion and false.

Oh my God.

I'm having trouble swallowing this one.

I need a minute..

Sara

err To some degree perhaps not so strongly but,...

Take your time hun, sit down and Breath...

Actually, if GID is a continum and  multi-factorial, the binary divide could
be more of a curve with lot less people in the middle and most people at both ends.

There's very little reason to think gender is linked to one single gene if its created
in the brain. There's very little linked to a single gene. But, its probable that its
related to few genes since there seems to be correlation between the ratio
of female to male child in previous generations and the probability
of being TS. If it was related
to a great number of genes it couldn't be passed on easily and would not
be so strongly influenced by the maternal side.

Its possible that to be TS this genetic propensity needs a trigger, low
exposure or sensitivity to androgens which can be influenced by transient
environmental factors and a whole other set of other genes
to be able to express itself in gendering the brain.

Then, there's the whole question of is gender an on and off switch in the brain or
is it more a kind of fuzzy logic type thing. The reaction to all the previous factors
will depend on this end point.

Then, you've got social and cultural issue, which impact how many
Ts actually transition (which is seen recently) and the fact that maybe
those with in between genders (if gender is not binary) may not need
to transition at all or do so under different circumstances than
the most extreme gendered brain.

Even in IS, there are countless variations. Its hard to believe that with the
high number of gender variants out there and the incredible variety
of reaction to GID, there would be a single causal factor.

I agree Keira, I too believe that there are many factoring influences that can cause gender variation, I am glad you wrote that.

It is presumably not sufficient to think that just one thing causes it..

I think the hypothesis of HBS is worthy of debate. 

But it as of yet has no currency with those who do not already accept us "T"s.  Nor do I envision it would change enough minds, or enough of the right people's minds (those who have the power to bring about such sweeping changes as legislating acceptance for us.)

And I see the potential that, like Barney Frank booted out all the can't-pass-for-straight off the ENDA bus, The HBS Womyn Born Transsexual would boot the not-passable of the Equal Treatment For Trans bus.

And, I've called for some sort of rational, understandable system on the different people on the TG spectrum -- e.g., CD, TG, TS pre, TS post --  and what 'gendered' spaces they are permitted to enter (or denied from entering,) and what the criteria and thresholds are for entry.  As of yet, the HBS folks, much like the FundeVangelical Terminators out there, haven't appeared to want to discus that issue AT ALL, and I still don't quite know what to make of that...

Anyway, I said my piece, which, if you're not registered on this site as a TS MtF, is posted to a topic which has been moved to a forum you can't see.  The entrances are barricaded and there's a sign hung on the door;

関係者以外立入り禁止

(Japanese for "If you're not one of us, stay out!)

Karen