OK, so maybe I am just too naive to have encountered this before, but a friend sent me this link.   I have been reading it, pretty much in disbelief:

http://www.transkids.us/index.html

If I am reading this right, (please forgive the summary) only those who transitioned at puberty are true transsexuals.  Those individuals are actually homosexuals who can function better in society as members of the opposite gender.  Anyone else is simply lying to their therapist in order to get treatment, including surgery.  Instead, late transitioners are all just really dealing with  ->-bleeped-<-.  There is no such thing as a gender identity.  In short, it is all about sex.

Now please tell me, you who have been exposed to this before, am I really seeing this from a group of early transitioning transsexuals?  They are the real deal and everyone else is just a freak?  Now personally, I could care less how a person wishes to describe his/her identity.  But to presume to understand me in this light makes me livid. 

If you have not read it, please do before responding.

Kristi

They've swallowed Bailey and Blanchard hook, line and sinker yeah. I agree it's quite nasty to be so blatantly labelled, but I don't suppose there's much to be done.

Mina.

The article is dated, and it is written by someone who does not understand GID, and furthermore is very elitist and heirarchal in terminology.
But I am not offended by it.  I know who I am and I am the only one who counts.

Quote from: Virginia87106 on February 11, 2009, 08:56:01 AM
But I am not offended by it.  I know who I am and I am the only one who counts.

Thanks, Virginia.  That is a great thought.

Kristi

not offended, just saddened.  the privileged who were lucky enough to be born at a time and have the right parental support and circumstances so they could transition as kids scapegoating the less fortunate...

I'm not offended.  I am angry, though.

Their philosophy is incoherent.  I don't see a true or deep understanding of TS issues.

I believe they are proud to be "homosexual transsexuals".  I'm not certain it's about age, though, but the clarity of the topic is mind bendingly bad.

They aren't going to be much of a group/movement.

My brain needs a rape shower!

I feel dirty just touching that website.  Ack!  I got as far through the FAQ to the point where they started talking about Blanchard.  I couldn't stand it any longer.  blech.

Notice that, at least as far as I got through, there were no explanations for FTM transsexuals.  By implication, transmen don't exist because by definition lesbians cannot be HSTS (gack!) because they are not attracted to men!

Somewhere in that pretzel logic my brain wanted to strangle my eyes.

-Sandy

That whole site is five years old and doesn't seem to have been touched since then.

Maybe the 'transkids' grew up. I would hope so. It sounds to me like children doing what children do, finding a niche to somehow gain recognition, which rebels against already established convention, whether that rebellion has any basis in reality or not.

The site is a clubhouse. Might as well stick a sign on it saying "Please don't read unless you first know the secret handshake". They even say it themselves:

QuoteBut the website is not about social identity because that discourse has been established and dominated in the west by autogynephilic transsexuals. Our website is targetting at the medical, psychological and academic sector and it is not about "identity" but about etiology and the need to establish a separate social and academic understanding that transkids and ->-bleeped-<- transsexuals are two separate and different groups, with different medical and social needs.

*sigh* The need to create their own 'scene'. Hardly surprising behaviour. It's the Emo of the trans world. "We're more different than you, and no one understands us."

Offended? Hardly. I feel kinda sad for them, though. That they feel the need to isolate themselves to this extent, and attempt to degrade the validity of everyone else they don't feel are like them in a bid to find, or create, their place in the world. It's a shame.

Offended? No. Laughing? Yes. But then, I tend to laugh at anyone whom tries to presuming to understand and better yet "know me better than I know myself" and then get it SO wrong.

I didn't even want to read past the first page....

It reminded me of a church group of so called christians that my in-laws
introduced me to.

The more I went to that church the more I noticed that the people there
viewed people who did not belong to thier group as somehow beneath them..

..even other christians...well, that group is no more, and the building they
occupied now is a comic store, which opens its doors to anyone.

I can't say I know all that much on  ->-bleeped-<-, but I don't stand in front
of a mirror wanting to have sex with myself, heck I havent had sex with my GF
in at least six mths. and I still don't think about it. My transition has nothing to
do with sex.

  Nicole

Quote from: Kiera on February 11, 2009, 12:33:58 PM
lol "Christians", in the South @ least, are nothing more than reformed, born again sinners aka ex-politicians, released convicts, pawn shop owners, sober drunks, used-car salesmen etc etc . . .

Look, I don't think this group has one thing in common with real Christians.  Nor is that description accurate.  And that really was not what this topic was about.

That being said, thanks for all of the comments.  I see some rather recent updates about ENDA, but the rest of it is more of a who's in the union, exclusivistic, pseudo-scientific,  propaganda for their small group.

Kristi

You forgot psudo-academic gibberish also.

People who need labels create them.  Usually these people take what society has drilled into their heads and alter it to fit their situation so they aren't social outcasts.  Then they criticize "what's left" in an effort to look like they are part of the mainstream.

Basically, they are insecure individuals who need the approval of the masses to feel validated.  They are not the ones who lead into battle.  They are the ones who hide behind the strong in hopes they won't be hurt.

Julie

This transkids thing is puported to be a hoax at tsroadmap.

http://www.tsroadmap.com/info/transkids/

http://www.tsroadmap.com/info/transkids/kiira-triea.html

That website is seriously scary and just waiting for a lawsuit.

The most scary part is the hrt section.


They sure like to make themselves out to be better than the rest. Not everyone was able to express their true selves in childhood.

There are wheels within wheels and a bit of researech will turn up all sorts of interesting things: like the origin of Kirii Triea (kiri tree) and the transkids and their collaborations with Lawrence and Bailey and Zucker and Blanchard.

http://www.tsroadmap.com/info/transkids/

There are places there you can link and find more, enough to soothe even the most troubled breast.

Nichole

Well that was too much of an epic fail to be offensive.

What noobs.

We should classify ourselves as "Susans Transpeople"

It doesn't necessarily offend me because I feel like it's almost an accurate representation of my life, to be honest. Actually, that site is what helped me come to terms with my transition (though at the time I didn't know there was some sort of controversy behind it). I'm kind of confused about what the controversy stems from. Though I do take issue with the term "homosexual transsexual", mainly because its confusing as all hell. 

Quote from: Kiera on February 12, 2009, 09:30:52 AMJulie, we ALL fit this description in more or less degree!

I see in myself characteristic elements of both and perhaps it wouldn't be a totally vain endeavor to try and "classify" our Susan's membership here according to life experiences and preferences? (not to "divide" but rather to see what we share in common?) What Am I Missing Here?

Well, not all.  There are some Rosa Parks types out there.  While I won't say I am that brave I will say I have forged into virgin territory at least once in my life and survived.  And I now find myself able to stand up for myself without needing a support team backing me up.

The point I was trying to make is there are those within our community who are willing to throw some of us under the bus so they will be accepted in the mainstream.  Susan Stanton made a comment that she wasn't like those men in dresses (I'm paraphrasing) in an apparent attempt to disassociate herself from the image the public most often uses when demonizing MTFs.  Young transitioners can be stealth so much easier than late transitioners and are accepted more readily because they look more female (minimal T damage).  The author(s) of this piece are doing what Stanton did, supporting the notion that if you don't look like a natal female you should never be accepted as female.  Since they look the part, they are 'real'.

Julie