Quote from: Alexmakenoise on November 20, 2009, 02:33:19 PM
The "just a phase" thing creates a lot of problems.  I agree with you.

Another issue is that, for some people, it really is a phase, and they won't know until they spend time talking to TG people, soul-searching, researching, etc.  I don't think there's anything wrong with it being a phase.

But when someone tells you, "It's just a phase," you're automatically put on the defensive and forced to choose sides.  And maybe you're not ready to choose sides.  And maybe you'll never want to. 

The whole situation of choosing sides presupposes some kind of fixed gender identity in accordance with the binary system, and that just doesn't apply to everyone.

Well-said.  There's absolutely nothing wrong with people who are simply experimenting for a temporary period, or who have a more "gender-fluid" identity or preference of expression -- this is one of the primary reasons I simply cannot condone the transition of teenagers and advise very young adults to be cautios of their own expressed desires to transition at that age.  As you say, many people will automatically go on the defensive and feel forced to "pick one" when they may not be ready or may simply be confused about themselves.  There's no way to know for certain whose is "just a phase" or not, so young transitions can lead to all sorts of problems later on -- especially for FTM persons, who are too often given leniency toward physical transitioning, and just-too-often-enough don't realise until they've destroyed their voices with testosterone and mastectomised their breasts that they had felt "pressured" into transitioning.  In the experiences of myself and several other people at my local TS/TG group, there are way more "FTMTF" persons "transition back" to their natal sex than there are MTFTMs.

Quote from: Alexmakenoise on November 20, 2009, 02:33:19 PMYeah, I wish ftm's and mtf's could trade genitals.  It would make everything so much easier.

Last I heard, there were experimental runs of that in perhaps Thailand(?), but the results proved that while MTF persons would get oestrogen production from donated ovaries, etc..., and FTM persons would produce testosterone from donated testicles, this production was only temporary due to the nature of the anti-rejection drugs.  This is just something that I heard from one of the TS women at my local TS/TG group, and she hasn't sent me a link to an article, even though I asked her for it on FaceBook, so I'm not sure how true this is, but it makes sense.

YES.

Even got a comment about "now she can afford that sex change" when I was up on the podium getting my first National championship medal. Geez - if only the surgeries etc were coverable by the tiny cash prize given.

Quote from: YoungSoulRebel on November 19, 2009, 11:17:21 PM
Well, here's my story:

I don't drive.  My eyesight is just bad enough that I shouldn't drive, so I rely on either public transportation or friends with cars.  I took the bus out to the bar one night about two years pre-surgery (and a good six months before I started replacing my wardrobe), and because the public transportation around here sucks so bad that the buses don't run after 10pm on weekdays and not after 6pm on weekends (yet this is a college town, where nearly everybody drinks), I had a friend drive me home.  He was driving a few others home, too, and all of us but the driving friend were drunk and being very silly.

At some point, the car conversation turned into talking about who had the bigger dick -- literally.  Save the driver's girlfriend, I was the only female in the car, but then I loudly proclaimed "My penis is bigger than the Internet!"

The whole car then went silent, save for some nervous giggles from the driver's girlfriend, and the driver's eyebrows perked up in the rear-view mirror and he said "You know, if anybody else in this car said that, I'd find that odd.  But since it was you, I can't say I'm surprised."

A few weeks later, I was on LiveJournal and having a really pissy day and decided that I *had to* start even the "dressing right" and "social cues" part of the transition process for my own sanity, so i made a poll asking my LJ friends which term they'd use to describe me -- their choices were "Girl, Boy, FTM Transsexual, Other".  About Half picked "FTM" with most of the rest pretty evenly divided between the other three.  One of the friends from the car ride clicked "other" and commented:  "Well, you look like a girl, but when people get to know you, it's apparent that, hrmm... well, when most girls claim to be 'just one of the guys', they're more just annoying girls who fart and don't pick up after themselves.  You're WAY more guy-like in personality, so you could say that and it wouldn't annoy me. :-)"


Also, my friend Aaron was fond of saying "R----'s not even bi-, but just talk to h-- long enough, and you'll see there's something queer upstairs."

Also just remembered something else:

I met my friend Esther on the Internet ages ago on this e-mail list for a radio show in the L.A. area that we both liked.  It was a Goth thing, so there were at least slightly more women than men on the list, and it was one of the first on-line communities I'd seen where people were more likely to be assumed female than otherwise.

Still, Esther apparently assumed I was a gay man for the longest time, even with my old name attached to my old e-mail address.  She still didn't completely believe I was "female" until we finally met up, and even then she said "OK, this may be, but it seriously wouldn't surprise me if you turned out like A---- [a trans woman lesbian on the same e-mail list], only, you know, for guys."


Then there's the story of my high school prom.  Long story short (and it is a long, embarrassing story), the "goth clique" at the small-town high school I went to consisted of me and four or five guys, depending on the semester -- these would be Robin, Adam, Big Gay Adam, Brendt, and sometimes Tad (Tad was also seriously the only Black kid at our school).  Robin and Adam are the important ones here.  So, I get to prom, in a dress, so unfashionably early that the prom committee asks me and the date my step-mother arranged for me to help finish setting up.  Robin is the first of my friends to show up, wherein he immediately spies me from across the room, darts right over toward me and The Villiage Idiot (who was twenty-one and still a senior -- and no, not for medical or psychological reasons).

"What are you wearing?" says Robin.

I looked down and sarcastically feign surprise.  "Oh my gawd, Robin!  It's a dress!"

"I can see that, but why are you wearing one?"

"Well, see Robin...  I'm gonna tell you like Dr. Cavanaugh told my father -- I'm a girl."

"No!  No, you're not!  You have a nice rack, I'll give you that, but that don't make you a girl -- not where it matters."

Then Villiage Idiot butts in, "Well, I think you're all woman," as he makes a move for my hand, which I smacked away.

"See?" Robin shouts as his date finally caught up with him.  "You've fooled him, but you can't fool me.  I actually know you."

Fast forward several hours.  Robin's "date" and her boyfriend have been ejected from prom due to their high school sadistic shenanigans at my friend's expense.  Adam's girlfriend and Villiage Idiot disappeared maybe an hour before prom officially ended.  Big Gay Adam and Brendt had called Big Gay Adam's aunt in Ferndale to threaten the school with a lawsuit if the two didn't get to come together.  Needless to say, if I wrote a film script about the evening, I'd have one hell of a teen comedy I'd be able to retire on if I negotiated the contract right.  So we did what any other group is sub-rural outcast teens would do -- we broke into the city park to fantasise about what we were all going to do after graduation the next year, most of which relied on getting out pf that town.  At some point, Robin and I started making out cos...  hell if I know, there was nothing better to do.  Adam, who got the full story of what Robin said, was there chiding us the whole time saying "So, Robin? Does this make you gay?  Bi?  Well you said yourself that R-----'s not really a girl. Oh, I figured that out in eighth grade, and yeah, we dated briefly last year, but I'll also admit I'm bi.  You can't hide your man-=lust, Robin!"

Quote from: heatherrose on November 24, 2009, 02:16:19 AMBefore the European societal pendulum swung from science as an artistic pursuit
to science used as a weapon in World War II, donated ovaries where implanted
into patients as part of the first documented sexual reassignment surgeries.

Source on that?  I know Lili Elbe died from her transplant operation to give her uterus and ovaries:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lili_Elbe

Uhh, what? And it's fart *out loud* that matters, nothing like a good butt solo.

Quote from: YoungSoulRebel on November 20, 2009, 06:32:20 PM
Well-said.  There's absolutely nothing wrong with people who are simply experimenting for a temporary period, or who have a more "gender-fluid" identity or preference of expression -- this is one of the primary reasons I simply cannot condone the transition of teenagers and advise very young adults to be cautios of their own expressed desires to transition at that age.

Sorry to jump in late to this - but isn't this a classic case of the fact that you have to treat the patient and not a set of rules. This is a terribly compex area and I don't want to present my own case as any more definitive than yours. But I do think that it is very dangerous to make too many pre- judgements.

If anyone, had blocked my transition on the grounds of age I promise you that they probably would have, indirectly, killed me. As it is I am now nearly fifty, over thirty years past transition and coming on for 30 years post-op with no regrets other than a lasting and burning hatred of the doctor who wouldn't allow me hormones until I was over 18, and wouldn't allow SRS until I was 21. If I met him today I probably would still swing for him!

Because he was so wrong abut me and he couldn't see beyond his own prejudice. I don't give a stuff about the fact that for someone else it would have been wrong. I want someone to treat me, not them, and for me it wasn't wrong.

What was wrong was being made to endure five years of torture and abuse.  The only result was that, because of the things which I then did to cope with my inderterminate state other innocent people got sucked into the pain needlessly. As it was I did try to commit suicide. I did get inovolved with lovers who were then deeply hurt. All because one person had decided that early transition and early SRS was ALWAYS wrong.

I really think we do have to get beyond our own experiences and prejudices and learn to treat each person as an individual, to judge each case on it's merits. Because we aren't all the same, and what is right for one will terribly cruel and a disaster for another. I also agree that MTF and FTM transition is not the same, so different criteria are needed here again.

But to answer the original question in the thread, my family and I had known for certain I was a girl ever since I was about five years old. Which is how in 1977, aged 17, I came to be having that particular fight with John Randall.

Someone who is sure of their gender, and who always has been, but simply has the wrong set of bodily clothing, is different from someone who has evident internal confusions. The two need different treatment approaches, that much should be obvious.

Quote from: rejennyrated on November 24, 2009, 03:08:41 AMBecause he was so wrong abut me and he couldn't see beyond his own prejudice. I don't give a stuff about the fact that for someone else it would have been wrong. I want someone to treat me, not them, and for me it wasn't wrong.

It likely wasn't "prejudice", as you seem to believe after all these years.  You say one thing, but how is a doctor supposed to prove you're right?  Do you realise how serious the fear of malpractice was taken?  The fact that he was allowing your HRT regime and GRS for some-one as young as you were at the time that he did is evidence enough to me that he was sympathetic enough, but still might have feared malpractice over a teenage whim -- or feared the law.  While I'm sure you've had your hardships, the story you give tells me that you're simply not as persecuted as you fancy yourself.  HRT at eighteen and GRS at twenty-one is *young* -- and is far better than some people who are equally "sure of themselves" are allowed.  You were very lucky, in reality.

Quote from: rejennyrated on November 24, 2009, 03:08:41 AMSomeone who is sure of their gender, and who always has been, but simply has the wrong set of bodily clothing, is different from someone who has evident internal confusions. The two need different treatment approaches, that much should be obvious.

And what about those who are "so sure of themselves" only to change their minds in their mid-twenties or so?  Whether you choose to admit it or not, such people happen, and since many of these changes are irreversible, it's only sensible that there be a certain litmus test in place.

Quote from: heatherrose on November 24, 2009, 05:26:00 AM
Sexual Metamorphosis:
An Anthology of Transsexual Memoirs
Edited by Jonathan Ames

Jonathan Ames is a novelist and comedic writer.  His Masters from Princeton is in "Fine Arts of Fiction".  While I've no reason to doubt that he's treated the subject with sensitivity, I have doubts as to how much is "memoir anthology" and how much is his own fabrication.

Sources from the medical community?  I'd welcome it if you had something different from the scores of unsuccessful attempts of gonadal implantation for TS persons I've sourced.

And what about those who are "so sure of themselves" only to change their minds in their mid-twenties or so?  Whether you choose to admit it or not, such people happen, and since many of these changes are irreversible, it's only sensible that there be a certain litmus test in place.

It's just welfare for the doctors and medical industry.  An informed consent model is much more practical, and would lower the overall cost. 

See, all the doctors in the world are not going to know what's going to happen in the future, when you're in your 20s, or further down the line.

Moreover, SRS, like other things can be a lifesaving deal, or a huge mistake.  That the risk.  But that risk exists with other things.  Lots of people find a salvation of sorts in sports, others waste a critical part of their lives pursuing something that will not have the desired end, and still other have life-time injuries.  Should we prevent sports? 

Quote from: tekla on November 24, 2009, 03:12:20 PMAnd what about those who are "so sure of themselves" only to change their minds in their mid-twenties or so?  Whether you choose to admit it or not, such people happen, and since many of these changes are irreversible, it's only sensible that there be a certain litmus test in place.

It's just welfare for the doctors and medical industry.  An informed consent model is much more practical, and would lower the overall cost.

Yes, and lawyers quite frequently manage to get patients and sometimes even next-of-kin healthy settlements from a malpractice suit despite "informed consent" waivers signed.  I don't think you actually have a thourough understanding of how these things tend to work out.

Quote from: tekla on November 24, 2009, 03:12:20 PMSee, all the doctors in the world are not going to know what's going to happen in the future, when you're in your 20s, or further down the line.

Moreover, SRS, like other things can be a lifesaving deal, or a huge mistake.  That the risk.  But that risk exists with other things.  Lots of people find a salvation of sorts in sports, others waste a critical part of their lives pursuing something that will not have the desired end, and still other have life-time injuries.  Should we prevent sports?

Nice slippery slope with a dash of appeal to ridicule thrown in, there (probably even a Straw Man constructed?) -- you know for a fact I've not advocated "preventing" anything.  If you can argue with what I'm saying using sound logic, I'll be more than happy to engage you, but if you're just going to resort to fallacies to create the illusion that your arguments might have good footing, then I'm done with you.

---

Post Merge: November 24, 2009, 02:15:13 PM

---

Quote from: heatherrose on November 24, 2009, 05:26:00 AMSexual Metamorphosis:
An Anthology of Transsexual Memoirs
Edited by Jonathan Ames

Also, the only "pre-WWII" TS cases this book sources are Lili Elbe -- who never wrote a memoir, the book about her which Sexual Metamorphosis sources was written in 1933, two years after her death in 1931.  The cause of Elbe's death was the rejection of her implanted uterus and ovaries -- hers was the first such publicised operation:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sex_reassignment_surgery_%28male-to-female%29#History

...considering that this was only a scant few years "pre-WWII", Lili Elbe is pretty far from an example of an alleged "widespread" practise of implanting female gonadal organs into a MTF woman.

Furthermore, Sexual Metamorphosis also contains an excerpt of Richard von Krafft-Ebing's 1886 Psychopathia Sexualis' first-person narrative of one of von-Ebing's cases as a psychiatrist:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_von_Krafft-Ebing

Von Krafft-Ebing, while impressive that Psychopathia Sexualis not only touches but details female-to-male transsexuality, he's a Freudian psychiatrist, and in all honesty, Freud is now well-known to have fabricated some of his "cases" (even those he provided first-person narratives for) to "prove" his hypotheses.  von Krafft-Ebing is a contemporary of Freud's and may have even met him.  Furthermore, even ignoring this, von Krafft-Ebing's excerpt from Psychopathia Sexualis simply does not detail a case where organs were implanted into anybody.  How, therefore, these two "pre-WWII" cases --one lacking organ implantation completely, and one case who died as a result of her organ implantation-- make Sexual Metamorphosis an adequate "source" for this assertion is preposterous.

The next earliest case after Elbe, in Sexual Metamorphosis, is the excerpted autobiography of Christine Joprgensen -- whose operations were performed in the 1950s, long after WWII ended.  Jorgensen never hade an implanted uterus and ovaries -- I've owned an early "pulp" edition and later (1981) edition of her autobiography, and read them in totality.

There has never been a long enough history of successful TS organ implantations, "pre-WWII" or otherwise.  There have been great strides to make such operations more likely for success, but as it is, claiming that it has ever even been successful enough to enable motherhood of TS women or at the very least, replace HRT is in the realm of fantasy.  These operations have potential for greater future success, possibly even in our lifetimes, but it's just never happened before because the medical communities just hadn't happened upon the proper anti-rejection methods and medications before.

I don't see where you're so bought into the medical model that you think its OK to force it on others.  Why not let adults make adult decisions for themselves?  Lawsuits, but of course, there is a pretty much ironclad way around that too.  It's call, "binding arbitration agreements".  And I have a better chance of having a baby with Madonna than in a US court breaking a contract for binding arbitration.  And the worthless relatives who think they can make a quick buck off your death are pretty much stopped by such contracts.  But you knew that.  So such a strawman argument is not working.  The law always provides a way around the law, after all.

All I was trying to point out in the sports analogy is that some things can be good or bad, and most of the time you're only going to know in the long run.  Lots of stuff, not just SRS/HRT is like that.  Lots of the guys (and back then it was only guys) who I started work with have done very well.  They have had a career they loved, made money, supported their family, bought houses, train cars (I know two guys in my union who own train cars) - all that stuff.  Others wound up in rehab, drug clinics, and in more than one case dead.  There were too many demons laying around on tables that were too easy to pick up, and all but impossible to put down.  Had they not done this, had they gone out and got some normal job, I bet none of that would have happened to them.  The easy access didn't exist anywhere else.  So, what do you tell someone, do it or not?  Good chance they might do well, even very well, pretty good odds they might well end up in the Betty Ford Clinic or standing around in some crappy church basement for the rest of their life saying "Hi, I'm Bob and I'm a junkie."  Is it worth the risk?

You pay your money and you take your chances.

Well I think that no outside person can assess that risk for you.  You pay your money and take your chances.  Dale Earnhardt knew that driving a car at 200+ MPH was dangerous, and that if he hit the wall he might regret it.  Or just be dead - which is what happened.  Should someone have stopped him just because he might have ended up as he did?  Hell, it didn't even look all that bad, but dead is dead.

He paid the money, took the chance, and won a lot, then lost big time.  So it goes.

Everyone who thinks is going to have moments of regret.  That's no reason to stop them, or put a bunch of medical garbage (and steep payments) in the way.

So, I think that the informed consent model works out better for most people.  Those who think, or want, to see a therapist can do so, those that are not interested in that route don't have to waste their money or time, or the therapist's time.  Moreover, that's not just me, but several clinics have been moving toward that kind of model for some time.   

Quote from: tekla on November 25, 2009, 02:09:51 AM
I don't see where you're so bought into the medical model that you think its OK to force it on others.  Why not let adults make adult decisions for themselves?

That would be a great idea if the comment you refer to was not about letting teens make adult decisions.

Since you refuse to follow the thread but instead build straw-man arguments that I never mentioned, I have nothing more to say to you.  Have a fun time talking circular reasoning around yourself.

---

Post Merge: November 25, 2009, 02:34:13 AM

---

Quote from: heatherrose on November 25, 2009, 03:06:55 AMYou asked for my source, I gave you my source.

Your "source" only further confirmed what I had previously said -- Lili Elbe's surgery to implant uterus and ovaries was ultimately unsuccessful.  Your previous statement also carried implications that implanting utera and ovaries into TS women was relatively routine and successful -- you have yet to provide a source for such an implication.

Quote from: heatherrose on November 25, 2009, 03:06:55 AMI read that several Reassignment Surgeries were performed, considered "successful" or not, in Europe prior to World War II. One in particular, not that of the artist Lili Elbe, was the instance of an individual who lived out the rest of her days working as a custodian in the same hospital where the surgery was performed.

"Reassignment surgeries" in the current state of vaginoplasty?  Yes, I've never denied that.  In fact, even Lili Elbe's vaginoplasty was successful -- it was the implantation of a urteus and ovaries that was a failure.

"Reassignment surgeries" in the sense of implanting a uterus and ovaries into TS women?  I will have to ask you again for your source.

As a 'gifted' student as the web links say, I don't think it makes much difference to you or me that they can't separate the remarks of the two of us honey, smarter people are just that.  We ought to best accept it.

Quote from: tekla on November 25, 2009, 03:52:54 AM
As a 'gifted' student as the web links say, I don't think it makes much difference to you or me that they can't separate the remarks of the two of us honey, smarter people are just that.  We ought to best accept it.

That doesn't negate the fact that you were responding to a point totally different from the one you've since been asserting.  Stop trying to obfuscate what you said.

Nice try.  Now do please stop obsessing over me.  You're making me with this forum had an "ignore user" feature.

Quote from: YoungSoulRebel on November 24, 2009, 02:36:18 PM
It likely wasn't "prejudice", as you seem to believe after all these years.  You say one thing, but how is a doctor supposed to prove you're right?  Do you realise how serious the fear of malpractice was taken?  The fact that he was allowing your HRT regime and GRS for some-one as young as you were at the time that he did is evidence enough to me that he was sympathetic enough, but still might have feared malpractice over a teenage whim -- or feared the law.  While I'm sure you've had your hardships, the story you give tells me that you're simply not as persecuted as you fancy yourself.  HRT at eighteen and GRS at twenty-one is *young* -- and is far better than some people who are equally "sure of themselves" are allowed.  You were very lucky, in reality.

Yes I realise that of course but it doesn't alter the fact that I resent the lost time! I'm sorry but it was my life to screw up if I wanted to! I had the full support of my entire family. I didn't ask for his advice and as this is considered elective surgery, or at least it is in the UK, that is non essential surgery that the patient opts for, the question of malpractice doesn't really apply because the doctor should not be advising but merely acting on the patients request.

At least to my mind that is how it should work because I didn't go for advice. I went like a customer to a store who doesn't want the shop assistant to advise them but instead hopes that they will simply provide the goods requested.

I know that this approach wouldn't suit everyone - but with an IQ of 150 and a good scientific education I think it was fairly obvious, even back then, that I knew my own mind. A fact which I have subsequently proved by living successfully and happily ever since. Finally I repeat that I had my families full support (very unusual in the 1970's) which should have told him something.

That is what I mean about treating people as individuals - I know that what you say may be right for many - but there are always exceptions... and all I really said was that it makes no sense to treat a set of rules, you have to look at the patient and try to suss them out a bit.

Quote from: YoungSoulRebel on November 24, 2009, 02:36:18 PM
And what about those who are "so sure of themselves" only to change their minds in their mid-twenties or so?  Whether you choose to admit it or not, such people happen, and since many of these changes are irreversible, it's only sensible that there be a certain litmus test in place.

Yes - but as I say, and this may sound callous, but as a paying patient I don't really care about all that - as a patient I am ONLY really interested in my treatment, the fact that someone else makes a mistake may be very sad for them, but ultimately as no one forces them onto that operating table, this is, as I said, something people must choose. In fact I would go further. I personally do not feel that anyone should take it upon themselves to advise someone over SRS either for or against. It's a decision that each individual should have to make for themsleves. That way no one else gets blamed either way.

My approach to medicine always has been that I am the customer and the doctor is the servant. I call the shots not them, and I'm always prepared to accept the consequences and indeminfy them accordingly. In fact on several occasions I have done precisely that. These days I only agree to be treated by doctors willing to work within that broad framework.

My approach wouldn't suit everyone - but it works well enough for me. All I am saying is that we are all different and until someone develops a proper diagnostic criteria for this condition, allong the lines of brain scans and or DNA tests or whatever, a one size fits all approach simply won't wash for many of us.

Of course the final irony was that two decades later, after some tests for an unexplained medical problem, it was discovered after extensive hospital specialist investigations, that I had actually been technically intersexed all along (PAIS) - and of course as things stood in the UK in the 1970's if that had been known at the time then I probably wouldn't have had to go through all that rigmarole at all.

But lets agree to differ - It seems that we are unlikely to ever really agree but I have no wish argue either. Life is too short. 

Oh gosh yes.  My younger brother, who is a year younger than I am would always accuse me of being very girlish.  Maybe it was because I wasn't interested in playing with trucks or toy guns or getting dirty, as most boys were.  Also, nearly all of my childhood friends were girls.  As we grew up together, he would always make comments on my femininity.  Needless to say, he was not surprised when I broke the news about transitioning. 

Quote from: rejennyrated on November 25, 2009, 03:20:38 PMI know that this approach wouldn't suit everyone - but with an IQ of 150 and a good scientific education I think it was fairly obvious, even back then, that I knew my own mind.

With an IQ of 157 and astoundingly self-educated in the humanities, I was a Libertarian at sixteen, even registered with that party at eighteen -- which I pulled a complete 180 on by twenty-three.  I "knew my own mind" then, and I know it to be wiser, now.  Two different things, yes, but the fact remains that people can, and often do, change -- especially young people.  It can be proven scientifically that there is no discernable developmental difference between a fifteen-year-old and a thirty-year-old, but all too often the same person at those two ages will hold slightly or even wildly different opinions, beliefs, and convictions due to gaining knowledge and experiences.

You cannot trust the judgement of a typical teen because the typical adolescent lacks experience and knowledge in certain areas and, often enough, only two or three years can make a huge difference in a teen's point of view.  You may very well have been that one teenager out of ten thousand who actually knew who they were -- but kids fool their parents all the time, and how is some doctor to know that you, at sixteen, were some exceptional case?  Your apparent narcissism worries me.

Quote from: rejennyrated on November 25, 2009, 03:20:38 PMOf course the final irony was that two decades later, after some tests for an unexplained medical problem, it was discovered after extensive hospital specialist investigations, that I had actually been technically intersexed all along (PAIS) - and of course as things stood in the UK in the 1970's if that had been known at the time then I probably wouldn't have had to go through all that rigmarole at all.

Possibly perhaps. 

Quote from: rejennyrated on November 25, 2009, 03:20:38 PMBut lets agree to differ - It seems that we are unlikely to ever really agree but I have no wish argue either. Life is too short. 

I can agree to that.