Cynic is just a word that dreamers thought up to describe realists.

Well, it's still listed in a book of mental disorders.  And society still creates stigmas for people they think are mentally disordered.  And it still thinks discrimination of the mentally disordered (and anyone else who isn't "normal") is okay.  So as long as it remains in the book, it will be that much longer before society begins to accept the physical condition soon to be labeled (maybe) gender incongruence.

If you like the prejudice and are okay with the discrimination then you can be happy with the new proposed changes.  If not, then you have a lot of work to do.

As for me, if the proposed exit clause stays, I'm cured.  Now all I have to do is get the rest of society convinced I'm no longer crazy.

Quote from: Julie Marie on February 12, 2010, 05:59:30 PM
Well, it's still listed in a book of mental disorders.  And society still creates stigmas for people they think are mentally disordered.  And it still thinks discrimination of the mentally disordered (and anyone else who isn't "normal") is okay.  So as long as it remains in the book, it will be that much longer before society begins to accept the physical condition soon to be labeled (maybe) gender incongruence.

If you like the prejudice and are okay with the discrimination then you can be happy with the new proposed changes.  If not, then you have a lot of work to do.

As for me, if the proposed exit clause stays, I'm cured.  Now all I have to do is get the rest of society convinced I'm no longer crazy.

I'm probably going to get in trouble for saying this, but.

I think the trans community itself does FAR more damage to our public perception than the medical community could ever do.

I'm not going to name names or go into any specifics, but there are a LOT of people in the transgender community including here on susans who would not be behaving normal in the context of either gender, arguing that normal is subjective (which is true) and thus excusing the behavior.

I think people should be free to do what they want to be happy as long as it isn't actually hurting anyone, but the facts are that we live in a society that does have expectations and does have a subjective sense of normality and I think that the "transgender community" is more harmful in our acceptance in mainstream society than being in the DSM could ever be.

Well, there is also the problem that what is a solution for one may not work on the next person.  It's not like a broken bone where there is a standard way to treat it, and it seems to get better all things being equal.

Right.  Because we don't understand the brain well enough.  I'm not suggesting we ever will, by the way.


..many of us didn't need them in the first place except to get our letters etc.

I definitely did not need counseling.  It was such a complete waste of time and money.  Most expensive letter I ever bought. :\

~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~

---

Post Merge: February 12, 2010, 07:23:00 AM

---

Quote from: Ashley4214 on February 12, 2010, 06:32:52 PM
I think the trans community itself does FAR more damage to our public perception than the medical community could ever do.

I'm not going to name names or go into any specifics, but there are a LOT of people in the transgender community including here on susans who would not be behaving normal in the context of either gender, arguing that normal is subjective (which is true) and thus excusing the behavior.

For society, normalcy can be simply defined as the familiar.  A large section of society fears the unknown and feels they must control it by defining reality unrealistically in hard-edged black and white terms.  Within the parameters of those rules they have "truth" and feel safe.  If you challenge their truth they can react violently because you have, in effect, threatened their safety.

The catch-22 is the only way to get inside the "box of normalcy" is to be visible and be harmless and let the b/w peeps get used to you.  You have to take your lumps to be free of their wrath, unfortunately.

In my opinion, the goal of the gender rights movement should be to get people used to the fact that gender is not binary, so that all of us -not just one narrowly defined segment of the gender spectrum- can be safe and have equal footing in this world.  So I feel pretty strongly that people who kind of hang out in gender's gray areas, and thus stand out, actually do a lot of good for the cause.  Much more, in fact, than those who disappear into the woodwork.  Those who become invisible don't do the rest of the trans community any good, until/unless they become visible again.

But that is fine and their prerogative.  In fact, if that path becomes a possible choice for me, I'm not going to say I won't take it.

Quote from: Jen on February 12, 2010, 06:47:22 PM
In my opinion, the goal of the gender rights movement should be to get people used to the fact that gender is not binary, so that all of us -not just one narrowly defined segment of the gender spectrum- can be safe and have equal footing in this world.  So I feel pretty strongly that people who kind of hang out in gender's gray areas, and thus stand out, actually do a lot of good for the cause.  Much more, in fact, than those who disappear into the woodwork.  Those who become invisible don't do the rest of the trans community any good, until/unless they become visible again.

The problem comes with those of us who are trans but are actually perfectly happy and content with the gender binary and don't like being made out to be total freaks by the segment of the transgender community that wants to push the boundaries and defy normal far beyond simple binary gender. 

I don't want to be visible, I hate being what I am, what do I or other people who feel as I do get out of the association with the highly visible side of the transgender spectrum?

It's like the old question of what do gays and lesbians get out of being associated with transgender, and with the same answer, nothing.

Quote from: Ashley4214 on February 12, 2010, 07:56:18 PM
what do I or other people who feel as I do get out of the association with the highly visible side of the transgender spectrum?

That's sort of what I was trying to explain ~.^  Not that I feel anything I said should necessarily ring true for you, I was just giving you a different perspective.

How do non-conforming people help you?  By being visible yet harmless, they effectively, bit by bit, open people's minds that gender is more complicated than they thought, and that it is okay.  If enough people aren't out there opening minds though, it's not going to have a global effect.

That doesn't mean anybody should be expected to fight or be out there, but we should respect and be thankful for those who do.

If it's worth anything, I happen to conform pretty well to the gender binary too.  Not by choice, it's just the brand of gender I've been handed.

Quote from: Jen on February 12, 2010, 08:16:25 PM
That's sort of what I was trying to explain ~.^  Not that I feel anything I said should necessarily ring true for you, I was just giving you a different perspective.

How do non-conforming people help you?  By being visible yet harmless, they effectively, bit by bit, open people's minds that gender is more complicated than they thought, and that it is okay.  If enough people aren't out there opening minds though, it's not going to have a global effect.

That doesn't mean anybody should be expected to fight or be out there, but we should respect and be thankful for those who do.

If it's worth anything, I happen to conform pretty well to the gender binary too.  Not by choice, it's just the brand of gender I've been handed.

I guess I don't agree. Most normal people, certainly most normal people my age, if they pay any attention at all to transgender community nonconformity it's that of ridicule. And I wouldn't care except that when they find out my situation all they'll have to go on to start with is the way non-conformists behave.

I hate being what I am
Get over that, and the rest comes easy.

After all I don't let some gun tottin' person define my life, why let others define yours?

Quote from: Jen on February 12, 2010, 08:16:25 PM
That doesn't mean anybody should be expected to fight or be out there, but we should respect and be thankful for those who do.

If it's worth anything, I happen to conform pretty well to the gender binary too.  Not by choice, it's just the brand of gender I've been handed.

I happen to agree on both counts.



Now what I do not understand in all of this is that Gender Incongruence sounds like a rather benign term, a descriptive term that is less "judgmental" sounding than GID.  However, as Julie pointed out, it is in a book of mental disorders.  If fixing a person's body is the primary cure, how can they consider this a mental disorder?   And since it is (sort of) no longer considered a mental disorder, what will this do to the question of insurance coverage or lack thereof? 

Personally, I am sure they have seen way too many people be fixed by a surgical procedure to doubt the effectiveness.  However, the inclusion, the exit clause, and the rest seem to me to be nothing other than a CYA operation and a money making scheme.

Kristi

heh ya nothing is set in stone but i doubt the draft will change much.  i'm loving the distinction the committee has made between transsexualism & shall we say ->-bleeped-<-? not "better" but for damn sure different which is something some of us have been saying for years & years.

http://www.dsm5.org/ProposedRevisions/Pages/proposedrevision.aspx?rid=193#  (click on 'rationale')

emphasis mine.

"16. Although the DSM-IV diagnosis of GID encompasses more than transsexualism, it is still often used as an equivalent to transsexualism (Sohn & Bosinski, 2007). For instance, a man can meet the two core criteria if he only believes he has the typical feelings of a woman and does not feel at ease with the male gender role. The same holds for a woman who just frequently passes as a man (e.g., in terms of first name, clothing, and/or haircut) and does not feel comfortable living as a conventional woman. Someone having a GID diagnosis based on these subcriteria clearly differs from a person who identifies completely with the other gender, can only relax when permanently living in the other gender role, has a strong aversion against the sex characteristics of his/her body, and wants to adjust his/her body as much as technically possible in the direction of the desired sex. Those who are distressed by having problems with just one of the two criteria (e.g., feeling uncomfortable living as a conventional man or woman) will have a GIDNOS diagnosis. This is highly confusing for clinicians. It perpetuates the search for the "true transsexual" only, in order to identify the right candidates for hormone and surgical treatment instead of facilitating clinicians to assess the type and severity of any type of GI and offer appropriate treatment. Furthermore, in the DSM-IV, gender identity and gender role were described as a dichotomy (either male or female) rather than a multi-category concept or spectrum (Bockting, 2008; Bornstein, 1994; Ekins & King, 2006; Lev, 2007; Røn, 2002). The current formulation makes more explicit that a conceptualization of GI acknowledging the wide variation of conditions will make it less likely that only one type of treatment is connected to the diagnosis. Taking the above regarding the avoidance of male-female dichotomies into account, in the new formulation, the focus is on the discrepancy between experienced/expressed gender (which can be either male, female, in-between or otherwise) and assigned gender (in most societies male or female) rather than cross-gender identification and same-gender aversion (Cohen-Kettenis & Pfäfflin, 2009)."


GIDNOS diagnosis huh?

GIDNOS = a non-transsexual GID considered as GID-Not Otherwise Specified

While it's true they may acknowledge a "clear difference" in the rationale, one certainly doesn't have to be "Über Transsexual" to get diagnosed as GI with the proposed changes.  There seems to be much less obstruction between diagnosis and moving on to figuring out how best to treat the person, which seems to be left open-ended.

I like all of that.  Focus on treating the patient according to their needs rather than focusing on whether they are worthy of a certain path of treatment -seems like a winning plan to me.

GIDNOS seems to me to be getting phased out with the proposed changes, though it's possible I'm just getting cross-eyed with sleep deprivation.

Does anybody else think it should be "Gender Incongruity" rather than "Gender Incongruence?"  It just rolls off the tongue better.

Quote from: Julie Marie on February 11, 2010, 12:50:49 PM
What they are saying in effect is surgical intervention addressing the genitalia (or other areas) will cure the disordered mind.  That of course means the problem does not lie in the mind but rather in the body.

Extreme paraphilias (a mental disorder in the DSM) are often treated by castration.  Does the fact that the removal of the testes provide relief from the disorder imply that it is not a mental disorder?  No it doesn't.  I'd be careful making the assumption that treating the body disqualifies something as a mental disorder.

---

Post Merge: February 13, 2010, 03:45:38 AM

---

Quote from: Alyssa M. on February 12, 2010, 02:54:28 PM
Interesting point about other sections within the Sexual and Gender Identity Disorders category -- consider the following:

So ...  I guess there are a bunch of other mental disorders that might be treated through conventional medicine. How about that?

Basically yeah... you are making the case already.

My Exit visa was stamped and actioned nearly three decades ago.

As for people pushing the gender boundaries I think I may have to respectfully disagree slightly. It may be different in the US - but here in the UK the trans community is actually most often ridiculed precisely BECAUSE they are so ultra stereotypically normal! Sometimes almost a gender carriacture.

If you look around you (at least in the UK) you will find loads and loads of men and women who aren't in any way trans and yet don't really fit the gender binary either... because it isn't a binary - it's a continuous spectrum, and what's more a continuous spectrum where more people exist towards the centre than at the ultra extreem ends.

After living most of my life as a postop woman, widely accepted at face value, I can assure you that even now that I am "out" I pass pretty darned well and one of the things which most people identify as something which makes them forget that I actually have a trans past is the fact that, as they put it, "I'm not afraid to break the rules on occasion." Which is something that they all see as normal and healthy.

So maybe I'm misunderstanding the original comment by Ashley, but personally I think just being yourself and being comfortable with that is the real way to both the exit visa and indeed mass acceptance.

Quote from: rejennyrated on February 13, 2010, 05:59:07 AM
My Exit visa was stamped and actioned nearly three decades ago.

As for people pushing the gender boundaries I think I may have to respectfully disagree slightly. It may be different in the US - but here in the UK the trans community is actually most often ridiculed precisely BECAUSE they are so ultra stereotypically normal! Sometimes almost a gender carriacture.

If you look around you (at least in the UK) you will find loads and loads of men and women who aren't in any way trans and yet don't really fit the gender binary either... because it isn't a binary - it's a continuous spectrum, and what's more a continuous spectrum where more people exist towards the centre than at the ultra extreem ends.

After living most of my life as a postop woman, widely accepted at face value, I can assure you that even now that I am "out" I pass pretty darned well and one of the things which most people identify as something which makes them forget that I actually have a trans past is the fact that, as they put it, "I'm not afraid to break the rules on occasion." Which is something that they all see as normal and healthy.

So maybe I'm misunderstanding the original comment by Ashley, but personally I think just being yourself and being comfortable with that is the real way to both the exit visa and indeed mass acceptance.

There is defying normal gender roles, which is fine and common to the point of it being actually uncommon to completely conform to gender norms. Then there is defying even normal gender nonconformity.

For instance, being interested in sports and cars is gender nonconformist for females. That's not what I'm talking about.

Ironically I think what I'm talking about in part is the same thing you're talking about only under different names.

I don't really want to get into exactly what I'm talking about as far as behavior or views that defy even the normally abnormal, because several here on the forum do it and I'd rather not get into too much trouble.

But no, that's not what I was talking about.

oh ok then... I did think I might have missunderstood you. So thanks for clarifying

A man walks into his boss's office and says he's tired of being the janitor.  He works hard, fixes everything that's broken in the building and gets no respect.

His boss says, "You're right.  I'm going to promote you to maintenance engineer, and put a plaque on your door with your name and the title 'Maintenance Engineer' on it."

He thanks his boss and walks out of the office feeling great about his promotion.  What he missed was he didn't get a raise and he was still doing the same job.  Only his title had changed.

We are getting "promoted" from gender identity disorder to gender incongruence.  But nothing else has changed, unless you've happily transitioned.  And you'll have to go to a book of mental disorders to prove you no longer have a mental disorder. 

BTW - Anyone who wants to be considered having a mental disorder is free to do so.  All you have to do is walk into a therapist's office and say you are unhappy.  They will find what's wrong with you and let you pay them to treat you.  But please don't argue on behalf of the rest of us who don't want that stigma attached to us.  We'll do just fine without it.

If you think about it, according to the new guidelines, the exit clause is happiness, isn't it?  You can transition, find you are happy enough without surgery and stop there and still be "psychosocially adjusted in the identified gender role" can you not?

Thinking about this some more I think I understand (I don't know about agree with yet) the belief that there is a fundamental difference between somebody who can stop short of surgery and be happy and somebody who can't.  Just because of the tension that exists, I'm not going to go into the details.

For myself, I can't see stopping short of surgery being an option.  Because of the trajectory I'm on, right now I'm plenty happy.  If I were to lose inertia, however, I would very quickly cease to be happy.  I can't see that changing until I'm 100% female.  But who knows, I might surprise myself for all I know.

I have a therapist I really like. She helps me a lot with things, some unrelated to gender issues. That doesn't mean I am mentally ill. My physical condition will be cured soon. I do have psychological issues that stem from having to deal with the physical condition, which I think is normal considering the nature of the affliction. Once the physical condition has been fixed however, that will go a long way towards healing any associated psychological trauma.

There does seem to be a fundamental difference because there are so many variations and ways of looking at this. The only right one is what's right for you, which is why it's impossible to quantify for everyone. There are many types and many cures. Sometimes it's fatal. Sometimes the cure is worse than the disease. I feel quite binary personally, although born on the wrong end physically, which is why I will never feel complete without surgery. That will cure my medical condition, but we all have to determine our own path to happiness.

I'm just going to pick this one bit out, though a similar sentiment runs through many of the posts on the last page:

Quote from: Julie Marie on February 12, 2010, 05:59:30 PM
Well, it's still listed in a book of mental disorders.  And

society still creates stigmas for people they think are mentally disordered.

And it still thinks discrimination of the mentally disordered (and anyone else who isn't "normal") is okay.  So as long as it remains in the book, it will be that much longer before society begins to accept the physical condition soon to be labeled (maybe) gender incongruence.

[Um ...  emphasis mine ...]

Here's a suggestion:



Okay, what the hell? Doesn't this seem like the heart of the problem? What the hell is wrong with society -- with some of us -- that we're so damned prejudiced against people with mental disorders and afraid to be labeled with that awful stigma? One might hope that in realizing that society has problems in the way it tries to force people into gender boxes they don't belong in, one might also realize that society (or at least many segments of our society) has a couple of other problems like, oh, I don't know, racism, sexism, classism, discrimination on the basis of national origin, looks, age, physical or mental disabilities, and even -- what a shock! -- whether someone has a mental disorder, even ones with clear and treatable physical causes, even ones that are "Due to a General Medical Condition" (according to the DSM).

Instead of saying, "Hey, I'm no freak, I'm not 'mentally ill,'" [which having a condition listed in the DSM does not imply -- there's a very important, if sometimes hazy, distinction between mental illnesses and mental disorders,] why don't we ask "What the hell is your problem with people with mental disorders?"

As I said in another thread on this subject, many, many people -- as in, closer to half of the population than to one percent -- have or have had diagnosible mental disorders, as listed in the DSM. In fact, it might be a lot higher than that. Depression triggered by really bad times in a person's life is still a mental disorder. It's like being sick: everyone gets sick from time to time; a very large portion of the population will have a serious, even life-threatning, illness or injury at some point in life. It doesn't define them as people, and neither should having or having had a mental disorder. It's simply a condition that causes anguish and loss of functionality, and that might indicate benefit in seeking treatment of a mental health professional, though many times you don't need it.

I'll agree that trans folk of all types often do harm to our own public (though I think it's fairly rare since most people aren't paying attention anyway). But perpetuating bigotry on the basis of mental health issues doesn't solve that problem; it only aggravates it.

Thank you Alyssa! The bigotry against people with mental health issues was really starting to get upsetting.