The rape issue related to a motion to be debated at conference put forward by a different group and was simply to discuss male rape as there had not been any debate on this while female rape had been on several agendas.
I sided with the Gay guys as I'm well aware of how few male rape victims dare involve the police or even seek medical treatment...plus we hear of pre-ops being murdered when rapists find the male bits.
The Ls were sort of OK with this until the very butch one came in and immediately started talking down to us about female rape.
Nothing we could say altered her attitude that male rape could only be on the agenda if the motion also covered female rape and put the emphasis on that.
Eventually the topic never got to conference as the other group hadn't followed procedure.
At the weekend cconference it was immediately apparent that the Gs spent a minimum time in the debates and maximum cruising the gay bars while the Ls had all brought their partners and went off with them. 
On the Saturday afternoon I went to a caucus for the Ts but was like a fish out of water among the stiff faced CDs sat  there like men with zero body or face language, ill fitting wigs and no makeup and they clearly let me know they weren't happy to have me among them which really surprised me as basically I like to think I'm a really friendly approachable person.
It was a curious exposure to the LGBT movement and in my report to my boss I highlighted the fact that very little of the conference had any relevance to our work and we agreed not to bother with any  but the basic LGBT stuff as we have a zero-tolerance policy in place and we just don't have LGBT problems from either the staff or the patients that use the hospital.

Quote from: Cindy Stephens on October 18, 2010, 06:48:56 PM
Not to belabor the point, but from the wikepedia a more current reference from the same source you quote, "Olyslager and Conway presented a paper[33]  at the WPATH 20th International Symposium (2007) arguing that the data from their own and other studies actually imply much higher prevalence, with minimum lower bounds of 1:4,500 male-to-female transsexuals and 1:8,000 female-to-male transsexuals for a number of countries worldwide. They suggest the prevalence might be as high as 1:500 births overal "
They only seem confident of the minimum lower bounds.  EVEN if it were 1 in 500, it still wouldn't be an order of magnitude.

Hmm, I'm not sure which Wikipedia article you're referring to, but the 2007 paper is here; the link is right at the top of the page I mentioned. From the abstract:

QuoteFrom this reanalysis of those early reports, we determine lower-bounds on the prevalence of the underlying condition of transsexualism to be between 1:1000 and 1:2000, using those reports own data. We then present more recent incidence data and alternative methods for estimating the prevalence of transsexualism, all of which indicate that the lower bound on the prevalence of transsexualism is at least 1:500, and possibly higher.

So it looks to me as though the more recent study you mention measures the lower bound (based on documented transitions) of prevalence to be at least 1:500; the expected prevalence value would be higher. I can't image that a factor of two -- 1:250, exactly one order of magnitude higher than your figure -- would be ruled out, based on the methods used.

In any case, like you say, that's not the point; the true prevalence is interesting, but not terribly important.

Quote
But that's not my point.  We just aren't that large a group, we have this enormous religous headwind to overcome, and we fight amongst ourselves who is "deserving" of protections.  I have been getting a bit upset over the trash talk about cds, and/or ->-bleeped-<-s in a number of threads. 

Understood. Same here.

Basically, I agree with you that we should be united, but the numbers game strikes me as a really hollow reason in favor of LGBT unity, that's all. I think it would behoove us to ally with LGB people even if the numbers were exactly reversed. The trash talk is upsetting -- completely inappropriate, in my opinion -- no matter how many people we are fighting or how many we have "on our side."

But if basic decency and being on the right side of the fight for all LGBTQetc. people isn't sufficient reason to convince someone that we should unite, then sure, I'll use the numbers argument.

Quote from: clairezoey on October 26, 2010, 09:59:15 AM
i hate gay man

i like transgender women.

if the gay man transgender women i will like him coz he was transgender (and he actually girl because he transgender)

but i hate gay man. ewww

ZOE!
You really are screwing up here again.
There are ftm on this board who are gay men.
Just keep your dislikes to yourself please.

Well he is right, we have a choice. We can choose not to wear the clothes, not to transition and not be ourselves. Just like gay men can choose not to have relations with another man. Everyone has choices, it doesn't mean I'm wrong for making my choice to be myself.

Quote from: SamanthaFLA on October 27, 2010, 12:55:25 PM
Well he is right, we have a choice. We can choose not to wear the clothes, not to transition and not be ourselves. Just like gay men can choose not to have relations with another man. Everyone has choices, it doesn't mean I'm wrong for making my choice to be myself.

The record shows that the idea of "choice" when it comes to sexuality is an illusion for most people. Choosing not to have relations with other men, for a man who is completely gay, is the same as choosing celibacy - and celibacy doesn't work out so well for what appears to be a majority of non-asexual people who attempt it. There's a reason why sex is usually grouped with food and shelter in the category of "basic human needs." Very few people can choose not to eat for any length of time when they're hungry and can obtain food, and very few people can choose not to have sex for a significant period of time when they have an unmet need for sex and the ability to meet it.

Self-expression, including gender expression, is arguably a lower priority than the food/shelter/sex triad. It's still not a choice in any meaningful sense of the word, though.

Quote from: kyril on October 27, 2010, 02:07:50 PM
Self-expression, including gender expression, is arguably a lower priority than the food/shelter/sex triad. It's still not a choice in any meaningful sense of the word, though.

Arguable, perhaps, but patently false, at least as it applies to some people. And that is all that is necessary for the argument to be irrelevant, since the original point was that for some people transitioning is no more of a "choice" than seeking emotional fulfilment from romantic attachment to someone of the same gender.

Food, shelter, and sex are great, but the reason they are considered "basic needs" is that they are very commonly needed, and also very commonly hard to come by. Gender expression is really easy to come by for most people in the world. I'd say in my hierarchy of needs, it's at least as high a priority as sex. And neither sex nor gender expression would seem so important if I didn't have a place to sleep or food to eat.

@ Everyone:

Thank you SO MUCH, everybody, for your very interesting and very informative replies.  I learn so much from everybody ... things I did not know and was not aware of.  Many of you are very well-informed and have wide and varied experiences.  It's SO EXCELLENT to read your posts, learn and understand things I never knew that well or understood that well. 

@ Britney_413:

Hey, I can really appreciate how you feel, and people can sometimes really torque us and freak us out with snide and dumb comments.  It's so easy to REALLY get upset and let them have it, especially when they really deserve it.  When I was younger, I did that a lot!

You know, my experience is that you are basically right about all of this.  I've had similar experience with the LGB component of the LGBT Community.  Two of the people of utmost prominence in the LGBT Community in our city were rude, unprofessional and juvenile beyond belief and comprehension when I recently contacted them, by e-mail, in a concise, polite and non-threatening or -aggressive way offering to help them with writing and ad sales.  Their comportment and demeanor where absolutely perfect examples of what not to do and how not to handle yourself if you are the LGBT Community. 

These are people who REALLY should know better, but alas, they decidedly do not.  'Tis a pity.  So, what's my point?  Just this:

As much as possible, be the emissary of good will ... be diplomatic ... be gracious.

Oh, yeah, I understand that people like that guy you talked about are stupid, rude, a-holes, etc., etc., etc., ... fill in the blank!  True, true, true!  BUT!  Grace, tact and dignity all the more are the order of the day in such a situation.  This is so easy to say and so hard to do, but we MUST do it ... if we are to foster understanding of us and foment respect for us by the larger society. 

I'm facing a situation right now as I write this where somebody has heinously and shamelessly betrayed and used me (... and I'm talking about in a criminal way! ...)(... who will way blow your minds, folks! ...), no s--t!  How am I handling it?  With:  Grace ... tact ... dignity.

The Mahatma Ghandi ... Mother Teresa ... The Dalai Lama (Did I spell that right?) ... were premier examples of how to do this and how to win the respect of nearly everybody if not their approval. 

Yeah, I know:  This sounds like B.S.  It's not.  When I was young, The Beatles had a song called "Love is All You Need."  Corny as that sounds, it's the plain truth.  Unfortunately, because there are so many rude, stupid, violent people in the world, WE will have to be the ones to give ... to compromise ... to back down.  With some folks (... too many, in fact ...), even this will not do.  They are to be avoided if and when you can possibly avoid them. 

I am guessing that I'm quite a bit older than you are (understatement!), and if I've learned anything, I've learned the little lesson I'm trying to impart here.  Indeed, it's the BIGGEST lesson any of us will ever learn.  Okay, I'm a dreamer, but I'm not the only one.   Hmmm, seems like I've heard that somewhere before:       Lacey ... The song takes a while to start ... stay tuned, please:

John Lennon - Imagine

Quote from: Miniar on October 18, 2010, 09:24:44 AM
Responding with yelling doesn't really help anyone...
I would have just rolled my eyes and gone "Yep, it's a choice to be trans JUST like it's a choice to be gay... "

Well said, sir.  Excellent point.  Totally agree.

@ Everyone:

Aha!  The rumor turns out to be true.  I've heard hearsay as to Miniar's being very handsome.   

@ Miniar:

Great taste in glasses, man.  Mine are very similar to yours.  I've got Skechers, azure blue.   

Quote from: Lacey Lynne on October 27, 2010, 11:37:42 PM
Well said, sir.  Excellent point.  Totally agree.

Great taste in glasses, man.  Mine are very similar to yours.  I've got Skechers, azure blue.

Well, the glasses do increase my IQ by 20 points....