Also, the fact you call my lifestyle and the lifestyle of hundreds of thousands of others who have been smashed into what I think is generally the lowest-rung of society at present a life of "delusion" is outright inflammatory and bigoted to the extreme. If you make any more comments like that, I'm going to be running watchdogs and moderators over every post you make until you slip up and infract yourself out of this civil debate.
Honestly, Alexan, I keep re-reading your post trying to find more supporting facts but all I find is more thinly-veiled bigotry. How is "as a psychological condition it reinforces that femininity is a sickness, invented by men" true? Please, justify that for me, because I have no fucking idea.
As a psychological condition, it establishes that some people are born with very strong preferences and ties to identity that, when denied, produce very strong reactions and lead those people to try and gain access to their preferences and identity.
It pluralizes. The concept pluralizes-- the system around it is, admittedly, stupid in some regards. I talked on previous pages about how they used to rank transpeople on a scale of "severity" before considering them for treatment, but also about how that is the way things used to be. Yes, it is somewhat silly that you need to fit their well-defined definition in order to gain access to treatment,
but that's an issue with the process, and not with the people undergoing it.
Please respond with some justification for your ideas and the ideas of "Feminist Marxists" that you support, instead of calling the lives of transpeople "delusions," "transvestic fetishism taken to insanity," talking about how they are only being "thrown a bone," while "undermining the homosexual movement," and similar miscellany.
There is little point debating it since you're hostile to an issue to deeply and personal to you. I also don't particularly care about quibbling over feminist politics or terminology of mental conditions. What I will say is that the argument is out there and that there are legitimate concerns that are not rooted in bigotry or backlash from other bigotry.
Don't be a dick about it. I think they have a legitimate complaint, I think transexualism is an encroachment of patriarchy and an undermining of female and male identity, and I think from what I've studied on transvestive fetishism and GID I honestly think GID is an extension of the fetish into a logical conclusion. Of course, I could be wrong, since the cause of GID is unknown, though I do know that diagnosis that separates the two is largely one of degree.
I also think it's a mental health issue not tied to sexual orientation. As a mental health right, it is an important study in its own, but it should not be attached to the rights of sexual orientation as loosely as it is.
Alexan Drite on
0
Options
Dhalphirdon't you open that trapdooryou're a fool if you dareRegistered Userregular
edited October 2007
hey, Alexan?
Shut up, and come back when you're at least slightly informed about ANYTHING.
In fact, it is precisely BECAUSE this issue is very personal to Oboro that she is so well informed, because she has spent countless hours researching every single aspect of the issue.
You have not.
And don't try to couch it in pretty terms. You're essentially saying "I don't mean any offence, but...*offensive statement*".
I also think it's a mental health issue not tied to sexual orientation. As a mental health right, it is an important study in its own, but it should not be attached to the rights of sexual orientation as loosely as it is.
I like this part in particular, because at the end of page 6/ the top of page 7, I have posts quoted by multiple people and echoed, positively, by multiple people where I talk about the problems inherent in conflating the issue with sexual orientation as it is.
Please, read the thread-- any of it-- and do some research before you try and contribute further, like the person posting above me has suggested as well.
Don't be a dick about it. I think they have a legitimate complaint, I think transexualism is an encroachment of patriarchy and an undermining of female and male identity, and I think from what I've studied on transvestive fetishism and GID I honestly think GID is an extension of the fetish into a logical conclusion. Of course, I could be wrong, since the cause of GID is unknown, though I do know that diagnosis that separates the two is largely one of degree.
I also think it's a mental health issue not tied to sexual orientation. As a mental health right, it is an important study in its own, but it should not be attached to the rights of sexual orientation as loosely as it is.
You're the person that's being hostile here because you are stating that you want to maintain bigoted norms about sex that were in vogue during the 1950's. Homosexuals, transsexuals and AIDS activists have spent the past 20 years fighting against the ignorant crap you're spouting. Before and during that time, people discriminated against them and ignored the various serious issues associated with them. Frankly it's disgusting that people still dismiss the conditions that accompanied the "queer" movement, when they need to be addressed. If you disagree, then I guess you're glad that the AIDS epidemic killed millions of people worldwide. Ignoring an important issue especially when it's a disease is a idiotic way of handling things because the issue isn't gonna go away just because you're uncomfortable with it.
Transsexuals are put into an extremely difficult place and it is NOT just some "fetish", it's a serious disease. GID is an extremely difficult condition for the individual to deal with. They feel alienated because they are not comfortable with their bodies or socially at all. And as progressive as we like to think we are, physical appearance is an extremely important part of a person's identity. The sex change process is the best we can do so far for people with GID. Additionally, rhe process of changing from one sex to another isn't just a "mental issue", the individual has to seek extensive medical counsel, take a lot of hormones and other things for a long period before the actual operation. I see absolutely no reason why this process wouldn't be categorized under medical expenses and how one could possibly see it as a separate issue from sexual orientation.
Actually there's an issue documented in various medical journals about how a lot of people on antidepressants have a tendency to become non-compliant (with respect to taking the drugs) because outside of people killing themselves they tend to think there's something stoic about being depressed but still struggling on and take inspiration from the various artists who were depressed and yet produced X,Y,Z great historical works.
As a guy who has suffered from a pretty severe depression I can certainly see what they're talking about. I was very wary about starting anti-depressants, because even if I was depressed, that was who I was -- it was my sense of identity, and now some doctor was going "these pills will change you". My thoughts were along the lines of "Who would I want to be if not myself?"
This issue is alot more complicated than I realized at all.
like if gender is inborn and sex is inborn as well but not neccesarily the same, how can that tie into gender being a social construct (as I've had shouted at me on this forum many a time)?
Also I find it difficult to believe that that the people who claim to be so forward thinking and totally accepting of transgender people would be comfortable in a relationship with one.
You're confusing gender identity with the rituals surrounding the expression of same. Don't do that. It makes you look silly. One can safely criticise the nature of the latter without denying the former.
edit: also, I'm perfectly comfortable with the existence of catholics, republicans, people who think global warming is bullshit, people who hate chocolate, people who like Kenny Rogers, and Adam Sandler. Doesn't mean I'd want to be in a relationship with any of them, so why are you acting like its a moral failing for people who are okay with transgender people to not neccessarily want to be in a relationship with one?
Oh wait, its because you're a stupid trolling fuck trying to goad people into yelling at you. Well, you get one post. Take it and be happy.
Yeah because if I have a different opinion it indicates my desire to be fucking shouted at. Jesus Christ- I'm asking a genuine question. We've got people saying that its so wrong that transgender people find it difficult to completely integrate into their chosen gender- surely to do so it would mean the ability to have normal relationships with the other gender. I have reservations, im sorry... fucking shoot me for not being so open minded my brain can hop out and fly around.
And I don't understand how you can sever gender identity from the rituals that define it. What other expression of gender identity is there.
But whatever- its clear to me that these gender/society threads exist only for people to express how fucking liberal they are and deride everybody who clings to ancient evil primitive values as stupid fucks.
Yeah, it's not about treating every human being as a human being, it's about bragging about how big of lefties people are. That's totally it. No one actually cares about the harm done by gender essentialism. Especially not the people being harmed by it.
Yeah because if I have a different opinion it indicates my desire to be fucking shouted at. Jesus Christ- I'm asking a genuine question. We've got people saying that its so wrong that transgender people find it difficult to completely integrate into their chosen gender- surely to do so it would mean the ability to have normal relationships with the other gender. I have reservations, im sorry... fucking shoot me for not being so open minded my brain can hop out and fly around..
They can have normal relationships with the opposite gender. That doesn't mean anyone in favor of transgender rights are oliged to have sex with them. There are people that are attracted to transgenders. I imagine things work out for them.
I would assume it has something to do with how the vagina already has increased blood flow during periods of arousal, so its not an extreme stretch of the imagination that it could be redirected to inflating the penis.
RE: Not wanting to have relationship/sex with post-op transgenders
I am totally cool with gay men, am I a hypocrite if I dont want to have sex with them? Also should a MtF person contain the qualities that I find attractive, chances are very good I would still consider them a candidate for a relationship.
**Insert some hippy bullshit about accepting people for who they are and who they want to be that I cannot accurately communicate**
**Insert more hippy bullshit about just treating males and females the same and judging people based on their individual characteristics and actions**
If I met a woman I liked who was born a man but I was unable to tell by anything except their telling me, I have no idea what I would do with that situation. It is, however, exceptionally unlikely, especially given that they'd have to like me too, so it's one of thise things I'd have to figure out when I got there. Oh, oops, was I supposed to play holier than thou? Sorry.
ViolentChemistry on
0
Options
INeedNoSaltwith blood on my teethRegistered Userregular
"I am a heterosexual male who likes to have sex with women"
"A transgender woman is just as much a woman as a born woman"
"I will not have sex with transgender women"
And that metaphor with the gay men is not even remotely related.
'Was born with a penis' might not fit one's qualifier for what he wants in a sexual partner. That's not hypocritical, and it also doesn't invalidate a claim that one a) likes to have sex with women and b) believes transgender women to be the same as born women.
Claiming that you either have to want to sleep with every woman or you're a hypocrite is really, really dumb.
There is a woman you are attracted to. She likes you. You are willing to have a relationship with her. You find out she is a post-op transvestite. You are now not willing.
If this is how it goes, then she is not 'just as much a woman as any other woman'.
because you can't have it both ways. you can't say that you believe her to be the same as a born-woman if you won't treat her the same.
There is a woman you are attracted to. She likes you. You are willing to have a relationship with her. You find out she is a post-op transvestite. You are now not willing.
If this is how it goes, then she is not 'just as much a woman as any other woman'.
because you can't have it both ways. you can't say that you believe her to be the same as a born-woman if you won't treat her the same.
Wow, that's an incredible overgeneralization of the thought process of every heterosexual man there when confronted with that situation.
I don't think it's really about not wanting to be with them because of that simple fact of transgenderism. It seems more like if someone couldn't maintain the relationship after they found out, that it would be more attributed to emotional shock or stress. The transgenderism may have been the catalyst, but it could very well have been some other revelation. It's not as simple as, "you're transgener huh?, now I don't like you even though I purport to have nothing against it all." Anything hidden that comes out in a relationship that is that substantial will shock a lot of people out of relationships, and it's not neccesarily because of the fact itself, theyh may just be unwilling to deal with a perceived emotional burden or societal adjustment, becuase whatever their feelings on the matter it's still a loaded issue with impacts in their smaller scale social locus, and the greater social spectrum. It's like if someone was to date a woman, and she revealed she had children. The Guy might leave the relationship, not because he doesn't like kids or has a problem with them but he's not ready to deal with it on a personal level. So, you may still consider them(transgender) much like you would other natural women, but the revelation freaks you out becuase of the impact.
I'm sure it's been mentioned in the thread, but is there a mental approach to solving transexuality? As in, with the physical approach being to change the body into the gender the mind identifies with, where the mental approach would be to change the mind to what the body is? Like, some kind of hormone therapy or counseling that has shown results?
I'm sure it's been mentioned in the thread, but is there a mental approach to solving transexuality? As in, with the physical approach being to change the body into the gender the mind identifies with, where the mental approach would be to change the mind to what the body is? Like, some kind of hormone therapy or counseling that has shown results?
Slipperier slope. By a long shot.
As such, it is generally considered more ethical to conform the body to the mind than vice versa.
The general opinion is that it can't be done. Theres a book about a disgraced prof dude who tried to reassign a boy whos penis was lost as a girl. It very much did not work
There is a woman you are attracted to. She likes you. You are willing to have a relationship with her. You find out she is a post-op transvestite. You are now not willing.
If this is how it goes, then she is not 'just as much a woman as any other woman'.
because you can't have it both ways. you can't say that you believe her to be the same as a born-woman if you won't treat her the same.
That's so retarded.
There are lots of things that won't be obvious early on, do not make a woman less of a woman, and can still play a role in whether or not a person would want to have a relationship with them.
What someone is willing to accept or not in a relationship is a pretty personal thing, man, and it doesn't make you a hypocrite to support someone without wanting to sleep with them.
There is a woman you are attracted to. She likes you. You are willing to have a relationship with her. You find out she is a post-op transvestite. You are now not willing.
If this is how it goes, then she is not 'just as much a woman as any other woman'.
because you can't have it both ways. you can't say that you believe her to be the same as a born-woman if you won't treat her the same.
While that certainly would be nice if it were the case. People aren't always particularly consistent. That doesn't mean our legal morality should appeal to the lowest common denominator of human emotional reactions.
Wait, wait. Are we saying that it's (un)reasonable to be turned off to find out your girlfriend used to be a guy, or are we arguing that it's (un)reasonable to say most/every guy(s) is/are like that?
I can't even tell the exact argument this thread is having, but to add to it.
We're apes. We have natural tendencies that cannot be ignored, but they can be overcome, correct? So I have a hard time thinking anyone should be shunned because they would turn down a post-op girl. I'm also ignoring the fact that I'm not sure there are "perfect" post-ops. Aren't they always messy?
Some people also find vastly different age unattractive, regardless of appearance.
Some people find plastic surgery of less drastic sorts unattractive, regardless of appearance.
Some people find the fact that a person has an abnormal physiological background unattractive, regardless of appearance.
All this means is that people are attracted to qualities other than appearance. Oh-fricking-noes.
--
Also: "Just as much a woman" is pretty much meaningless. Gender and sex are seperate things (though apparently there is also mental sex - the craving to wear a skirt has nothing to do with biology: see kilts).
And boy it gets even more complicated but anyways: "Woman" as a singular definition is kind of a primitive word with modern understanding.
Its default understanding is XX Chromosomes, standard female biological characteristics, standard psycholgical identification with "femaleness", and the standard female gender behavior and role set.
But I don't think anyone outside of horribly traditional areas is that strict in the definition.
"I am a heterosexual male who likes to have sex with women"
"A transgender woman is just as much a woman as a born woman"
"I will not have sex with transgender women"
And that metaphor with the gay men is not even remotely related.
There are a large number of issues in dating a transgender beyond simply "OMG she used to have a penis" and "Was her penis larger than mine?"
Things like procreation, and mental health. As Oboro already showed there is a larger incidence of suicidal tendencies, as well as increased financial burden for hormone replacement prescriptions. Not to mention the stated lowered life expectancy.
Honestly, if you have an open mind I recommend the movie "Different for Girls", I really liked it and thought it was a good portrayal. I wouldnt mind hearing Oboro's thoughts on it.
The general opinion is that it can't be done. Theres a book about a disgraced prof dude who tried to reassign a boy whos penis was lost as a girl. It very much did not work
How does that align with the notion that gender is fluid? If I'm not mistaken, the scenario is that they attempted to raise and condition the boy as a girl, but his mind wouldn't accept it. So are gender identity and gender roles something you're born with or a construct of society? I'm genuinely curious, because I do generally believe that gender is fluid, but this is a confusing case.
Gender roles are assigned by society, apart from the actual mechanics of reproduction. Gender identity is which one you see yourself as, on a fundamental level (it doesn't go "oh, I think I'll be a girl, it'll be fun", fun-da-men-tal). There's nothing contradictory about saying both "I think girls can do pretty much anything guys can do except bench-press a volkswagon or create semen" and "I'm a guy".
The general opinion is that it can't be done. Theres a book about a disgraced prof dude who tried to reassign a boy whos penis was lost as a girl. It very much did not work
How does that align with the notion that gender is fluid? If I'm not mistaken, the scenario is that they attempted to raise and condition the boy as a girl, but his mind wouldn't accept it. So are gender identity and gender roles something you're born with or a construct of society? I'm genuinely curious, because I do generally believe that gender is fluid, but this is a confusing case.
It's a confusing case in general. The way I always understood it was that you were born feeling to yourself "Yeah, okay, I am a male". You then look to society, and say "Hey, what do males do anyways?". If society says "cook, sheep-shearing, astrophysics, and football", then those are activities that you can use to express your masculinity.
If we only allowed women to become firemen, little susie would more often pick up the red truck than little johnny.
Gender roles are assigned by society, apart from the actual mechanics of reproduction. Gender identity is which one you see yourself as, on a fundamental level (it doesn't go "oh, I think I'll be a girl, it'll be fun", fun-da-men-tal). There's nothing contradictory about saying both "I think girls can do pretty much anything guys can do except bench-press a volkswagon or create semen" and "I'm a guy".
Yeah I had a feeling when I was typing that up that I was conflating gender roles and gender identity. Makes more sense now.
Gender roles are assigned by society, apart from the actual mechanics of reproduction. Gender identity is which one you see yourself as, on a fundamental level (it doesn't go "oh, I think I'll be a girl, it'll be fun", fun-da-men-tal). There's nothing contradictory about saying both "I think girls can do pretty much anything guys can do except bench-press a Volkswagen or create semen" and "I'm a guy".
That is an excellent summary of both kinds of gender, V.C. :^:
I suggest you all take a look at the book The Riddle of Gender. Transgenderism and Transsexualism have been studied since the early 20th century, and it's surprising how much was known by the scientific community about gender and sexuality way back when society was still pretty back-asswards.
The Riddle of Gender also talks about Cristine Jorgensen, the first U.S. citizen to go through a sex-change.
Harry Benjamin, a colleague of Kinsey's who studied gender and has been mentioned earlier in the thread, gets a whole chapter just about him. He's real cool.
((So yeah, we're a bit off topic now... but only so much we can say about sex changes as tax deductions...))
I'm sure it's been mentioned in the thread, but is there a mental approach to solving transexuality? As in, with the physical approach being to change the body into the gender the mind identifies with, where the mental approach would be to change the mind to what the body is? Like, some kind of hormone therapy or counseling that has shown results?
It doesn't really work, is the problem. Surgery is much just more effective than therapy.
Feral on
every person who doesn't like an acquired taste always seems to think everyone who likes it is faking it. it should be an official fallacy.
Well, I don't know if this has been mentioned either, but according to this article, most people (most as in the 75-85% range) are happy with their sex change.
Best snippet from the article?
"most transsexuals simply wish to get on with their lives"
But, to qualify this, the article is specifically speaking of the surgical aspect. Not the psychosocial aspect.
I would like to go to sleep, but reading this topic, that I stumbled across, has reeled me in.
I used to be very involved in the LGBT community a while back. It gave me some hefty insight onto this topic. I've gotten to meet trans people from all sorts of walks of life. Some had sorted and dark histories like Oboro, and others lead realitivly peaceful, if not closeted, lives.
Gender Dysphoria, like all mental disorders, are a nightmare to classify. Our Healthcare system, esspecially mental health, requires that things be clearly catagorised. What is harder to classify than the human brain, which is in itself, a mystery? To best understand the condition, it would be ideal to understand the brain, which no one can claim to totally have a grasp on. But still, there is a process;
For persons brave enough to take the first step forward on the road from gender dysphoria, is to see a mental health worker. This usually takes at least a year, and is quite expensive (think, 80 to 130 dollars an hour session). The intent is to classify if the person is indeed a victim of gender dysphoria, and what steps can be taken from there.
For people wanting to walk the road, the next step is usually hormones, taken via intermuscular injection (shot in the hip) or orally. The intent of the hormones is to generate a better appearance of the opposite gender. Sometimes, for some gender dysphoria afflicted, this is enough, and that is what the mental health care workers are trying to assess. These drugs are anywhere from 40 to 200 dollars. Another year, and the next step becomes available; SRS, or Sexual Reassignment Surgery.
This is of course skipping the side step of eliminating of facial hair, perhaps some other things need to be taken care of to insure that the persons passability remains true.
SRS is the subject of todays dabate. I think a fair number of people here are ignorant of what a transgender person has to go through to reach the point of SRS. After the first year of anaylising a person, another year of hormone theropy, and any little things nessessary in between, the option (assuming the mental healthcare worker is willing to write a letter green lighting it) for SRS becomes available. Minimum, two years.
SRS carries a massive price tag. Anywhere from 10,000 dollars to 25,000. So even if a transgendering person makes it the two years, it could be another 10 before he or she has saved enough to make a down payment on the only real treatment available him or her.
-- That covered the HOW. The steps involved to getting to SRS. It was a dry list, and the reality of it is often very turbulant. There's nothing dry and easy about it.
The WHY is another matter; No one can say for sure WHY a person becomes aflicted with gender dysphoria. If it manifests, was a born condiction, or if it's as simple as a brain chemical imballence. But the proof is out there; millions are Transgender, all over the world. It can't be ignored.
SRS for these people is the only available treatment in modern medicine. It maintains the identity of that persons percived gender, and gives the person a shot at living a normal life. (That whole discussion back there about pills for treating the brain on this disorder would be medicly absurd. Treating the disorder, not the identity, is the method of medicine.)
A transgender person lives in a very mean world. They're fighting their own gender induced depression for starters, and get the intollerance to modern society heaped onto them. All they ever wanted was a shot at a normal life, and for many, that is not an option because of the massive price tags tacked on every step of the process. Suicidal depression becomes a reality for many. plain old suicide, for those not strong enough to cope with the conditions. For those with no hope of progress into transgenderism, suicide becomes the only choice for many.
The initial arguement was about this being a cosmetic issue, or not. Because of what I've seen in the community, I don't belive this to be cosmetic. Treating an analysed and confirmed condiction (gender dysphoria, which takes about two years, min to be considered for SRS) seems every bit as reasonable as treating a people with depression or an accident caused disfigurment. The difference should not be viewed as a physical or mental condiction. The reality is that it is a mental condiction based on physical conditions; wrong gender.
I doubt any insurance agency in the US will cover SRS 100%. However even a percentage on perscriptions and partial coverage on SRS is a step in the right direction for treatment.
Unfortunately, Washington (the capital city, not the state) is full of very ingorant people, on the topic. A good portion (but surprisingly not all) of this thread contains obvious ignorance on the topic, and what ignorant people would likely think about when presented with the issue. Kutos to you who know what your talking about.
(I doubt anyone read this. If you skipped it, stop and educate yourself on the topic further by actually reading the post.)
Posts
As a psychological condition, it establishes that some people are born with very strong preferences and ties to identity that, when denied, produce very strong reactions and lead those people to try and gain access to their preferences and identity.
It pluralizes. The concept pluralizes-- the system around it is, admittedly, stupid in some regards. I talked on previous pages about how they used to rank transpeople on a scale of "severity" before considering them for treatment, but also about how that is the way things used to be. Yes, it is somewhat silly that you need to fit their well-defined definition in order to gain access to treatment,
but that's an issue with the process, and not with the people undergoing it.
Please respond with some justification for your ideas and the ideas of "Feminist Marxists" that you support, instead of calling the lives of transpeople "delusions," "transvestic fetishism taken to insanity," talking about how they are only being "thrown a bone," while "undermining the homosexual movement," and similar miscellany.
Don't be a dick about it. I think they have a legitimate complaint, I think transexualism is an encroachment of patriarchy and an undermining of female and male identity, and I think from what I've studied on transvestive fetishism and GID I honestly think GID is an extension of the fetish into a logical conclusion. Of course, I could be wrong, since the cause of GID is unknown, though I do know that diagnosis that separates the two is largely one of degree.
I also think it's a mental health issue not tied to sexual orientation. As a mental health right, it is an important study in its own, but it should not be attached to the rights of sexual orientation as loosely as it is.
Shut up, and come back when you're at least slightly informed about ANYTHING.
In fact, it is precisely BECAUSE this issue is very personal to Oboro that she is so well informed, because she has spent countless hours researching every single aspect of the issue.
You have not.
And don't try to couch it in pretty terms. You're essentially saying "I don't mean any offence, but...*offensive statement*".
Which is a cock thing to do.
Please, read the thread-- any of it-- and do some research before you try and contribute further, like the person posting above me has suggested as well.
You're the person that's being hostile here because you are stating that you want to maintain bigoted norms about sex that were in vogue during the 1950's. Homosexuals, transsexuals and AIDS activists have spent the past 20 years fighting against the ignorant crap you're spouting. Before and during that time, people discriminated against them and ignored the various serious issues associated with them. Frankly it's disgusting that people still dismiss the conditions that accompanied the "queer" movement, when they need to be addressed. If you disagree, then I guess you're glad that the AIDS epidemic killed millions of people worldwide. Ignoring an important issue especially when it's a disease is a idiotic way of handling things because the issue isn't gonna go away just because you're uncomfortable with it.
Transsexuals are put into an extremely difficult place and it is NOT just some "fetish", it's a serious disease. GID is an extremely difficult condition for the individual to deal with. They feel alienated because they are not comfortable with their bodies or socially at all. And as progressive as we like to think we are, physical appearance is an extremely important part of a person's identity. The sex change process is the best we can do so far for people with GID. Additionally, rhe process of changing from one sex to another isn't just a "mental issue", the individual has to seek extensive medical counsel, take a lot of hormones and other things for a long period before the actual operation. I see absolutely no reason why this process wouldn't be categorized under medical expenses and how one could possibly see it as a separate issue from sexual orientation.
As a guy who has suffered from a pretty severe depression I can certainly see what they're talking about. I was very wary about starting anti-depressants, because even if I was depressed, that was who I was -- it was my sense of identity, and now some doctor was going "these pills will change you". My thoughts were along the lines of "Who would I want to be if not myself?"
This issue is alot more complicated than I realized at all.
like if gender is inborn and sex is inborn as well but not neccesarily the same, how can that tie into gender being a social construct (as I've had shouted at me on this forum many a time)?
Also I find it difficult to believe that that the people who claim to be so forward thinking and totally accepting of transgender people would be comfortable in a relationship with one.
https://medium.com/@alascii
edit: also, I'm perfectly comfortable with the existence of catholics, republicans, people who think global warming is bullshit, people who hate chocolate, people who like Kenny Rogers, and Adam Sandler. Doesn't mean I'd want to be in a relationship with any of them, so why are you acting like its a moral failing for people who are okay with transgender people to not neccessarily want to be in a relationship with one?
Oh wait, its because you're a stupid trolling fuck trying to goad people into yelling at you. Well, you get one post. Take it and be happy.
And I don't understand how you can sever gender identity from the rituals that define it. What other expression of gender identity is there.
But whatever- its clear to me that these gender/society threads exist only for people to express how fucking liberal they are and deride everybody who clings to ancient evil primitive values as stupid fucks.
So have your liberal fun guys. I'm out.
https://medium.com/@alascii
They can have normal relationships with the opposite gender. That doesn't mean anyone in favor of transgender rights are oliged to have sex with them. There are people that are attracted to transgenders. I imagine things work out for them.
Also, you're fucking retarded.
I would assume it has something to do with how the vagina already has increased blood flow during periods of arousal, so its not an extreme stretch of the imagination that it could be redirected to inflating the penis.
RE: Not wanting to have relationship/sex with post-op transgenders
I am totally cool with gay men, am I a hypocrite if I dont want to have sex with them? Also should a MtF person contain the qualities that I find attractive, chances are very good I would still consider them a candidate for a relationship.
**Insert some hippy bullshit about accepting people for who they are and who they want to be that I cannot accurately communicate**
**Insert more hippy bullshit about just treating males and females the same and judging people based on their individual characteristics and actions**
MWO: Adamski
"A transgender woman is just as much a woman as a born woman"
"I will not have sex with transgender women"
And that metaphor with the gay men is not even remotely related.
https://medium.com/@alascii
'Was born with a penis' might not fit one's qualifier for what he wants in a sexual partner. That's not hypocritical, and it also doesn't invalidate a claim that one a) likes to have sex with women and b) believes transgender women to be the same as born women.
Claiming that you either have to want to sleep with every woman or you're a hypocrite is really, really dumb.
For me:
"I am a heterosexual male who likes to have sex with women"
"That woman is just as much a woman as any other woman"
"I will not have sex with that woman"
There is a woman you are attracted to. She likes you. You are willing to have a relationship with her. You find out she is a post-op transvestite. You are now not willing.
If this is how it goes, then she is not 'just as much a woman as any other woman'.
because you can't have it both ways. you can't say that you believe her to be the same as a born-woman if you won't treat her the same.
https://medium.com/@alascii
Wow, that's an incredible overgeneralization of the thought process of every heterosexual man there when confronted with that situation.
Currently DMing: None
Characters
[5e] Dural Melairkyn - AC 18 | HP 40 | Melee +5/1d8+3 | Spell +4/DC 12
Slipperier slope. By a long shot.
As such, it is generally considered more ethical to conform the body to the mind than vice versa.
https://medium.com/@alascii
That's so retarded.
There are lots of things that won't be obvious early on, do not make a woman less of a woman, and can still play a role in whether or not a person would want to have a relationship with them.
What someone is willing to accept or not in a relationship is a pretty personal thing, man, and it doesn't make you a hypocrite to support someone without wanting to sleep with them.
While that certainly would be nice if it were the case. People aren't always particularly consistent. That doesn't mean our legal morality should appeal to the lowest common denominator of human emotional reactions.
I can't even tell the exact argument this thread is having, but to add to it.
We're apes. We have natural tendencies that cannot be ignored, but they can be overcome, correct? So I have a hard time thinking anyone should be shunned because they would turn down a post-op girl. I'm also ignoring the fact that I'm not sure there are "perfect" post-ops. Aren't they always messy?
Some people find plastic surgery of less drastic sorts unattractive, regardless of appearance.
Some people find the fact that a person has an abnormal physiological background unattractive, regardless of appearance.
All this means is that people are attracted to qualities other than appearance. Oh-fricking-noes.
--
Also: "Just as much a woman" is pretty much meaningless. Gender and sex are seperate things (though apparently there is also mental sex - the craving to wear a skirt has nothing to do with biology: see kilts).
And boy it gets even more complicated but anyways: "Woman" as a singular definition is kind of a primitive word with modern understanding.
Its default understanding is XX Chromosomes, standard female biological characteristics, standard psycholgical identification with "femaleness", and the standard female gender behavior and role set.
But I don't think anyone outside of horribly traditional areas is that strict in the definition.
There are a large number of issues in dating a transgender beyond simply "OMG she used to have a penis" and "Was her penis larger than mine?"
Things like procreation, and mental health. As Oboro already showed there is a larger incidence of suicidal tendencies, as well as increased financial burden for hormone replacement prescriptions. Not to mention the stated lowered life expectancy.
Honestly, if you have an open mind I recommend the movie "Different for Girls", I really liked it and thought it was a good portrayal. I wouldnt mind hearing Oboro's thoughts on it.
MWO: Adamski
How does that align with the notion that gender is fluid? If I'm not mistaken, the scenario is that they attempted to raise and condition the boy as a girl, but his mind wouldn't accept it. So are gender identity and gender roles something you're born with or a construct of society? I'm genuinely curious, because I do generally believe that gender is fluid, but this is a confusing case.
It's a confusing case in general. The way I always understood it was that you were born feeling to yourself "Yeah, okay, I am a male". You then look to society, and say "Hey, what do males do anyways?". If society says "cook, sheep-shearing, astrophysics, and football", then those are activities that you can use to express your masculinity.
If we only allowed women to become firemen, little susie would more often pick up the red truck than little johnny.
Yeah I had a feeling when I was typing that up that I was conflating gender roles and gender identity. Makes more sense now.
That is an excellent summary of both kinds of gender, V.C. :^:
I suggest you all take a look at the book The Riddle of Gender. Transgenderism and Transsexualism have been studied since the early 20th century, and it's surprising how much was known by the scientific community about gender and sexuality way back when society was still pretty back-asswards.
The Riddle of Gender also talks about Cristine Jorgensen, the first U.S. citizen to go through a sex-change.
Harry Benjamin, a colleague of Kinsey's who studied gender and has been mentioned earlier in the thread, gets a whole chapter just about him. He's real cool.
((So yeah, we're a bit off topic now... but only so much we can say about sex changes as tax deductions...))
It doesn't really work, is the problem. Surgery is much just more effective than therapy.
the "no true scotch man" fallacy.
Best snippet from the article?
"most transsexuals simply wish to get on with their lives"
But, to qualify this, the article is specifically speaking of the surgical aspect. Not the psychosocial aspect.
I used to be very involved in the LGBT community a while back. It gave me some hefty insight onto this topic. I've gotten to meet trans people from all sorts of walks of life. Some had sorted and dark histories like Oboro, and others lead realitivly peaceful, if not closeted, lives.
Gender Dysphoria, like all mental disorders, are a nightmare to classify. Our Healthcare system, esspecially mental health, requires that things be clearly catagorised. What is harder to classify than the human brain, which is in itself, a mystery? To best understand the condition, it would be ideal to understand the brain, which no one can claim to totally have a grasp on. But still, there is a process;
For persons brave enough to take the first step forward on the road from gender dysphoria, is to see a mental health worker. This usually takes at least a year, and is quite expensive (think, 80 to 130 dollars an hour session). The intent is to classify if the person is indeed a victim of gender dysphoria, and what steps can be taken from there.
For people wanting to walk the road, the next step is usually hormones, taken via intermuscular injection (shot in the hip) or orally. The intent of the hormones is to generate a better appearance of the opposite gender. Sometimes, for some gender dysphoria afflicted, this is enough, and that is what the mental health care workers are trying to assess. These drugs are anywhere from 40 to 200 dollars. Another year, and the next step becomes available; SRS, or Sexual Reassignment Surgery.
This is of course skipping the side step of eliminating of facial hair, perhaps some other things need to be taken care of to insure that the persons passability remains true.
SRS is the subject of todays dabate. I think a fair number of people here are ignorant of what a transgender person has to go through to reach the point of SRS. After the first year of anaylising a person, another year of hormone theropy, and any little things nessessary in between, the option (assuming the mental healthcare worker is willing to write a letter green lighting it) for SRS becomes available. Minimum, two years.
SRS carries a massive price tag. Anywhere from 10,000 dollars to 25,000. So even if a transgendering person makes it the two years, it could be another 10 before he or she has saved enough to make a down payment on the only real treatment available him or her.
-- That covered the HOW. The steps involved to getting to SRS. It was a dry list, and the reality of it is often very turbulant. There's nothing dry and easy about it.
The WHY is another matter; No one can say for sure WHY a person becomes aflicted with gender dysphoria. If it manifests, was a born condiction, or if it's as simple as a brain chemical imballence. But the proof is out there; millions are Transgender, all over the world. It can't be ignored.
The simplest description I've ever heard sounds like the most cliché; "It's like being born in the wrong body." The mind says girl, by the body says boy (or vice versa). It's a matter of IDENTITY. The steps behind the HOW establish just how far into gender dysphoria a person is, and many transfolk even skip SRS. They became happy with the female appearnace, and it wasn't about the penis or vagina. But for others, SRS is the only option.
SRS for these people is the only available treatment in modern medicine. It maintains the identity of that persons percived gender, and gives the person a shot at living a normal life. (That whole discussion back there about pills for treating the brain on this disorder would be medicly absurd. Treating the disorder, not the identity, is the method of medicine.)
A transgender person lives in a very mean world. They're fighting their own gender induced depression for starters, and get the intollerance to modern society heaped onto them. All they ever wanted was a shot at a normal life, and for many, that is not an option because of the massive price tags tacked on every step of the process. Suicidal depression becomes a reality for many. plain old suicide, for those not strong enough to cope with the conditions. For those with no hope of progress into transgenderism, suicide becomes the only choice for many.
The initial arguement was about this being a cosmetic issue, or not. Because of what I've seen in the community, I don't belive this to be cosmetic. Treating an analysed and confirmed condiction (gender dysphoria, which takes about two years, min to be considered for SRS) seems every bit as reasonable as treating a people with depression or an accident caused disfigurment. The difference should not be viewed as a physical or mental condiction. The reality is that it is a mental condiction based on physical conditions; wrong gender.
I doubt any insurance agency in the US will cover SRS 100%. However even a percentage on perscriptions and partial coverage on SRS is a step in the right direction for treatment.
Unfortunately, Washington (the capital city, not the state) is full of very ingorant people, on the topic. A good portion (but surprisingly not all) of this thread contains obvious ignorance on the topic, and what ignorant people would likely think about when presented with the issue. Kutos to you who know what your talking about.
(I doubt anyone read this. If you skipped it, stop and educate yourself on the topic further by actually reading the post.)
I'm quasi-progressive!
Steam Profile | Signature art by Alexandra 'Lexxy' Douglass