Will Genetics Research And Eugenics Doom The HBS-born?

As scientists

Sun, 27 Apr 2008 21:45:26 +0100

We have an ethical imperative to pursue our investigations without regard to consequences. As people we must be mindful of the consequences when we pursue our investigations. Reconciling these two can be very difficult. Consider this, Sharon: did Robert Oppenheimer have to explode a nuclear weapon to advance knowledge of nuclear physics? We are a biologist and a neuroscientist. We are not physicists, but our best guess is that the A bomb project would not come up at all except to win a war. We feel that bigots see our struggle with these questions and worry that we might figure *them* out. It isn't about any of you. It is about the chance you might peek under their robes and tell the truth about their emptiness. The power of that makes other disputes very much small bits. Thank you for a very accomplished article and discussion. Good on you, Robert and Linda. - Robert and Linda LaSeur

Leigh

Sun, 27 Apr 2008 12:39:12 +0100

on this site we desire a civil dialog and avoidance of gotcha games where people try to dominate others to win an argument without regard to finding soutions. [quote]However, there is a level of shall we say... "membership to the club" sort of attitude. For example your question to Susan regarding her time post op which is nearly always a set up question, put with the best of intentions but usually designed to set someone up for a fall. Its sort of an intimidation question and used often on the blogsphere to either say someone is too inexperienced or so far ahead they should know better.[/quote] I did not ask that question, Lisa Thompson did, but I get your point. Let me say that just because there are oher sites that engage in such tactics neither makes them right nor appropriate. Not here, anyway. I read Lisa's question as an honest attempt to understand where Susan was coming from in light of her (Susan's) earlier comments. If my editorial team thinks anyone is out of line (including Lisa), I will take action to correct the situation. But let me comment on the relevance of the question. Speaking personally, I do have an enhanced perspective since my own surgery, one that deepens as time passes. Others have experienced the same thing. It is most noticeable among those who have a lot more time in than me. Like yourself, as just one example. None of this makes anyone better, superior, or anything like it. It just means we are at different stages in the process. It seems strange to me that people can be clubbish about a birth condition. I am a long-term burn survivor. It would be best if it had not happened in the first place. To the extent possible, I have overcome the consequences of my injuries. That doesn't make me better than those who didn't. I am darn fortunate, though. [quote]In reference to myself with the early memory comments I made on another article it was sort of suggested that since I didn't have early memory of feeling born in the wrong body that I should perhaps send in an application to join the HBS club and a vote would be taken to consider my eligibility. Maybe I read into comments made, but it made me feel that way.[/quote] Whoa, you are talking to Sharon here. All TS-Si has said is that early recognition of our condition is common - not necessarily universal. We have to draw an important distinction between occurence and recognition (or "awareness"). Scientific research, available on this site in large quantities, supports the existence of capabilities for concept development and memory among the very young. Knowing that you know something is different from what there is to know. Go to our search engine and search for metacognition for more on that subject, as in this link: [url]http://ts-si.org/component/option,com_ijoomla_archive/Itemid,1115/[/url] Consider the following two statements: -- I did not become aware of my condition until later in life. This statement acknowledges that the condition pre-existed my awareness of it. That is, it was there and I denied it, took it for granted, or had some other distraction that prevented full engagement. -- My condition did not occur until later in life. This statement supports the idea of "late onset", that HBS is something you catch or develop, disconnected from our prenatal environment. Both statements can be discussed and if they are, should be dealt with in a civil manner. I personally support the argument that HBS was there all along, whether one is aware of it or not. I think science supports me on that, but readily understand if others have a different view. Let me state very clearly: just because you didn't become aware of your HBS until later on does not mean you aren't HBS. [quote]Thats what I mean about TS-SI when I say it appears snobby and aloof, like even those of us that had surgury way back do not necessarily feel totally comfortable about joining what appears to be an elitist club.[/quote] I don't want to overemphasize process, but what do you think TS-Si really is? TS-Si, Inc. is a non-profit organization dedicated to the acceptance, medical treatment, & legal protection of individuals in the process of correcting the misalignment of their anatomical sex, & supporting their transition into society. TS-Si.org is a website sponsored by TS-Si, Inc. It has a large and growing readership. Thousands of people subscribe to this very discussion thread. There is a lot more we do that is away from this site and quiet - much of it is out on the streets. By the way, we are not a membership organization, so we do not actively recruit anyone to be a member or not. This website, TS-Si.org, has obvious implications for the development of HBS studies. There are a number of people who contribute to the inner workings of this site. They come in from around the world to help out. Other than Lisa and myself, the others seldom comment and do not generally participate in the discussions. We have a separate, and private, means for our internal deliberations. Out here in public view, a lot of different people do contribute and we value their participation, including yours. It does not mean we agree with every single comment or feel comfortable with the tone of those comments. It does mean that we value the input and respect the intentions of the contributor. Those (relatively few) people who come here to disrupt our site learn we have zero tolerance for such behavior and take necessary actions to protect the environment. [quote]The elitism is there, shielded under the thin veil of science that cannot hide it. Now perhaps we are elite, and why not? This is our damn club after all and we don't want to let the riff raff in to spoil it for us. Well thats all well and good but its like making products.[/quote] I quite honestly do not understand what you mean by those statements. Could you explain them further? [quote]Its all about volume and price and for the transgender, the more you make, the more you make. However, for us its about quality. We won't sacrifice quality for quantity and it shows. Oh yes the tranny's want our position on the hill alright, but while we sit up here and giggle at their antics, they are digging the hill out from beneath us. We hold the moral high ground, we should use that to our advantage to convince those in the media that we are being usurped. Someone needs to call the cavalry before the whole bloody hill comes tumbling down. I don't know Sharon, maybe I am just babbling on here ... maybe we are all just too bloody busy with our lives to care. Its all very well for someone to say that one person can make a difference, but first you have to have the ear of those that would listen. Perhaps you and Lisa are our best hope.[/quote] All I can say to that is we keep working at the problem in our own way(s). Others also make major contributions, in their own way(s). I am a big believer in the plain common sense of people. It isn't always evident day-to-day, but over time the general public seems to be gathering up an awareness that misinformation has compromised the health of the misaligned. There are many reasons for this, not least an all too eager embrace of transgenderism. All we can do is keep working. There are only two people who can speak officially for TS-Si. Those people are Lisa Thompson and me. If you have any other questions or concerns, please let us know and we will try to answer the best we can. All the best, Leigh. I hope this helps. Sharon - Sharon S. Gaughan

In reply to Sharon

Sun, 27 Apr 2008 01:33:49 +0100

There has been no disagreements that were beyond any level of decency .. one would normally have to visit a transgender site for that to happen :) However, there is a level of shall we say... "membership to the club" sort of attitude. For example your question to Susan regarding her time post op which is nearly always a set up question, put with the best of intentions but usually designed to set someone up for a fall. Its sort of an intimidation question and used often on the blogsphere to either say someone is too inexperienced or so far ahead they should know better. In reference to myself with the early memory comments I made on another article it was sort of suggested that since I didn't have early memory of feeling born in the wrong body that I should perhaps send in an application to join the HBS club and a vote would be taken to consider my eligibility. Maybe I read into comments made, but it made me feel that way. Thats what I mean about TS-SI when I say it appears snobby and aloof, like even those of us that had surgury way back do not necessarily feel totally comfortable about joining what appears to be an elitist club. The elitism is there, shielded under the thin veil of science that cannot hide it. Now perhaps we are elite, and why not? This is our damn club after all and we don't want to let the riff raff in to spoil it for us. Well thats all well and good but its like making products. Its all about volume and price and for the transgender, the more you make, the more you make. However, for us its about quality. We won't sacrifice quality for quantity and it shows. Oh yes the tranny's want our position on the hill alright, but while we sit up here and giggle at their antics, they are digging the hill out from beneath us. We hold the moral high ground, we should use that to our advantage to convince those in the media that we are being usurped. Someone needs to call the cavalry before the whole bloody hill comes tumbling down. I don't know Sharon, maybe I am just babbling on here ... maybe we are all just too bloody busy with our lives to care. Its all very well for someone to say that one person can make a difference, but first you have to have the ear of those that would listen. Perhaps you and Lisa are our best hope. :) - Leigh Smith

...

Sat, 26 Apr 2008 08:02:39 +0100

I am one who feels that we need to define ourselves to others as to what and who we are. Not as a subterfuge but as a definition that links us favorably with someone or something that deals with our specific issue separated from any glbt attachment. I doubt that anyone here feels that a man who dressed as a woman and made it clear he had no intention of surgery but only wanted to mimic and even fool people would be someone whose label we might find acceptable to include us or any other who survived our birth plight. He defined himself as tg and that is fine... for him and his gender variant supporters. He most assuredly did not define me. How could he since he never understood me or any of us. In fact he communicated to me that anyone who wanted a 'sex change' was delusional. Now his followers demean me only because I want exactly what he wanted: self definition which for me HBS fits. To those that think the research findings dealing with our brains being in contradiction may I suggest you read the research rather than discard it as do the tg's who see their valued choice argument destroyed by evidence that links us to a birth anomaly. We did not wake up and make a choice. We were born without one. Our link is: http://www.harrybenjaminsyndrome-info.org/ We are in the process of changing domains but if you cannot link on please be patient and in time we will be up and running again with many functional changes. What I am angered about is the assumption by some that we might as well accept ourselves as being transgender and therefore agree with those who would throw us into the morass of confusion. Transgender chose that term for themselves, we did not choose it for them or were we given the right of critique. So, that being the case for them, why is it that some would chastise us and deny us the same right to define ourselves as we have done with a distinctive identity - Harry Benjamin Syndrome. Give it time and it too will be just as clear a definition in opposition to the transgender confusion that took over 20 years to become well known and an attraction for those many diverse elements under that leaky umbrella. I want to be me, not them! Over the years even though basically stealth I have stuck my neck out and communicated and even attended events in advancing the concept of HarryBenjaminSyndrome. My husband feared my involvement since he and I might be harmed politically and functionally by exposure and we had a lot to lose. Most of us from my experience live rather mundane lives and just want to get on with life. We do not march in parades but do, as Sharon has explained, what we can in a quiet and somewhat focused way. I did that when I ran into roadblocks after surgery and had to go it alone and I know how difficult that can be but I still continue today. I also know that the best way to deal with a complicated issue is with intelligence, focus, facts and at times even with some humor. It worked for me back then in the early 70's and it can work now as long as we are committed to an ideal and commitment to define ourselves so that we might make clear we are not like them, whomever 'them' might be. That is not snobbery but simply a reflection of what we are without allowing others to mar the picture of ourselves with their transgender graffiti. I am still awaiting what term others might suggest that we might identify with other than HBS. Or is it that they are comfortable with being under the transgender umbrella and cannot or would not make that a declaration of their real beliefs. Perhaps they are so ingrained with those that identify with tg'ism that to distinguish themselves from it might bring forth the insulting name calling many of us have endured simply for being clear in our attempt to be ourselves. I am not part of the transgender 'community' and never was; I am not part of any 'inclusion' movement that on the other hand condemns me for not supporting some ideal of 'diversity' (that presents itself as an oxymoron as I see it); I did not go through hell so I might be joined at the hip with people whose argument for legal redress deals with sexual orientation and/or fetishism. I did all I did to be whole in mind and body...not to be a caricature but to be a woman in heart, soul, brain and body -not half and half and not when an urge or the whim hit me. If you don't understand just that then I must assume you have not travelled the same path I have or suffered the mind boggling pain that comes with trying to join body to brain not as an illusion but in an effort to bring harmony and success to my life unattainable in the past while living under an ever present fog. Diane - Diane Kearny

Martin, do not be troubled

Fri, 25 Apr 2008 23:42:03 +0100

I really do appreciate praise for my opinion column, but I am sobered by the implications. You used the phrase Night Riders. I shied away from using that phrase in my piece to avoid melodrama and stay focused on the enduring reality that Eugenics, the desire to purify society of (name the target) and optimize the human race, is active among us. The Night Riders are of a piece with that, of course; they would return in a hoofbeat if we let them. The parent, Eugenics, never really went away. As a number of groups have found, much of the soft bigotry remains. It has a similar intent and longer time frame to be sure. But it has the same result: limitation of social participation by a restricted - and approved - population of like-monded bigots. It is something we must guard against. The tough part is to do so without imposing a stultifying sameness, a blase inclusiveness that stamps out true diversity and innovation, without any countervailing benefit. - Sharon S. Gaughan

The issue

Fri, 25 Apr 2008 23:21:04 +0100

As I see it, Sharon is on target with this. We are always in danger of Night Riders who if you get in their scopes will come for you. I think you hbs women are in greater danger than the transgender guys - the xdressers. You hbs people are a much bigger threat because you kick away all their assumptions and propaganda and prove the bigotds wrong. I don't want Sharon to be right but I fear she is. Some of you people say a lot of things about yourselves and miss the Big Pic. Read Sharon's column again and be afraid very afraid. Martin C. Burke - Martin C. Burke

...

Fri, 25 Apr 2008 22:16:39 +0100

No question this was one of best columns I have read lately. But it got better! What an interesting thread that followed up? Take the passion and complaining out and I get a whole lot of useful ideas. It makes me want to study neurosciences and karate. lol, not me, i'm done so I will stick to karaoke. You get the idea. The blah blah blah blogs havbe nothng on you,people. - Lois Marckson

for Susan

Fri, 25 Apr 2008 14:36:45 +0100

Thank you for posting again, Susan. You have addressed some important issues and I would like to comment on them (from my own personal - and official - perspective). In my view, this is very important. We should not judge each other on the basis of perceived passion and a relevant response to whatever threat we take as the priority. We are talking about tactics, not a difference in opinion over strategy. [quote]... I am as stealth as is humanly and legally possible.[/quote] We absolutely support your decision and fierce in our respect for your privacy. We all live diferent kinds of lives, as ourselves, and make our own choices. Isn't that the point of transition? To be who we really are? In my own case, my daily activities do not involve issues connected HBS, TG, TS, or whatever. Just last night, Lisa and I had dinner with our son. He is a US Marine who has already served one tour in Iraq and mustered out of the Corps. However, he has been recalled, with specific orders for another Iraq tour (and who knows where else). This family situation trumps everything. [quote]This started, when I posted here that others who feel like I do, of which a concentration seems to gravitate to TS-Si, don't seem to want to challenge not only the GLBT but the public on the blogosphere...in essence "...going insane by only talking to themselves".[/quote] Lots of people come, many of whom do not comment. This site has a large and active audience, many of whom comment privately. For every thousand comments that come in the public space, there many times that in private. All are welcome to comment publicly who respect the Terms of Usage. Some of the people who do comment publicly are known to have challenged both the GLBT constructionists and public misconceptions (as expressed in the blogosphere). We also know that many who comment publicly, particularly on the science articles, are themselves active within their occupations and professions. Without further details from your end, it is difficult to comment further. [quote]I support the concept of HBS, and have said so on numerous occasions throughout the blogosphere, but the term has been tainted due to misrepresentations on the sites that promote it. I think that if HBS had been presented differently its legitimacy would not be so prone to attack. Any, but any, educated person who reviews those site will walk away from them with the same opinion its distractors do: a bunch of trannies invented a new term for classic transsexualism and the science behind this invented term is limited to the science supporting classic transsexualism.[/quote] How would you present HBS to improve public understanding? [quote]But, because HBS advocates insist HBS is a new, unique discovery/diagnosis supported by absolute and undeniable fact (instead of what the evidence suggests) it is an easy target to shoot down; it clouds the issue of the difference between "us" and "them". There has been no absolute proof as the the cause of transsexuality, and for laymen to present a term (HBS) as something unique and different than classic transsexuality and expect it to be accepted without criticism is irrational.[/quote] I feel there are at least three different issues here: (1) Why use the term HBS in the first place? (2) Is HBS a scientifically meaningful and permanent designation? and (3) What is the scientific support for the birth condition that falls under the HBS definition? 1. Please note that we are not specifically an HBS site. It also may be helpful to re-read our editorial on the reasons behind our organization's name change. You can see it here: [b][i]Facts of Life: Changing Our Name And Refocusing Our Mission[/b][/i] TS-Si Op-Ed Pages - Editorials: Sunday, 17 June 2007 [url]http://ts-si.org/content/view/2378/995/[/url] In addition, we have further tightened our Mission Statement. It appears on the header of every page on this site: Dedicated to the acceptance, medical treatment, & legal protection of individuals in the process of correcting the misalignment of their anatomical sex, & supporting their transition into society. (2) use of the term Harry Benjamin Syndrome (HBS) is meant to convey the specificity of our birth condition and differentiate that condition from lifestyle and paraphilic considerations. The term is, in the opinion of many - inluding mine - of testable scientific validity. The term HBS is not universally accepted and does not have "official" scientific, medical, and legal endorsement. The term does present a useful starting point for discussion with those authorities necause it clarifies our intentions and provides a useful focal point or discussion. I personally can attest to this from practical experience when exchanging views with potentially influential figures in those fields. But let us be clear: HBS (or "classic transsexual" for that matter) are only names for something, subject to change. I care not a whit about what we call it, but there it is. I could propose we call what we are talking about something like "fhhbgfe", but where would that get us? We have to call it something that sounds at least a little bit sensible! Right now the term HBS seems to focus on "classic transsexuals", as you say, but it has the benefit of excluding cross-dressers and others who have appropriated the term "transsexual" for social cover and other purposes. In fact, the best thing that could happen would be if the scientific community would arrive at the substance of our concerns as a focused area of study and come up with their own designation. That would be a great buy-in. I would gladly abandon HBS under those circumstances. 3. The direct scientific support for the birth condition (which I refer to call HBS) is limited but powerfully suggestive. The findings from adjacent fields lends even more support. The more we learn from genomics, neuroscience, and embryology, the mow likely it is we will eventually have a quantitative basis for making informed judgenments on the matter. Having said that, let me be clear about something else: there is no definitive, dispassionately observed proof of our existence at that level of detail. The studies some cite as "proof" are observational studies, at best. They are tantalizing and - in the scientific sense - "interesting", but non-definitive. What we do have is a group of people from widely variant population groups who share a common understanding of themselves and apply a great deal of effort to realign their brains and bodies to resolve achieve a sense of wholeness not otherwise available. No matter when or how we become aware of ourselves, we exist. We are fact. That is the baseline and the basis for further study. That will be a tough go given that there are (comparatively) few of us, with a large proportion in stealth. However, there is a younger generation coming up that seems far less reticent. [quote]However, that is not the case anymore. Whether you like it or not (personally I hate it), the GLBT speaks for us and HRC represents us; the public and society sees transgender and classic transsexuality (HBS) as one and the same...I know, not only from experience, but from reading over 2000 posts by the mainstream on Oprah's blog.[/quote] They don't represent me. I can only laugh when someone engages in sophmoric political "movementspeak" and accuses me of being a "separatist" from an outfit that I never belonged to in the first place. - Sharon S. Gaughan

"When did you transition and when did you have GRS?"

Fri, 25 Apr 2008 14:03:47 +0100

Asked and Answered. Transitioned at work when the plane ran into the pentagon. SRS five or six years ago or so. You said we are "... challenging those who already agree with you or researchers who already understand the difference between transgender and transsexuality is not challenging anyone at all." Where the hell did you imagine that piece of nonsense? What we don't do is waste our time on self-serving, anti-scientific, post-mod bigots, whether they are transgendered, crossdressed, or academic. It's a waste of energy that can better be used elsewhere. Disagreement is not a personal attack. You have the right to post what you want here (within limits), you do not have the right to be free from disagreement. TS-Si is not some PC lovefest. Please read what we have written without filtering it through your preconceptions. - Lisa Thompson

Rude,

Fri, 25 Apr 2008 13:07:38 +0100

is what you are. I was forthright enough to answer your questions, why is it so difficult to answer mine: When did you transition and when did you have GRS? Sharon posted on my blog when it was up; she and I have corresponded via e-mail. I have posted here more than a few times. Sue Robbins posted on my blog when it was up as did Diane...and others who read TS-Si. I know that all of my posts on Enough Non-Sense were read; I know my position on the debate is crystal clear. And, I also know you know what my position is. Publically, and more than once - plainly so the entire blogosphere could see - I not only supported TS-Si and the message your site is trying to get out, Lisa, but lauded it. Yet, in spite of that, you have insulted me, baited me, and implied a position, tenor, and demeanor to me you, Sharon and others know I simply don't hold or have. If you don't feel you want or need my support, fine...you don't have it. But just for the record, and to clear up your rude, juvenile implications, misrepresentations and attempted shout-down, I will put my position out there again. With the possible exception of a traffic stop a few years ago, I have never been discriminated against for being transsexual...never had an issue with healthcare providers or employment...I don't support ENDA or any special legislation aimed at protecting anyone with gender issues, TG or TS. I don't and have never marched in the streets in support of anything, much less anything that has to do with the GLB...or T; I guard my privacy with a vengence, know only a handful (at most) of pre/post ops and the very few who do know my background (my very close friend, Leigh, for one) would tell you or anyone who cares to listen I am as stealth as is humanly and legally possible. No one will ever see me on Larry King live, or anywhere in the media, ever. I don't support the HRC nor the GLB's agenda (one and the same). I abhore anything that has to do with the transgender construct and lamented that fact almost daily in my Enough Non-Sense blog when it was up...but of course, again, you know that. If I chose to, I could disappear from any and all of the debate and feel quite comfortable in knowing the entire issue would never touch me. This started, when I posted here that others who feel like I do, of which a concentration seems to gravitate to TS-Si, don't seem to want to challenge not only the GLBT but the public on the blogosphere...in essence "...going insane by only talking to themselves". If you want to childishly imply that makes me "mad at the world" and attempt to set me up as a malcontent, knock yourself out; a more mature approach might have been simply to disagree...as Diane did. I really don't need a lecture on the difference between transgender and classic transsexualism nor about how we are "not them" nor "trans anything"; I know that and you know I know that. I support the concept of HBS, and have said so on numerous occasions throughout the blogosphere, but the term has been tainted due to misrepresentations on the sites that promote it. I think that if HBS had been presented differently its legitimacy would not be so prone to attack. Any, but any, educated person who reviews those site will walk away from them with the same opinion its distractors do: a bunch of trannies invented a new term for classic transsexualism and the science behind this invented term is limited to the science supporting classic transsexualism. But, because HBS advocates insist HBS is a new, unique discovery/diagnosis supported by absolute and undeniable fact (instead of what the evidence suggests) it is an easy target to shoot down; it clouds the issue of the difference between "us" and "them". There has been no absolute proof as the the cause of transsexuality, and for laymen to present a term (HBS) as something unique and different than classic transsexuality and expect it to be accepted without criticism is irrational. I'm sorry, but because the term has worked its way into a court case record or two, or has found its way into a medical chart occasionally, in reality, though positive, means next to nothing. Mainstream reasearch carried out by the likes of GIRES and others does not use that term, HBS; if I am mistaken in this, which I am most comfortable I am not, please provide me links to the contrary so that I may use them to persuade others. And, because of that controversy, I have distanced myself from the term. As I said, the controversy just clouded the greater issue...that being the difference between transgender and classic transsexuality. Prior to the GLBT and HRC becoming so influential, not to mention successful in lumping everyone under the transgender umbrella, it was possible to take an under the radar approach to change things. In fact, that is exactly how the birth certificate laws in all of the states were changed. However, that is not the case anymore. Whether you like it or not (personally I hate it), the GLBT speaks for us and HRC represents us; the public and society sees transgender and classic transsexuality (HBS) as one and the same...I know, not only from experience, but from reading over 2000 posts by the mainstream on Oprah's blog. If I am angry about anything it is that. And, in all of those posts, only one person set the record straight, me. Where was everyone else? Where were you? The comments on Oprah (and other mainstream blogs) were not from TG's who you won't talk to, but from mainstream men and women, who you say you do...so whay aren't you our there? Platonic question... Changing the opinion of a few here and there is admirable...good for you. I prefer to chip away at the general consensus. For the past 20 years the transgender idiots have, by proxy, taught the world, incorrectly, that we are all one big happy family scattered throughout some ridiculous gender spectrum. If every scientist on the planet instantly used the term HBS in their papers, and every doctor with an M.D. license diagnosed under that term, the public would still think that TG and TS/HBS are the same thing. Why? Because they don't read the journals and they don't have gender issues as a matter of course. What they think, what they walk away with is what they read on the internet and what they see on Ophrah and see on TV. And, what they read and see is transgender = classic transsexuality. If one gives a damn about the difference, then it is that forum in which hearts and minds have to be persuaded. A hundred scientist and medical doctors could instantly come out in making the differentiation between TG and TS and just five minutes of "transgender" on television would make their position moot...we are transgender. I live in reality, Lisa, not in my little sphere of influence. I don't need to change Sue Robbins, or Diane, or Leigh, or you and Sharon's opinion. I need to change Larry King's perception, MSNBC's perception...Ophrah, Discovery Channel...mom and pop's opinion...the religious right, who not only sees TG = TS, but TG AND TS = GLB. Take the approach you are taking, even if I wanted to, which I don't, I know nothing I will say will slant you to a different tact. But challenging those who already agree with you or researchers who already understand the difference between transgender and transsexuality is not challenging anyone at all. And, attacking me, someone who supports what you think, is both insulting and rude...and fruitless. Whether you agree with me or not is immaterial. What is important is whether others who count do. - Susan

Bobby Kennedy on what one person can do

Fri, 25 Apr 2008 12:31:50 +0100

First is the danger of futility; the belief there is nothing one man or one woman can do against the enormous array of the world's ills -- against misery, against ignorance, or injustice and violence. Yet many of the world's great movements, of thought and action, have flowed from the work of a single man. A young monk began the Protestant reformation, a young general extended an empire from Macedonia to the borders of the earth, and a young woman reclaimed the territory of France. It was a young Italian explorer who discovered the New World, and 32-year-old Thomas Jefferson who proclaimed that all men are created equal. "Give me a place to stand," said Archimedes, "and I will move the world." These men moved the world, and so can we all. Robert Kennedy Day of Affirmation speech University of Capetown South Africa (1966-06-06) - Lisa Thompson

for Leigh Smith

Fri, 25 Apr 2008 12:01:02 +0100

Hello, this is Sharon Gaughan. I have followed these comments with a great deal of interest. I did, after all, write the column that set all this in motion. You. Leigh, have raised a number of points well worth consideration. [quote]I will state the case that I have said once before and got virtually shot down for (so what else is new?) Seems like no matter which side of the gender fence you are, if you say something in a blog that doesn't AGREE with what the author says, your gonna be dodging heat seaking missiles.[/quote] Disagreements are acceptable and growth-inducing. I do not recall that any such have been beyond decency. If they are, I will enforce the Terms of Usage. [quote]I came across TS-SI about a year ago. ... The more I looked at the site over the past year the more I realise it's just another self appreciation society. There is no real difference other than the format suggests to the reader that the authors are privledged college grads with a holyier than thou attitude that sometimes comes off as being so upper middle class, better than thou, straight laced and republican valued, butter wouldn't melt in your mouth, snobbery.[/quote] Really? If you have read our "official" pronouncements, my opinion columns, and Lisa's stuff, how can you say that? We, all of us, are ordinary people. Maturity is the stuff of humility. I personally do not feel any sense of superiority over anyone. In fact, one area in which I do have fierce disagreements with the activist transgenders is the importance of everyday life out here in the mainstream. What you call a "straight laced and republican valued" life is a characterizaton based on no submitted evidence. What specifically have I (or we) said that indicates such attitudes? If anything, my life is one of commitment to family, friends, community, and nation. I am deeply skeptical of political ideologies, whether of the Left or Right. If we sometimes speak of our settled domestic life, it is to counter the TG activists who carry on about how we don't matter. Well, we - like so many - have an actual life. We tire of hearing that it does not matter. [quote]The science is impressive if not a bit one sided in its views and presented as fact that sort of leaves one with a bitter taste in their mouth when the science doesn't fit their view of themself.[/quote] Can you provide a specific reference? Perhaps you could comment on a particular science report that you find deficient and we can take it from there. [quote]In fact I posted about this a couple of months ago, saying that I did not believe in the "Knowledge at birth" theory and was pretty much put down and dismissed.[/quote] You cite the Knowledge at birth theory. Those of us who have experienced the phenomenon do not advance it as a theory, but an observable fact of our existence. Enough of us have experienced the phenomena that it bears scientific investigation. A great many TGs react strongly when some of us state that we knew at a very young age, marshalling all kinds of arguments that it is impossible. This discussion has gone on for at least 20 years, perhaps longer. [quote]I noted on subsequent visits that several articles were written on the subject that I had breached about early memory of transsexualism being key to "true transsexualism". Call me vain but I just have think that those articles didn't simply appear out of the blue but were more targeted.[/quote] Speaking as the Managing Editor of TS-Si.org, I guarantee that our editorial politices and publication schedule have not been triggered by your posts. Your views are important to us, but the site is not about you. As I explained, this is an ongoing discussion that precedes your participation. [quote]... Your not going to win this war sitting in the trenches, patting each other on the back and taking the view that we are somehow not connected. I have been in the trenches with Susan, been banned from sites and even lost Susan as a close friend over this. I have been called everything from a troll to an elitist and everything in between.[/quote] We live in the Washington, DC area, with correspondents from around the US and world. TS-Si.org is a website, sponsored by an organization that is very active. [quote]Fact is it doesn't matter any more. The genie is out of the bottle and nobody is ever going to put that lid back on other than the transgender and the LGBT themselves. Their constant whining and disrespect for what what mainstream see's as an attack on their morality will eventually force the transgender back in their hole.[/quote] Fact is, the TGs have already lost. They just haven't caught up with the news. [quote]The Oprah blog on the Pregnant man gave us more insight into what society feels about the trangender debate than this site or any blog ever could. Time and time again, people wrote that they were sick to death of hearing about the issue, that they were sick of reading about sex changes and tired of the media hype that promoted it. Oprah was not applauded for the show and many felt that it was beneath her and more in the realm of Jerry Springer. I read over and over that mainstream does not consider someone to be the sex they say they are simply because they say they are. In that regard, the HBS and the classic transsexuals (such as I consider myself) are in agreement with mainstream. If you have not had surgery on your genitals, or don't intend to have it, then you are the same sex you were born as.... period![/quote] You are preaching to choir, but it is good to hear the hymn sung once again, with feeling. [quote]I no longer get involved in the wars. At 57 years old having been post op now for 23 years. I don't see that anything I say will ever make any difference to anyone. I am poo-pood by the transgenders and I am poo-pood by the HBS.[/quote] How, specifically, have you been poo-pood by the HBS? To what extent has that happened on this site? Our editorial team monitors all comments. I personally approve or disapprove any actions recommended to manage alleged violations of our standards. If people disagree, and do so in a civil manner, that is acceptable. Personal attacks are not acceptable. Please let me know if this has happened to you; if so, I will take corrective actions. But I am still concerned by your statement that you have been poo-pood by the HBS? Knowing Who, What, Where, When, and Why would be a good start. Also, as we know, there are different flavors of HBS, depending on the source. The hijackers in Spain are a case in point. [quote]Perhaps just ignoring the whole bloody issue unless it actually comes knocking on my door is the best way to go. To that end I could care less what the science is or whether early memory is a factor in HBS identification, whether the transgender and the gays get same sex marriage rights or just the right to present at work any old way they feel like on a particular day, to hell with all of it. I reckon as along as my old man see's me for the woman he wants to spend the rest of his life with, then none of this even matters and for sure it's not worth losing even one good friend over.[/quote] Leigh, you and Susan are welcome here. We place a high value on mutual understanding. Sharon - Sharon S. Gaughan

Ah, but we aren't sitting

Fri, 25 Apr 2008 10:08:17 +0100

We simply are not out in the streets in loud, garish demonstrations and public wailings that do more harm than good in gaining support from the general public. We continue to work politics as it has always been worked: laying out the foundations of the argument, gaining public support (from scientists and researchers), and quietly working the backrooms, educating the people who cast the votes and those who influence the votes, earning their understanding and support for those steps required to meet the needs of HBS men and women. - Lisa Thompson

Susan

Fri, 25 Apr 2008 10:01:22 +0100

I am not rude, I am direct, looking for answers to the question why you seem so angry at the world. I don't couch my questions in PC indirectness or the worry that someone may be offended by my directness. My questions and arguments have been termed coldly dispassionate. One of the answers I needed was if you wer post op; that you are eliminates a lot of possibililties, but doesn't answer the question, why are you so angry at the world? I live my life in the open. My surgeon was Toby Meltzer. My transition at work was slightly delayed when a plane ran into my office at the Pentagon a week before the general and I had scheduled the public announcement. We both discovered that SRS and my transition was not big concern in the overall scheme of things. Those of us who survived became a band of sisters and brothers who supported each other in our efforts, personal and otherwise. The bottom line was and is, the government and the U. S. Army supported my transition, so I keep trying to find out more about the discrimination people encounter, the reasons for it, and why they seem so angry at the world. - Lisa Thompson

In support of susan...

Fri, 25 Apr 2008 02:02:46 +0100

I know her personally. She in fact asked me to comment on this so I will state the case that I have said once before and got virtually shot down for (so what else is new?) Seems like no matter which side of the gender fence you are, if you say something in a blog that doesn't AGREE with what the author says, your gonna be dodging heat seaking missiles. I came across TS-SI about a year ago. My first impression was that finally some of us were ready to fight back and speak our minds, state our case, take the transgender nonsense head on and hopefully try to reach those in the media and the public eye with the truth of who we are and how we are not like the transgender hoards sweeping across the internet and into peoples television sets like Ghengis Kahn. The more I looked at the site over the past year the more I realise it's just another self appreciation society. There is no real difference other than the format suggests to the reader that the authors are privledged college grads with a holyier than thou attitude that sometimes comes off as being so upper middle class, better than thou, straight laced and republican valued, butter wouldn't melt in your mouth, snobbery. The science is impressive if not a bit one sided in its views and presented as fact that sort of leaves one with a bitter taste in their mouth when the science doesn't fit their view of themself. In fact I posted about this a couple of months ago, saying that I did not believe in the "Knowledge at birth" theory and was pretty much put down and dismissed. I noted on subsequent visits that several articles were written on the subject that I had breached about early memory of transsexualism being key to "true transsexualism". Call me vain but I just have think that those articles didn't simply appear out of the blue but were more targeted. Whatever.... the fact is that Susan is right. Your not going to win this war sitting in the trenches, patting each other on the back and taking the view that we are somehow not connected. I have been in the trenches with Susan, been banned from sites and even lost Susan as a close friend over this. I have been called everything from a troll to an elitist and everything in between. Fact is it doesn't matter any more. The genie is out of the bottle and nobody is ever going to put that lid back on other than the transgender and the LGBT themselves. Their constant whining and disrespect for what what mainstream see's as an attack on their morality will eventually force the transgender back in their hole. The Oprah blog on the Pregnant man gave us more insight into what society feels about the trangender debate than this site or any blog ever could. Time and time again, people wrote that they were sick to death of hearing about the issue, that they were sick of reading about sex changes and tired of the media hype that promoted it. Oprah was not applauded for the show and many felt that it was beneath her and more in the realm of Jerry Springer. I read over and over that mainstream does not consider someone to be the sex they say they are simply because they say they are. In that regard, the HBS and the classic transsexuals (such as I consider myself) are in agreement with mainstream. If you have not had surgery on your genitals, or don't intend to have it, then you are the same sex you were born as.... period! I no longer get involved in the wars. At 57 years old having been post op now for 23 years. I don't see that anything I say will ever make any difference to anyone. I am poo-pood by the transgenders and I am poo-pood by the HBS. Perhaps just ignoring the whole bloody issue unless it actually comes knocking on my door is the best way to go. To that end I could care less what the science is or whether early memory is a factor in HBS identification, whether the transgender and the gays get same sex marriage rights or just the right to present at work any old way they feel like on a particular day, to hell with all of it. I reckon as along as my old man see's me for the woman he wants to spend the rest of his life with, then none of this even matters and for sure it's not worth losing even one good friend over. Leigh Smith - Leigh Smith

Insult...

Thu, 24 Apr 2008 23:40:44 +0100

In September, I will have been post op five years, Lisa...Toby Meltzer...I transitioned first in 1969, and failed...then in 1981, and failed again, before finally transitioning 10 years ago...I am a professional engineer, IE, specifically...I make just under 200K/year and am at the top of my field. What about you? When did you transition? When did you have GRS. You have no basis to say that I think like someone who identifies as transgender and/or a crossdresser...none...other than to insult me. You are a rude person. - Susan

...

Thu, 24 Apr 2008 23:18:32 +0100

Susan, how did your post get deleted? I didn't see anything on this end. Can you still post your views? Anyeay, I expect to jump into this discussion tomorrow and share a few thing you might find interesting. Sharon - Sharon S. Gaughan

I was afraid this was going to happen............

Thu, 24 Apr 2008 23:07:56 +0100

i just deleted most of what i was going to post on this thread......... One person's fixed idea on how it "was" in the 70's is far from the experience we had on the "left coast" Some how i knew this discussion was going to take this turn. Oh well........ - Sue Robins

Why are you so angry Susan?

Thu, 24 Apr 2008 15:50:02 +0100

Who or what are you defending? It would seem you have spent so much time associating with transgenders and crossdressers that you have started to think like them? Do you talk like this to your elected representatives? How many years has it been since your SRS? - Lisa Thompson

...

Thu, 24 Apr 2008 11:49:37 +0100

One question please: WHAT IS THE SPECIFIC LEGAL AND MEDICAL DEFINITION OF TRANSGENDER? I know what transsexual clearly meant when I was transitioning: "One who has had surgery to change sex or someone who desires surgery." Non-op was just a 'trans' something then and still applies. Please do not give me the 'umbrella' answer since that would simply confirm it to be nothing at all related to those who never were diagnosed as being gender dysphoric in the first place. And further, please do not give transgender unwarranted legitimacy as if a non-biological social construct should be accepted as being a medical condition rather than its actual link to gender dysphoria, a psychological manifestation. If someone wants to solicit laws protecting crossdressers who make up the majority of the transgender populace so be it. But, please do not include me under that suggested special privilege standard for it would only suggest to others that I too might be other than the woman I know myself to be physically and mentally. :) Diane - Diane Kearny