I'm just wondering where those post-ops who consider themselves transgender fit in.
Or those transgendered who consider themsemsemlves men or women.
Or those who (for whatever reason) cannot have surgery.
Or those who have surgery but do not change social sex.
Or those who are intersexed but do not consider themselves transgendered, but do not have surgery...
Or those who have two transitions and revert to their original gender (or more...)
Or those living in countries where surgery in unavailable (or of poor quality, or without the financial ressources...).
Interestingly, transgendered means different things in different countries... generally depending on how closed or open minded the culture is...
...and for most people in the world "Harry Benjamin Syndrome" is an irrelevent term invented half a century ago by an Americal psychologist who serously believed that human sexual identity was defined by what is between one's legs (in which case, nobody would ever transition).

One day, people will realise that identity is SELF determined, and however many rules one makes to try to put people in boxes, some will always be outside the rules.
But all will be human beings.

Post ops who identify as transgenders are transgenders.. we've all met post op crossdressers.
Transgenders who wish to keep their birth genitals are not the opposite sex (most of the world gets this.)
Those who legitimately cannot bring body and mind into congruence, as opposed to using excuses and logical slight of hand, are classic transsexuals.
Those who have surgery but do not socially transition are what they are.......weird.
Leave the intersexed out of this.....they do not want your umbrella either.
Transition flip floppers are most likely AG....
A type of surgical transition has been available throughout history in the poorest of countries.....the hijra of India have the same problem with those who claim hijra identity without the hijra chop.
You can self identify as a rabbit too, that doesn't mean the rest of the world will buy it.

In short, you want to keep a penis......you are a man.

Emma, and you state,"and for most people in the world "Harry Benjamin Syndrome" is an irrelevent term".
I shall remind you that the term transgender was coined by a cross-dresser (Mr. Prince).
which makes that irrelevent as he didn`t like the term tranvestite which he was.

They have license to label others.
Take whatever term suits them and apply it to them.(the misused word transsexual)

They also feel that the majority of society must comply to their wishes.
They need to be reminded they are less then 1.5% of general population.
They are a minority within a minority.

Finally they could stand to learn from us and work to fit into society instead of making outrageous claims about genitals not being important, and fighting with everyone who challenges them on that issue.

I also have nothing against Transgender folk. I have found most of them to be reasonable. Perhaps it's time that the silent majority stud up and put the rabid "activists" in their place before those rabid activists bring about a much justified backlash.

Take care

Just to make things clear, I'm not pushing one way or another, or for any particular label. I'm just trying to understand people's logic here!

Cathryn,

What would someone you call a man and who considers themselves to be a woman really be?
Would their genitals make a difference? Or their chromosomes? Whould the fact that their genitals or chromosomes didn't fit into a binary pattern make a difference? Why? And which chromosomes (since sex determination goes beyond X & Y)?

Until the 20th century, were there no transsexual people in the western world? Did those who lived in an opposite gender role to that assigned at birth at that time all fall under the "transgender" umbrella? (using American definitions of course). Or what definition could be used? Should a person who lived and died as a woman a that time, but had a penis, be called a man?

Should transmen who prefer not to have bottom-surgery as it is not so effective as M2F GRS still be called women? What is the definition of "effective" surgery?

I agree that self identifying doesn't mean that everyone else has to buy it, but should society have priority over individual feeling in determining social sex? If so, transsexuals wouldn't exist...

Holly,
Does the transgender term have more (or less) validity than the H.B.S. term? Why? And to whom?

Sue,

When does anybody have the right to label others? When does anybody NOT have the right to take whatever term they wish and apply it to thelmselves? To take Cathryn's example, if someone identifies as a rabbit (or how about a tiger, as someone really has had multiple tiger surgery) who's right is it to stop their self identification?

Just a few open questions... I don't wish to push labels on people.

Emma, if I see someone as male........then pretty obviously to me they are male. See, this is how the world works, everyone genders everyone else. If the world refuses to see you as the gender you claim you can go among those who buy your self identity or you can be in the real world. Take your tiger id'ed person for example, put them among actual tigers, how long before they are Alpo?

Types of srs go back beyond recorded history....and the crossdresser v transsexual problem does as well. Genetics?........stay off a subject you know nothing about. I was born intersexed.

People who identify as a tiger, cat dog or whatever non-human role they wish to live as are asked to seek out therapy because their grasp of reality is considered to be tenuous at best. This is worlds apart from being borne with a female brain and experiencing the overriding need correct one's body. This is what being paleo-transsexual (or HBS) is all abut. Transgender people don't have that same drive.

By the way you made the remark that there were no TS in western society before the 20th century. How do you know this? This is a popular assumption transgenders make and is most likely dead wrong.
If you are going to approach this from a logical position you must remember that "the lack of evidence for existence is not evidence of non-existence" This view that there were no TS in western society before the 20th century is fundamentalist and is very self centered.

I have a question for you; Why is it that transgenders have the need to forcibly co-opt other groups into being part of their corner of the GLBT socio-political construct when it is clear the majority of transitioned women have no interest in belong to such a construct?

I have many other questions, they can wait for now.

Take Care;

Hi Sue,

Do people who wish to be themselves have to seek therapy? Why should they if they are sure of themselves - whatever they may be? I think people only seek therapy if they are lead to believe they need it... I suppose the bigger the challenge, the more liklely one will need help. If we make something (like being in the correct gender) into a challenge, the likelihood of requiring therapy increases.

The comment about 20th century transsexuals was based on the TERM. People castrated themselved (or were castrated) millenia ago, so removing the other bits is quite plausible (whether or not they survived). However they weren't called transsexuals. Harry Benjamin hadn't come up with any theories or boxes then...

I guess people group together with those they believe they have something to share or exchange with, since we are social animals. Whether they do or not is another matter. Thinks of the number of divorces and broken friendships. It is easy to make a mistake.

Cathryn,

I agree that if you see someone in a gender then it is likely that is how you consider them. But we well know that cerebral sex and social sex are not directly linked, so we can make a mistake (otherwise people would ever transition).

I would be glad to discuss genetics with you when relevant to this thread.

Take care

People have the right to be themselves within the rules set down by society. Like it or not; the majority makes the rules, and it is out of their enlightenment and compassion that we are allowed to bring our body into alignment with our mind.

Therapy is not always something someone is led to. Many enlightened individuals faced with issues they are ether too self biased or too complicated to solve on their own seek out therapy to aid in the resolution of the problem at hand. Many people who are at war with their brain sex vs their social conditioning seek out therapy as a means of learning the tools to deal with this conflict. This problem solving approach should be familiar to the TG readers of this site as well as those who have fought to try and make their life work without transition and corrective surgery. Before the completion of my transition I made use of a behavioral therapist in order to learn and develop tools to deal with clinical depression I had for over a decade. I wanted to solve the problem not cover it up with harmful SSRI drugs. When you look at the motivations for therapy relative to transition that is more to limit or release liability for the caregivers (surgeons, endos, etc...) and to screen the prospect for any multiple diagnosis. A growing practice in the US is to have prospective cosmetic surgery patients at least be interviewed by a therapist once to provide a basis that the patient doesn't suffer from BDD. (body dismorphic disorder)

I do find it laughable in a perverted sense of the word that the term transgender was coined by a cross dresser who wanted to separate himself and his ilk from those "sickos" who wanted to mutilate their bodies because they had an issue with their genitals. When it became apparent those "sickos" had a legitimate reason for wanting their body to be in harmony with their mind the TG crowd latched on to the term Transsexual like fragrance on a rose. There is simply nothing transgender about being paleo-transsexual. While the two can co-exist in the same person to include all who have transitioned as transgender is as logical as calling everyone who is christian Jewish just because someone was borne into a Jewish family and was nailed to a cross. I understand the need to want to belong, most of us who have transitioned understand that to a very intimate degree. Transgender folk have little in common with the transitioning or transitioned man or woman.

If transgender folk think they have soemthing in common with us then they should;

stop trying to force us to take on their group identity.

Stop the name calling, referring to us as elitists because we have a strong calling to change our bodies to conform to our brain sex.

Should be willing to accept the boundaries between the sexes.

Should accept the fact that all borne in this country are assigned sex based on physical appearance of the genitals and acknowledge that standard as the definition of sex.
Males have a penis.
Females have a vagina.

98.5% of society accepts that as the gold standard for physical sex.
Those who do not are bringing undue attention unto themselves.
Nobody likes undue attention.

Take Care

Let me see how this works.

I know for a fact that transsexual was considered a treatable condition long before transgender come off the rack as another masking identity. I still don't know what is a real transgender or what is simply a something other. Almost like a Christmas tree, - cannot separate the branches from the tinsel.

Transsexual now too has become a shadow term used to hide the real identity of many who themselves have become ashamed of identifying as transgender and its connection with a myriad of other rather 'off the wall' behaviors. I just wish some of those disgruntled TG's instead of attaching to us might have joined themselves with others more fitting to their usually fetishistic moods. How about the Emelda Marcos International Support Group? Seems better cousined to them rather than to link up with us, -a bunch of delusional kooks who mutilated our genitals and usually lived happily ever after. Duh!!

A HBS/transsexual is not a country club membership...it is a need to be whole and a resolve to make that happen. If one still has the reproductive organs they were born with then they should not be considered as having had corrective surgery but still no different than how they appeared the day they took their first breath. Otherwise we might just as well all join the 'Pregnant Male' side of the transgender babble.

I think the confusion over time has been the misapplication of gender to be synonymous with sex. Therein lies the mistaken terms of identity and the confusion of who and what might belong to one or the other. I take exception since I don't equate with either.I am simply a country girl who did not hide behind a disguise but welcomed her move into womanhood.

Almost every defender of the term transgender loves to make his point that 'trans' is inclusive whether it is specific or as an inclusion of all. Next transgender that says to me, "I am only but a step away from being a transsexual," I will in turn offer him a swift kick in the rear end and let us see how many steps it takes for him take the journey to completeness that many of us have taken without hiding behind an ambiguous label such as transgender.

Diane

Do people who wish to be themselves have to seek therapy? Why should they if they are sure of themselves - whatever they may be? I think people only seek therapy if they are lead to believe they need it... I suppose the bigger the challenge, the more liklely one will need help. If we make something (like being in the correct gender) into a challenge, the likelihood of requiring therapy increases

Well Emma, MOST of them seek therapy because there is a "standard" in place that requires not one but TWO letters of approval from Therapists (minimum of a Masters Degree for one and the other a PhD)to get SRS. The surgeons here and in other areas of the world adhere to that "standard". SO, to accomplish what is needed. HBS people pay the "gatekeepers" their fees, collect the letters and go have surgery. I had a surgeon in Thailand that required only one letter and as an "elderly" patient would have simply accepted proof that I had lived in my true gender for 6 months-- no letter--. I did see a two therapists; the first for help in how to inform my family and for a REQUIRED letter to start HRT; the second a year later to get my letter for SRS which I obtained after only 2 months with her. As she said, "There is NO doubt that you are Transsexual". Don't get me started on "transgenderists" and "3rd Sexers" who have no intention or desire for SRS but want the "F" or "M" on their documentation.

Pamela

Curious 4

Hi Pamela,

Every society has its own rules and regulations as to what requirements justify a particular identity. I think what is important to understand is that different societies have different cultures, and appreciations of gender identity - and also that no culture has the right to impose its ideas on others. For example, the WPATH standards are used in some parts of the world, where they are and put into practise in VERY diverse ways - whereas in other parts of the world WPATH and their SoC are irrelevant to gender determination. Likewise, the cultural notions of "man", "woman" (or whatever) are culturally related.

I certainly believe that nobody should use a blanket term which offends people, but that at the same time, all human beings have something in common. Sexual differences cover an infinite spectrum of physique, hormonal, genetics, socio-cultural and cerebral differences, so to make a clear cut between these will always offend somebody. I agree with Diane's comments that there is often confusion between social gender and genital sex. The terms "man" and "woman" are (primarily) social concepts, whereas "male" and "female" tend towards more biological concepts. For example, a "man" can have "female" genes, or a "woman" can have a prostate gland.

Some of the confusion certainly also comes from interpretation of words. My interpretation of the word "transsexual" would be a "person born with the physical characteristics of one sex who emotionally and psychologically feels that they belong to the opposite sex", whereas I would generally identify a post-op person without the term transsexual as the aim of surgery is surely to be able to move away from "trans" terms? Am I wrong? I would say a transgendered person is one who changes gender (social sex) but not genital sex. I am not aware of ANY way of volontarily changing cerebral sexual identity.

The confusion comes in that all post-op people were pre-op at some stage. What should they be called? Transgenders? Transsexuals? Some people are sure they will never have surgery, and go on to have it. Because someone (like you Pamela) has their surgery later in life, does it make their new identity less valid? I hope not. Some people spend a large part of their life in a social sex different to that assigned at birth, strive for surgery, but never have it (for diverse reasons, sometimes beyond their control). How to classify such people?

To revert to Sue's point, every society needs to decide how to structure itself (and where structure is necessary), but since sexual identification, be it social, genetic, genital or whatever, is not black and white, so long as there is a binary system in place, there will always be some exclusion. Just like there was with apartheid...

Every society needs to decide upon its approach to inclusiveness and exclusion. And why.

Emma: "I would generally identify a post-op person without the term transsexual as the aim of surgery is surely to be able to move away from "trans" terms? Am I wrong?"

You are very correct as far as I am concerned. And this suggests the main reason that I am offended by attempts to view me as under some "transgender umbrella." Let me explain.

I am no longer trans-anything. The "trans" in transsexual for me reflects more the suggestion of transition from one state to another rather than static existence across a sexual or gender spectrum.

Many of us worked very hard, and against enormous obstacles, to align our physical sex with our psychology. One cannot possibly conceive of all the work that this takes, or all the difficulties inherent in this process, unless one has completed it. Some of us die in the process, and others (INCLUDING ME) come very close.

So, once we expend all the effort and the money, and suffer all the pain, the physical risk, and the social cost in order to no longer be "trans"-anything, it is not the most pleasant experience for us to be relabled as "transgendered" for the political or psychological convenience of those that choose not to walk down our road.

This does NOT mean that none of us support decent treatment for legitimately transgendered individuals. Some of my posts here have supported such treatment and criticized contrary arguments made by other post-ops. But most "transgenders" cannot in every case be treated in exactly the same way as women, whether natal or post-op. For example, the value of convenient bathroom privileges for an occasionally cross-dressing heterosexual male on a wild night out must be weighed against the needs for privacy and safety for physical females.

OTOH, a transitioned and discrete SOC pre-op will normally pose little or no difficulty in women's facilities, and should be able to enjoy privileges closer to those of physical females.

These are generalizations, of course, and the same solution may not be appropriate even within categories. I am hopeful that these issues can be worked out somewhat in guidelines and practices based on the nature and needs of the person, balanced against the interest and safety of others. And often IMO, the balance should tip in favor of the pre-op or even the "transgender."

But, as you say, "nobody should use a blanket term which offends people." The term transgender not only offends many of us, but contradicts and demeans our central, vital, and difficult accomplishment in life. In this sense, it is a gross assault on our very sense of self.

Count me a supporter (for the most part), but please leave me out from under the umbrella.

When I was younger, transgender* meant a man living in a social gender role as a woman, just like Virginia Prince meant it.. Over the last ten years (don't think it's been longer than that) I've noticed the rise of a second meaning to 'transgender'. It was in the US at first, and then more widely, also used to mean anyone who is gender variant in any way conceivable, from closet CD to drag king to full-time transvestite to . . . well, to a transsexual person..

In particular, people who wave the transgender banner speak of the 'rainbow' and the 'continuum' under which all gender variant people are subsumed. I do not believe that this concept is valid. I personally reject the existence of a 'transgender continuum'.

I'd like to offer a source for these shifts, and a motive. The source is that language changes. When Harry Benjamin wrote The Transsexual Phenomenon almost fifty years ago, the precise term for doing rude things was 'sexual intercourse'. In that milieu, transsexualism was equally precise. It meant a person who needed to change the physical sex of the body to get well. And of course, there would be a social transition to present the correct exterior to match the innate sexual identity (US)/gender identity (UK). Change of social gender role, and Genital Reconstruction Surgery to make the pole into a hole. Add a hefty dollop of exogenous sex steroids to the mix, and you have the HJB SOC. I'm not ignoring F>M people, it's just that M>F women seem to come in more societal flak; Plus, it's only very recently that it's even been possible to surgically create a resonable penile prosthetic (and very, very expensive). But more on this later.

People's speech patterns changed over the years. Laziness? Maybe. But the upshot was'sexual intercourse' became 'sex', and that put the sex in transsexual. Now, the issue was not about getting well, but about doing weird rude things! So we got all sorts of heavy-duty societal flak. So there was the sex in transsexual causing all sort of problems, and the time was ripe for some persons to take up an old term, dust it off, and totally change the meaning.

Nonetheless, the medical evidence was firm, and real legal rights eventualy started to appear. This happened both here in the UK and in some parts of the US, as well as many other places around the world. Unfortunately for the 'transgendered', these rights were restricted to people who satisfied ICD-10 F64.0 which included the phrase "...surgery and hormonal treatment to make one's body as congruent as possible...". DSM-IV-TR 302.85 says much the same thing.

Bad news if you are a part- or full-time transvestite. No legal protections at all. It comes as no surprise to me that 'transgender' activists want to subsume transsexual people under their rainbow umbrella. Push and pull. The push to avoid flak over sex made the term'transgender' socially acceptable (read: politically correct). Then, when combined with the other piece of spin ('we are all in this together') created an atmosphere whereby 'transgender rights' could be seen as a legitimate aspiration. Myself, I don't [i[care what another person's gender expression is. To quote a phrase used elsewhere, that's just window-dressing. But I do care when someone tries to take the hard-won legal protections that have been stubbornly granted to transsexual people and subsume thewm for their own political ends. Profound gender dysphoria is Hell on Earth. If you have it, or have been cured of it, there is no possible way you would class yourself in the same category as crossdressers.

Incidentally, a rather strange thing happened in the UK. Everywhere else in the world, you have to have that surgeon's letter to be legally established in your correct sex. However, in the UK, all you need is a diagnosis of gender dysphoria, a documented history, and a statement of intent that you "intend to live permanently in the acquired gender", and that's it. There is no requirement for surgery. It's perhaps noteworthy that the UK's main lobby group, Press for Change, had quite a number of transmen in it who didn't feel that 'bottom surgery' is necessary. But maybe that's just me being cynical. I do feel, though, that this one is going to turn around and bite someone in the ass at some point in the future.

My personal take on this whole issue? Mens are mens, and women are womens. People suffering from profound gender dysphoria need it physically fixed, and will get it fixed as soon as funds or other constraints permit. No transsexual person likes it in no-man's land . . . or no-woman's land either.

Donna Patricia