Conundrum

The transgender community has a conumdrum. Like that's new or news to or about them? No, it's not, they're always the stereotuypical walking conumdrum with all their diverse members and issues. But that's another issue. This one is about visibility or really invisibility. I was reading the call by some in the community instead of a Day of Rememberance they hold for all the (trans)people who have been killed by violence against them they proposed a Day of Visibility.

They want all transpeople to become visible for a day. It's about being out and proud versus being stealth and invisible. The reality is, when I do a back of the envelope calculation on the numbers of post-transistion women, the number of public post-transistion women is about 5% of the total number of post-transistion women who aren't. It's the reality that they prefer being invisible and simply going about their lives as women.

And that's the conumdrum facing the transgender community. Post-transistion women aren't transgender, but simply legally recognized females and women, meaning those who have completed the medical process, under the Standards of Care, to be physical women (as much as possible) and the legal proceedures to be legally female (birth certificate and all necessary docments). The last thing they want is to become visible.

So, the conumdrum is that only those who are out and proud become visible. When faced with the potential problems and lack of rights and protections, why would a post-transistion woman become visible? Now the vast majority live with just a handful of friends, family and co-workers knowing their history. So, why step out of the shadow into the light for a day? It doesn't make sense except to those who are out and proud and want more to be like them.

I know or have met post-transistion women in the course of my life. We all have, it's just that we likely didn't know it, because they're not obvious. They're just like any other women you meet, only their past is different. They identify as women and are legally recognized as women, so why would they want to become visible as transgender?

The problem is that the transgender community is a diverse group, which many see ranging from the female impersonators thorugh transvestites, cross-dressers, transexuals, and in-transistion women and men. So why would any woman who has gone through their transistion to life silently and quietly as women want to be recognized as one of them?

It's not that they don't support transgender people, they do. It's just that they don't see reasons to go back in their life, something they left and went through a lot of pain and hurt to get through it. They don't see the need to be visible again, and face all the realities that entails in today's society. They're done and have gone on with their life.

I don't think anyone disagrees with the importance a Day of visibility would do for the transgender community. It would be important. But that said the transgender community hasn't recognized the damage it would do to those who are post-transistion women. The last next they need or want is to be portrayed again as less than women, not because the transgender community won't respect them, but society won't.

Just look at the news stories about transgender people and transsexuals. It's neither pretty or nice. It's why the media mistakenly uses the term transgender to describe post-transistion women, because in their minds and what they think is the readers' minds they want to distinguish genetic women from legally recognized women. It, to them, is about their view of morality of being "normal".

And that's why the vast majority of post-transistion women leave the community and never again identify as trans-anything once they've completed their transistion. They're said, done and gone. And becoming visible again? That's not who they are. They're simply women, and deserve the same in return, only visible as women, nothing more.

And that's the conumdrum the transgender community has, but more importantly it's also the totally mistaken perception they give society about all post-transistion women. So why would these women want to come back to the community and become visible. Some of them didn't have a choice. Their life and work circumstances required being out or they were outed in the press.

And if you listen to them, they don't deny the transgender label, they simply ignore it or use it to describe who they were than who they are. It's about the past. They accept the label from the media, and many do an outstanding job presenting the whole positive side of being formerly transgender men or women. That's the visibily which helps.

And no one doubts if all post-transistion women stood up in America, they would amaze everyone as to the diversity and postive role models they have been as women. But we know that visibility would be lost on the media because it's not a story. The media wants the label as the story, not the people. And that's why they're invisible and will likely remain so.

Being Hypocritical

When someone owns and runs a member forum on their Website, the hardest thing to practice is fairness. The easiest thing is being hypocritical. In two ways. First, to members, treating members differently, and second, about yourself, being hypocritical about your policies and decisions.

When you run the forum, you establish the basic rules and policies. That's normal and expected. And those rules and policies evolve, you change and adapt them over time as events, circumstances and situations arise. That's also normal and expected. But what isn't is when you're hypocritical with those very rules and policies.

I wrote how my account was deleted when I challenged the application of a rule on one forum. Notice I didn't challenge the rule but the application of the rule by the owner. She decided that no one challenges her on the rules and policies. But then when I pointed out that quite a few members had challenged those very rules and policies, I was bannished.

It's the old adage, kill the messenger and the problem disappears. A very strong, "Not!" And that's because you, the owner, are the problem, being hypocritical with yourself. You can't be fickle with members, decide who's ok to allow to be rude or insulting and who gets booted for the least infraction of you choosing.

In my case I challenged her decision on a rule when it clearly wasn't being enforced fairly and evenly. The day before she booted someone for something I would simply send an advisory e-mail to "please don't do that.", but she deleted the person's account. And sure as the next day I made a similar comment, I was gone too.

Yet, in an e-mail exchange I pointed out she own contradictions in her words and actions, she simply stood pat saying that's her right. It is since it's her forum, but it's not when it obviously so blatantly hypocritical.

What's funny is that she has made changes to the moderators on the forum, she changed those who were posting news and blog entries saying the same thing we did. They no longer post those entries. But they still allows members to make statements which contradict her rules and policies. Yet they're still there.

And my point besides just ranting about a person?

No much except it's just another example of people being people. But I've noticed in the transgender community this attitude and perspective is often pervasive. In part it has to do with the nature of the community as a whole and the many divergent membership and members. It's worse than the Democratic party membership and members.

And that's saying a lot. The reason is that the only thing holding the transcommunity together is everyone's identity as transgender, everything else is different, including the flavor, expression, behavior of their identity. Kinda' like soup with a little of every spice in the world mixed into it. It just doesn't work and always ends up tasting bad.

It's doesn't work because beyond the umbrella term, which many don't agree with anyway and don't identify as, there isn't any commonality except wanting to be and expressing themselves as victims. Never mind the source or cause, they always consider themselves victims. And as such often think the rules of fairness don't apply.

And that's where they're wrong. It's actually the opposite. But they're sometimes no different in feeling being the victims a people who become some flavor of terrorists, from vocal advocates to religious extremists. They become defiant about their identity, with the world and especially with and within the community. The transcommunity, as many have said, is its own worst enemy.

But it doesn't change the responsibility to be fair about yourself and with other people. As many have also said, it's more reason to be vigilent about fairness, both yourself and everyone else. But I rarely find that in the transcommunity. I'm not talking nice here, almost everyone is nice. I'm talking after the initial nice is worn off and the real people begin to show.

And that's when fairness gets lost because they go back to their own self-identity and commonality with that. Everything else and everyone else becomes someone else outside their world, and sometime their own perspective, and fairness is usually the first victim. And being hypocritical becomes the only common expression.

And, as I learned, just don't be the one to point that out to them, especially about themselves. I know this is a one-sided view. The transcommunity can be and often is very fair and all the rest of the "good" adjectives in the dictionary. They often are a great group of people, as I have seen photographing events. And I, all too often, only see the negative side of things, whether it's work, life, issues, circumstances, situations, event, whatever.

It's part of my nature and personality, having lifelong Dysthymia. But this also allows and affords me the ability to focus on the negative side when everyone else is playing happy. And after being bannished I had two choices, apologize or walk away. Well, I didn't to the former, and only did the latter after making her aware of her hypocrisy.

And I've vented on my blog, not about being the victim, here, but about the hypocrisy. I know I'm not the good person here. No one really is, but I opened my mouth, as I often have in my life, to point out a contradiction, and got verbally pummelled and then banished. And doing so I've discovered how self-centered and self-absorbed many transpeople are, living in their world and the world.

And when you prick their identity and world, expressed as rules and policies, they get defensive and then get offensive, the latter disgused as reality but really is hypocrisy. And in the end I haven't minded being dismissed from that forum. The ownder didn't do anything I haven't seen before and haven't experienced first hand. I'll just move on to leave her in her own little world in the greater world. And that is my choice.

The lesson was learned, again.

Outside the box

I've always lived outside the box, any box anyone wants to put me in. I've never fit inside any box anyway, so standing outside a room full of identity boxes is ok with me. I'm not confined to any one and free to wander and wonder, and walk up to any box, look over the edge and see what's inside. And sometimes see how it fits inside.

But then I usually either jump out or get kicked out (see post about being deleted). That's also ok with me. I don't strive in life to be a socially accepted person by any one group's view of members or people. I do strive for a common sense perspective and approach to almost anything.

Note, almost. Everyone has personal issues they're passionate about. I have quite a few issues I'm passionate about, but I've also found that often my perspective is either extreme or out of the normal (box) of the group. And expressing my view also often gets me kicked out of the group, which is what I don't understand.

Why groups discriminate against members seems illogical, despite someone's extreme view with the issues. These people often bring a different thinking and set of ideas, where most of the groups becomes so inbred with their thinking. And it always surprises me when the groups begin some self-analysis after a major setback or failure. What don't they understand the old adage about repeating the same experiment expecting a different result.

I've seen this in the dwindling newspaper business, trying to reinvent itself like all the other failing newspapers, the American auto industry, trying to sell new cars when they haven't improved their reputation, conservative-religious groups, every answer is in the Bible, and so on.

Even the minority groups who feel burdened as victims and have been discriminated against follow their traditional perspective, it's their comfort zone and changing would be seen as heresy, often condeming or expelling members who challenge the status quo, let alone propose new ideas or directions. i've been there myself a few times in my life. Those times had their price and cost.

And during those times I had to decide which was more important, following my own values and beliefs or sacrificing them for being a "team player." I almost always choose the former, and only the latter when the issue was worth negotiating and compromising, even if it hurt a little. The key is your core values and beliefs.

But I'm not talking dogma for those values and beliefs, as is often found in religions. I'm talking basic human values and being a good human being with yourself and others, being honest, trustworthy, respectful, and the rest of the best of being human. That's unverisal and doesn't take anything outside of yourself.

I've wandered a bit, and wondered a bit more, as I often do, just following the stream of consciousness I am. And this post is like a box, I'm both inside writing and outside peeking. And always really outside the box, even looking at myself.

Semantics

I was reading about the transgender community. Some of my friends are or were, meaning self-identify as, transgender. And you can read the many Websites with all the terminology and definitions and get overloaded who's all under the transgender umbrella or in the transgender community, often shorten to transcommunity.

Anyway, I got into an e-mail exchange with the owner of a forum for transpeople. And she described all the flavors or classes of transpeople, but the ones that interested me were as follows:

"Pre-ops: Transsexuals who desire to to make their body as congruent as possible with their preferred sex, but have not yet had the surgical procedures for whatever reason.

Post-Ops: Transsexuals who have had surgical procedures to make their body as congruent as possible with their preferred sex. For MTF transsexuals this is generally considered to be after Genital surgery (GRS, orchiectomy, and/or penectomy), for FTM transsexuals it is generally considered to be after top surgery."

Except Non-op is missing and Post-Op is incomplete.

A Non-op is someone who elects not to go through genital surgery and lives with the birth genitalia but as a member of the opposite gender, usually a male-to-female since female-to-males are not required to have the surgery for their legal documents (it's medically not recommended and very expensive). Many lesbians who identify as f2m's do everything else.

But some m2f transwomen never get GRS but live as women the rest of their life. This doesn't allow them to get their legal documents, only a Driver's LIcense in some states - not all are consistent with standards, changed to reflect their female (living) gender. Some illegally get their documents changed, but this has risk of discovery later in life and possible civil and/or criminal actions.

After all who wants to know a woman has male genitallia? Yeah, the thing most men freak over, some get angry with, and some love them (that "she-male" thing). Personally I don't understand any of these views. But I do expect that a woman was either born with or has surgery to create a vagina. It's part of a woman's experience in and with life. I haven't met any woman who trade their vagina for a penis and testicles, and everything else it entails.

That's the view of our binary society. And like it or not, it's the reality here.

So why a transwoman pronounces here womanhood without a vagina is beyond me. And even is she illegally obtained her documents saying she's female - remember issuing legal documents under less than legal or fraudulant circumstance doesn't make the documents legal, they're invalid on their face, it's just a matter of time when she'll be required to present the documents supporting her status, take a physical or provide the name of her OB/GYN to certify her status. In short, she'll eventually find justice.

Anyway, there is a last group, Post-transistion.

These are Post-ops (above) who have had their documents legally updated and are fully recognized as female. This starts the the first necessary one, the birth certificate, allowable in every state save two (OH and TN), and then proceeds with the other local, state and federal records and any employment and credit records, and so on down the line. Rarely do all records get changed because they're either too long ago or a changed is not allowed, eg. DOD records.

This is important because you may be physically female with GRS (often called Sex Reassignment Surgery or SRS), but you're not legally female. SRS is the final medical step but not the final step you a (trans)woman's life, just the beginning of the end of her transistion. The rest is the mechanics of the paperwork.

This is also important because it then gives the woman the right to say she's not transgender anymore, but legally female. This is a small semantic difference but a significant one between the transcommunity and the individual. She is now free and independent of the term and community, so the community often likes to avoid that step by stopping at Post-op.

It's also why at least 80%, some estimates 90-95%, of post-transistion women leave the transcommunity, never to be recognized with it again. It's not their present or future life, only their history and past. And the community doesn't like or appreciate these women doing this.

The remaining ones were either publically outed for some circumstance or situation, outed themselves or didn't really have a choice to due their life, work or career. They may dislike the term and label, but it's the one the media sticks on them. It's the media's way of describing them for the story, to isolate and identify them as "not one of us but a transgender person."

It's unfair and not right. The media doesn't use adjectives with other people in the same way, only to highlight their difference between "normal" people and "transgender" people." But it's what the transcommunity loves, post-transistion women claimed and under the umbrella, which they can then call all transgender.

That's neither fair or right either. Post-transistion people are simply male or female, men or women, take your pick, but they're not transgender in any respect anymore. That's the right they earned and deserve when they finished their transistion. We owe them that, nothing less and nothing else.

Tavern conversations

I'm basically a tavern conversationalist. I like the spirit and openness of a good Friday night conversation at a tavern with rounds of good microbews, stout ale for me thanks, and great food. I like the hearty openness, honesty and freedom of these conversations. And the humor and tolerance for diversity and divergent views.

I like people who are passionate about their views, like wandering ideas, and listen well to understand and debate the subjects beyond saying, "I think..." I like people who take their issues seriously but don't take themselves seriously. I certainly don't. I often hold extreme view on issues, but I rarely speak them. I prefer offering views that open the door to dialog and debate.

Only when pressured or I want to say what I truly feel will I express my deeply held and strongly felt views on an issue. But even then it's just my view of the world, from my experience, knowledge and understanding. Nothing more, but certainly not less than anyone else's view. It's just mine.

And even as I age, I still feel the same way. The only people I avoid anymore are those who are clearly so intransigent in the views they won't change, they won't even listen. And they will keep twisting the topic or issue to their view or to denigrate the opposing view, or worse other people. At that point, when I used to try to talk to them, now I simply shut up and often walk away.

They won't change. But that's also issue dependent. I've known some very interesting, and staunchly opininated, people in my life, and I like being in their company for conversations, because they see the humor in life, and even their own life and view. They're often a hoot to be around and talk with. They laugh at themselves more than they laugh as life.

And I can kid them about life and their views. That's my style. Always with a smile and a humorous idea or perspective on things. The little kid in me never left and sometimes likes to make people smile. It's all in the value we have as people with each other. If we didn't respect each other and learned to appreciate and respect our differences and different views. what else would there be in the world?

I know somtimes friendship is best, and why maybe diplomacy is often better done, on a Friday night at the local pub over good beer and food.

Being Deleted

You said something about interpersonal communications?
Like many people, I'm a member of many Internet commuities and forums. Many are the predecessors to Websites like Facebook and Twitter where you can communicate with many people of similar lives or with similar interests. They were a godsend to many who felt isolated or for many who didn't have access to larger avenues for sharing. And as the Internet grew the number of forums for many topics have increased.

I belong to about half a dozen or so, some I visit daily, some routinely during the week, and some just a few times per month. It's understood that the owner has the right to set the rules and the owner and moderators have the right to set the tone. You're the visitor or guest, you behave for face eviction. That's obvious, but what's less obvious is the subtle bias and discrimination that creeps into them.

Recently on one the topic turned to inclusion or exclusion, both within the community and to the community by society at large. The community is a pretty big umbrella group covering a vast range of human identity, expression, and behavoir. And yes, it's been a group which has been discriminated against for decades and even today (and no it's not the lgb community). Yet, while they profess to be inclusive for its members, it actually is quite exclusive, and worse, discriminating against its own members.

So, why do owners of forum profess inclusion but then practice exlcusion when the topic wanders into areas they're uncomfortable or with views expressed by members they disagree? I don't know, but recently some of my posts were removed and then my account was removed. Without giving notice and reasons. And then the owner changed the rules to ban talk on the topic and views expressed by quite a few members.

The problem with the decision, which they're right to do because they own the forum, is that they and the moderators routinely post news stories and editiorials about the same topic and people write posts expressing the same view they banned and then deleted members. And the owners and moderators routinely criticize the opposing view.

It was a total suprise to me, as I have never criticized individuals. From my years in senior management I have always practiced focusing on the subject of the discussion and the ideas, views, opinions, issues, etc. under discussion. Never have I criticized an individual, only what they said. And never in the spirit of hate, because I like these conversations, and am always smiling for one good reason.

As the saying goes, I take my work and/or issues seriously but I never take myself seriously. I know my view or opinion is just one of many, Not better or worse, just different. Not more or less important, all are equal. While some people have more experience, knowledge or understanding, and can express more intelligent views and opinions, it still doesn't lessen the views and opinions of others.

And that is what floored me seeing my "username does not exist" when I tried to log in today. I sent the owner an e-mail (you can still read the forum except the member-only topics) explaining my position and her failure to understand. I doubt anything will change. For one reason.

She professes that everyone with this identity should be in the community whether or not they want to, whether or not they care to, and whether or not they changed and moved on with their lives. She believes once in your always in. That's her tragedy of understanding and compassion. And her bias to both discriminate against those who disagree with her and to remove anyone who expresses it.

So, it's one forum now I read for the same reasons I did before, I just can't post anymore. And my view is that I would recommend this forum for the many excellent and terrific members, they're great at providing the information and support you want and need. I won't, however, recommend anyone become members because the owner discriminates against members of her own community, just over words.

So to her, as much as I would like to tell her, "GFY.", I won't. You see I don't criticize people, just their decisions, actions and views, and always with a smile out of enjoyment for conversation. And yes, I'd like to be the sheepdog holding the wolf (her).

Definitions

The word transpersonal, according to the Oxford American Dictionary, means, "of, denoting, or dealing with states or areas of consciousness beyond the limits of personal identity." What exactly this means, personally (ok, bad pun), I really don't have a clue. I just like the word and description, except to me the word means, "the consciousness about crossing divides of human thinking, feeling, expressions and behaviors."

It's not necessary to me what the literal definition means according to the various groups or organizations which use the term. I may use their definitions and usage, but apply it to the here and now in the context of the human experience, from my favorite tavern absorbing all the experiences of the senses sitting at a table against the window, to my photography, especially where I'm hiking in Mt. Rainier NP, just putting one foot, or really hiking boot, in front of another looking, and to my life, just going about the world in the things I do.

It's about life and the moment, and what, where, when, how and why it all fits into our existence. I'm not sure where it goes, or even if it leads anywhere. Sometimes it's just a wandering and wondering about what's around me, the like adage, "Stand in your space and know you are there.", but more so about the interactions, interconnections and interrelationships between the person, me, the world, where I'm at, the universe, and the unknown, whether a belief, faith, or in my case Taoism.

Well, that's it for an introduction, which is about as clear as a glacier fed stream flowing of Mt. Rainier, kinda' a chunky, milk chocolate drink of everything past, present and future. But then that's the beauty of it. It's open to everything and anything which my senses experience, my mind thinks, my heart feels, my soul experiences, and my spirit absorbs.

To stand and be. Nothing and everything.

Merging and going forward

I decided to move all the gender related posta from my main blog to its own blog (here) and merged all those past essays with the new essays I'll write about the various and different aspects of gender, from personal experience to opinion and onward to ideas. As for the opinion ones, they're just my opinon.

I've always been someone who doesn't fit into nor wants to fit into any box people want to label me. And I've also always been an alone person, never a group or crowd person. That doesn't mean I'm anti-social, just the opposite. I can be quite social, but I'm just one of those who prefer socializing with smaller groups, and really only a few people. Both of those facets of me makes me more of an outside observer of anything.

I like to just peer into things, get the basic ideas, logic and reasoning and some experience, but then go my own way. And the essays here, past and future ones, will be in that vein, kinda' just reporting what I see and think. Not much else except throw in some experience, knowledge and understanding when and where necessary or helpful, and you get the picture.

Anway, there they are now in one place. I hope you enjoy them.