I was reading an essay on The Bilerico Project by Patricia Warren entitled, "Olympics and the Coming Gender Inquistion". And the comments seemed to agree with her. I started to post my commnet but decided to post it here instead, mostly because I'm tired of being verbally pummelled when I disagree with the transcommunity. So here would be my response to here essay.
I'm curious, what will the lbgt, and especially the trans, commnity would say if, and maybe when, it is confirmed that Caster was born male and is physically male, with no female reproductive system and probably with some form of androgen insensitivity? Will you still argue Caster should still be allowed to compete as a female athlete?
Simply believing your a girl/woman is enough? And what about other similar male-born athletes who decide they're really women and want to compete too? And what if a female athele decides to transistion to being a man, taking testosterone, but still wants to compete as a female, her birth sex? Where is the line between male and female athletes? Isn't that what they established the standards for transatheletes in some sports (eg. golf, mountain biking)?
You criticize the IOC and IAAF, which deserves some for their ineptness with the case of Caster Semenya, but if they have to develop some rules for all female athletes, where do you suggest they draw the line, set the standards and require treatment for variations?
I think folks in the community need to take a step back and look at the large picture. It's not about one athlete who has a special condition, it's about fairness for all the athletes. Let's also not forget Caster chose to compete, she chose to step in to the sports arena and spotlight, and despite the way she's been treated by the IAAF, she doesn't necessarily have the right to cry foul when questions were raised. Like any athlete under investigation, she has the responsibility to prove her case, which she didn't even try.
I don't like arguing, even in the debate style, with diehard activists. They're deaf and blind to opposing views and often change the argument from the subject to the greater topic or the individual, as Andrea James did in her essay, "Caster Semenya and the Apartheid of Sex." She wandered around the question, and title of the essay, but never addressed it.
The end. This is what the transcommunity has argued with this case, either her right to be and compete, or about non-typical sex conditions in people, trying to fit Caster's into the larger scheme which needs protection from discrimination. But she and the others don't address the discrimination to the other female athletes.
And when someone does take them to task on this issue, they simply verbally pummel the person. And they wonder why many people, even current and former transgender people, don't like them? Talk about clueless.
Monday, January 25, 2010
Thursday, January 21, 2010
Tough audience
Why is the transcommunity so obstinate, and often arrogant, when people disagree with them, and worse, dissent from their opinion? It's like the whole community has this attitude you have to agree with everything and everyone about al transpeople and transgender issues, or you're not one of them, and maybe not a real transgender person. It baffles me.
I got kicked off of one forum for disagreeing with the owner/moderators in a discussion, especially asking why someone else was booted off the forum for her views. They then imposed a rule that I found unacceptable, but only wanted to ask about it, and the next thing I realized I was gone from the member roles, as was another person before me (and I agreed with her).
They are really touchy people. But they don't seem to see the differcence between a simple opposing opinion and an opponent. They lump all opposing views into opponents forgetting to separate the discussion from the person. Ok, why the post here?
Well, someone posted the lasted news about Caster Semenya and I responded saying I thought she shouldn't have competed with the women because she didn't fit the definition under the rules of being a woman. The problem is that the rules aren't very clear and the IOC and IAAF decides on individual cases. And Caster's sex/gender fell between the cracks in the words, except Caster didn't.
The issue is that even if Caster is physically an underdeveloped boy (possibly a vagina but no female reproductive system) but raised female, should she be allowed to compete with female athletes. The transcommunity shouts yes and I said no. I agreed with the female athletes who filed the complaint which started the whole mess where everyone screwed up, including Caster.
And now it's an ugly mess. But the transcommunity argues that being raised female was enough to make her female and qualified to compete. And everyone thinks her privacy has been violated. But I disagreed arguing she wanted to compete, and she chose to step into the arena and spolight to compete. And so, she can't cry foul when questions are raised.
But my point here is the sensitivity of the transcommunity and the many members. It's why many don't get involved and the majority of post-transistion women don't identify as trans, walk away from the community if they ever were a part, and don't for the most part, even care. They've living as women, or men.
And I managed to put myself in their proverbial doghouse, like I'm supposed to apologize for my opinion? Sorry, that's not going to happen, unless the obvious where I'm proven wrong or stupid, like that hasn't happened before. But hey, I'm human. But it's only part and parcel with many issues in the transcommunity.
For example, those who express the view of the binary gender structure as it exists in society are criticized for not challenging it. Why? Many local and state government have laws protections lgbt people, but they still enforce a sex/gender binary. The experts have long exposed the binary sex/gender structure as false, but it hasn't changed it. And who would want to be in a third sex/gender umbrella type anyway?
Like the transcommunity thinks that's better? Or more so, challenge the sex/gender standards by being out and different. usually done by the young genderqueer as they're called now, and my apologies if that's not what you like, but it's what's you're called. Like they expect everyone out and proud. For what? You don't gain anything and you likely will lose a lot.
What don't they understand? They bitch about thinking people should be out and proud then speak out about it when those same people are outed. This is shown in the case of Chinese model Alicia Liu. But who cares if she's transistioned, and why doesn't it matter she never said anything so far? Because of the publicity she's getting now?
And the list goes on, but it's not universal. I've noticed occasionally longtime members have criticized people in the community and expressed opposition to majority opinions, many not that different than mine, and they're allowed to speak with freedom and often with respect. But others, like myself, get verbally pummelled. Except not into submission or agreement, just verbally black and blue.
So why stay on the fringes of the transcommunity? Well, for friends and others in the community, because it is a human rights issue, and I like to challenge norms, whether it's society's or the transcommunity. I think they need fringe people to remind them their world isn't the whole world, and their reality isn't the reality of the rest of the world.
Many in the community know that and express that, but more often they're more diplomatic or eloquent where the criticism isn't obvious. The dance of words, except I'm more like Harrison Ford's character said in his movie "Clear and Present Danger" when he replied, "I don't dance." I didn't with my life and career, so why stop now?
I got kicked off of one forum for disagreeing with the owner/moderators in a discussion, especially asking why someone else was booted off the forum for her views. They then imposed a rule that I found unacceptable, but only wanted to ask about it, and the next thing I realized I was gone from the member roles, as was another person before me (and I agreed with her).
They are really touchy people. But they don't seem to see the differcence between a simple opposing opinion and an opponent. They lump all opposing views into opponents forgetting to separate the discussion from the person. Ok, why the post here?
Well, someone posted the lasted news about Caster Semenya and I responded saying I thought she shouldn't have competed with the women because she didn't fit the definition under the rules of being a woman. The problem is that the rules aren't very clear and the IOC and IAAF decides on individual cases. And Caster's sex/gender fell between the cracks in the words, except Caster didn't.
The issue is that even if Caster is physically an underdeveloped boy (possibly a vagina but no female reproductive system) but raised female, should she be allowed to compete with female athletes. The transcommunity shouts yes and I said no. I agreed with the female athletes who filed the complaint which started the whole mess where everyone screwed up, including Caster.
And now it's an ugly mess. But the transcommunity argues that being raised female was enough to make her female and qualified to compete. And everyone thinks her privacy has been violated. But I disagreed arguing she wanted to compete, and she chose to step into the arena and spolight to compete. And so, she can't cry foul when questions are raised.
But my point here is the sensitivity of the transcommunity and the many members. It's why many don't get involved and the majority of post-transistion women don't identify as trans, walk away from the community if they ever were a part, and don't for the most part, even care. They've living as women, or men.
And I managed to put myself in their proverbial doghouse, like I'm supposed to apologize for my opinion? Sorry, that's not going to happen, unless the obvious where I'm proven wrong or stupid, like that hasn't happened before. But hey, I'm human. But it's only part and parcel with many issues in the transcommunity.
For example, those who express the view of the binary gender structure as it exists in society are criticized for not challenging it. Why? Many local and state government have laws protections lgbt people, but they still enforce a sex/gender binary. The experts have long exposed the binary sex/gender structure as false, but it hasn't changed it. And who would want to be in a third sex/gender umbrella type anyway?
Like the transcommunity thinks that's better? Or more so, challenge the sex/gender standards by being out and different. usually done by the young genderqueer as they're called now, and my apologies if that's not what you like, but it's what's you're called. Like they expect everyone out and proud. For what? You don't gain anything and you likely will lose a lot.
What don't they understand? They bitch about thinking people should be out and proud then speak out about it when those same people are outed. This is shown in the case of Chinese model Alicia Liu. But who cares if she's transistioned, and why doesn't it matter she never said anything so far? Because of the publicity she's getting now?
And the list goes on, but it's not universal. I've noticed occasionally longtime members have criticized people in the community and expressed opposition to majority opinions, many not that different than mine, and they're allowed to speak with freedom and often with respect. But others, like myself, get verbally pummelled. Except not into submission or agreement, just verbally black and blue.
So why stay on the fringes of the transcommunity? Well, for friends and others in the community, because it is a human rights issue, and I like to challenge norms, whether it's society's or the transcommunity. I think they need fringe people to remind them their world isn't the whole world, and their reality isn't the reality of the rest of the world.
Many in the community know that and express that, but more often they're more diplomatic or eloquent where the criticism isn't obvious. The dance of words, except I'm more like Harrison Ford's character said in his movie "Clear and Present Danger" when he replied, "I don't dance." I didn't with my life and career, so why stop now?
Sunday, January 17, 2010
Assumptions
The one problem people who transistion from one gender to the other have when talking with people, usually because the other person(s) are curious, mystified, angry, and so on through the gamut of emotions known in reactions to transpeople, isn't their knowledge and experience, although some aren't fully aware let alone knowledgeable about being transgender, but the assumptions of the other person(s).
It's why there are so many misperceptions about transpeople, many of which are perpetuated by opponents with blatant lies and misinformation (and why just because it came from a "Dr", usually of religion or theology, and sometimes from a mail-order "university", it must be right escapes me). But everyone has a view of transpeople which they put on anyone they see as transgender or occasionally meet.
It's why transpeople can't get their individual story through to most people, they don't want to listen except to fit the story into their assumptions about transpeople. In most cases, they've already lost the person(s) to understand the truth about transpeople and the reality of their story. And they lost the person(s) to accepting them, unless those people have experience and a postitive view of transgender people.
And try as they have, the transcommunity hasn't overcome these assumptions because in many cases they actually perpetuate those assumptions. It's because many in the transcommunity use the umbrella explanation of transgender people, from drag queens to post-transistion people, without qualifying the subgroups or the individuals. And especially the differences, in ways people see and understand.
The transcommunity loves the umbrella idea while sacrificing the individuals. And it's the individuals who suffer the most. The transcommunity argues against transphobia but can't see how they perpetuate it. When people look at post-transistion women but think of gay drag queens, or heterosexual cross-dresser, it's no wonder they can't accept them as women. And it's no wonder those women can't seem to get accepted.
And the media, sometimes with the transcommunity's help or involvement, perpetuates this problem with their rhetoric and news about "transgender" women, trying to show them as normal women, except any normal woman wouldn't do what the media has transwomen do for the story, but then reinforcing the idea they're not real women, but transgender women.
They isolate them from the rest and the transcommunity not only encourages it but emphasizes it themselves, identifying them as transgender, forgetting to add the explanation where under the umbrella they are, leaving it to the assumption of the people reading, watching or listening to the story. They actually make it worse. Really?
Yes. Look at the press releases about Amanda Simpson, the second political appointee to the government (not one of the firsts in government, just for appointees). It was the transgender community who identified her as transgender, even though she had transistion 10 years earlier. She has a transgender past or history, but she isn't currently transgender, but simply female and a woman.
But the transcommunity did the damage, feeding the opponents to call her every transphonic and degrading description in the book about transgender people. Leaving it to their assumptions than making sure the properly identified Ms. Simpson. And then they argued against those people, except the damage was done to all post-transistion women. They created the fire and were angry when people added more wood to it?
And the transcommunity wonders why the vast majority of post-transistion women, and many in-transistion, don't come out or become public, but simply live quietly as women? Would you help someone who stabs you in the back? Would you want to keep expaining why all the assumptions about transgender women aren't true because the transcommunity won't fight for you?
Anyway, my point is simply that if you meet a transperson, wherever they are in the transistion, don't assume anything unless they tell you, and then remember it only applies to them, and not other transpeople. Every transperson's story and view is different, and many don't fit under the transgender umbrella or in people's assumptions.
So ask with a clear open mind and heart as you would anyone else. You might just meet a really cool person, and maybe a new friend.
It's why there are so many misperceptions about transpeople, many of which are perpetuated by opponents with blatant lies and misinformation (and why just because it came from a "Dr", usually of religion or theology, and sometimes from a mail-order "university", it must be right escapes me). But everyone has a view of transpeople which they put on anyone they see as transgender or occasionally meet.
It's why transpeople can't get their individual story through to most people, they don't want to listen except to fit the story into their assumptions about transpeople. In most cases, they've already lost the person(s) to understand the truth about transpeople and the reality of their story. And they lost the person(s) to accepting them, unless those people have experience and a postitive view of transgender people.
And try as they have, the transcommunity hasn't overcome these assumptions because in many cases they actually perpetuate those assumptions. It's because many in the transcommunity use the umbrella explanation of transgender people, from drag queens to post-transistion people, without qualifying the subgroups or the individuals. And especially the differences, in ways people see and understand.
The transcommunity loves the umbrella idea while sacrificing the individuals. And it's the individuals who suffer the most. The transcommunity argues against transphobia but can't see how they perpetuate it. When people look at post-transistion women but think of gay drag queens, or heterosexual cross-dresser, it's no wonder they can't accept them as women. And it's no wonder those women can't seem to get accepted.
And the media, sometimes with the transcommunity's help or involvement, perpetuates this problem with their rhetoric and news about "transgender" women, trying to show them as normal women, except any normal woman wouldn't do what the media has transwomen do for the story, but then reinforcing the idea they're not real women, but transgender women.
They isolate them from the rest and the transcommunity not only encourages it but emphasizes it themselves, identifying them as transgender, forgetting to add the explanation where under the umbrella they are, leaving it to the assumption of the people reading, watching or listening to the story. They actually make it worse. Really?
Yes. Look at the press releases about Amanda Simpson, the second political appointee to the government (not one of the firsts in government, just for appointees). It was the transgender community who identified her as transgender, even though she had transistion 10 years earlier. She has a transgender past or history, but she isn't currently transgender, but simply female and a woman.
But the transcommunity did the damage, feeding the opponents to call her every transphonic and degrading description in the book about transgender people. Leaving it to their assumptions than making sure the properly identified Ms. Simpson. And then they argued against those people, except the damage was done to all post-transistion women. They created the fire and were angry when people added more wood to it?
And the transcommunity wonders why the vast majority of post-transistion women, and many in-transistion, don't come out or become public, but simply live quietly as women? Would you help someone who stabs you in the back? Would you want to keep expaining why all the assumptions about transgender women aren't true because the transcommunity won't fight for you?
Anyway, my point is simply that if you meet a transperson, wherever they are in the transistion, don't assume anything unless they tell you, and then remember it only applies to them, and not other transpeople. Every transperson's story and view is different, and many don't fit under the transgender umbrella or in people's assumptions.
So ask with a clear open mind and heart as you would anyone else. You might just meet a really cool person, and maybe a new friend.
Friday, January 15, 2010
Invisibility is ok
With all the press releases about and public interviews by post-transistion women, but especially the recent appointment of Amanda Simpson to the Department of Commerce, obviously more than qualified for the job but overshadowed by the supposed "first" transgender person in the federal government, and then corrected to be the second, a Congressional staffer took the honor of the first appointment.
Or so we know. And that's my point, the cloak of invisibility, or as some in the transcommunity like to call it, living stealth (which isn't really stealth but that's another and contentuous subject in the transcommunity). All of a sudden, again, the transcommunity wants all the "invisible" transpeople, assuming they want to be identified as transgender after their transistion, to come out into the public spotlight.
And, to me, that's the worst thing they could do, destroy what peace and quiet they had after probably a very tumultuous transistion. To relive all the pain and sorry again, but in the public arena. And it's the dumbest thing the transcommunity can do, to ask them and if necessary, to expose them as (former) transgender people. That's the best way to create hate within the community from in or post-transistion people.
I won't argue invisibility hurts the transcommunity to show present and former transpeople are normal within the population, likely tens of thousands living and working without the knowledge of their history, except by the necessary small group of family, friends, co-workers (often none), professionals (medical, therapists, legal, etc.), and others (past friends, lovers, etal.). The numbers are large, probably on the order of 8-10 stealth persons to each public transperson.
But I will argue they have the right to stay stealth and not to follow the transcommunity. The transcommunity all too often creates more problems for people for their political agenda and goals than they solve for them. I won't argue some public (trans)people (meaning if they identify or not, the media and community identifies them as transgender) are terrific and wonderful advancing the public view of former transpeople.
And I will argue however, those who are public, should rememeber they don't have the right to speak for or represent the invisible ones, nor do they have the right to describe them as transgender for the transcommunity or for public acceptance. None of those people want to find their past becoming their future, and any words by public (trans)people should express that, as a few do very well.
They left the word and world behind, let's honor that decision and only speak for yourself. And only represent yourself.
Or so we know. And that's my point, the cloak of invisibility, or as some in the transcommunity like to call it, living stealth (which isn't really stealth but that's another and contentuous subject in the transcommunity). All of a sudden, again, the transcommunity wants all the "invisible" transpeople, assuming they want to be identified as transgender after their transistion, to come out into the public spotlight.
And, to me, that's the worst thing they could do, destroy what peace and quiet they had after probably a very tumultuous transistion. To relive all the pain and sorry again, but in the public arena. And it's the dumbest thing the transcommunity can do, to ask them and if necessary, to expose them as (former) transgender people. That's the best way to create hate within the community from in or post-transistion people.
I won't argue invisibility hurts the transcommunity to show present and former transpeople are normal within the population, likely tens of thousands living and working without the knowledge of their history, except by the necessary small group of family, friends, co-workers (often none), professionals (medical, therapists, legal, etc.), and others (past friends, lovers, etal.). The numbers are large, probably on the order of 8-10 stealth persons to each public transperson.
But I will argue they have the right to stay stealth and not to follow the transcommunity. The transcommunity all too often creates more problems for people for their political agenda and goals than they solve for them. I won't argue some public (trans)people (meaning if they identify or not, the media and community identifies them as transgender) are terrific and wonderful advancing the public view of former transpeople.
And I will argue however, those who are public, should rememeber they don't have the right to speak for or represent the invisible ones, nor do they have the right to describe them as transgender for the transcommunity or for public acceptance. None of those people want to find their past becoming their future, and any words by public (trans)people should express that, as a few do very well.
They left the word and world behind, let's honor that decision and only speak for yourself. And only represent yourself.
Tuesday, January 5, 2010
Dear Ms Simpson
Update.--- After an e-mail exchange with Ms. Simpson, I'm satisfied she'll do well in the job, as she earned and deserved it, and will put the matter of her former transgender identity behind her. I will take her at her word for now and expect she will do as she said. While the transgender community will continue to promote her and probably encourage her activisim, I hope, and will hold her accountable by her words, that she will not engage in activites for the transcommunity or transgender employees in the federal government unless it is part of her official duties.
And so to that end, I will keep this post to hold it as a record. The original is below.
Dear Ms. Simpson,
I applaud your appointment by President Obama to the Department of Commerce. I have no doubt you will do well and serve this country well. You more than earned and deserved the offer to accept to serve the American people. And I appluad your efforts to work with the LGBT, and especially transgender, community to advance public awareness of transgender people and people like yourself to transistion and live legally recognized in the sex and gender they know they are.
After reading a public statement you made about your appointment, you said you hoped this opened the door to many more (transgender and post-transistion) people in government, I do, however, have some words in response. First, not all post-transistion people want to be recognized as transgender. It may be your choice of words, it's not theirs, so please don't label them when they don't want it.
Second, surprising as it may seem, there already are transgender and post-transistion people in government service, in the administration, the military and even Congress. You're not the first, so please don't assume you're the only one. The others have long preferred to live and work quietly without the public label you identify with. Again, don't hurt their life and work for your agenda and cause.
And third, don't think you speak or represent them. And you certainly don't speak for me. Keep your tune and tone, and especially your opinion, to yourself about other transgender or post-transistion employees and people. They just might not like or appreciate the consequences of your words.
Anyway, that's it. Enjoy government service. And remember you're appointed, not a permanent employee, so understand the latter are great people having worked for the American people in government service. Don't abuse or misuse them for political purposes or gain. They definitely won't like that.
Take care.
And so to that end, I will keep this post to hold it as a record. The original is below.
Dear Ms. Simpson,
I applaud your appointment by President Obama to the Department of Commerce. I have no doubt you will do well and serve this country well. You more than earned and deserved the offer to accept to serve the American people. And I appluad your efforts to work with the LGBT, and especially transgender, community to advance public awareness of transgender people and people like yourself to transistion and live legally recognized in the sex and gender they know they are.
After reading a public statement you made about your appointment, you said you hoped this opened the door to many more (transgender and post-transistion) people in government, I do, however, have some words in response. First, not all post-transistion people want to be recognized as transgender. It may be your choice of words, it's not theirs, so please don't label them when they don't want it.
Second, surprising as it may seem, there already are transgender and post-transistion people in government service, in the administration, the military and even Congress. You're not the first, so please don't assume you're the only one. The others have long preferred to live and work quietly without the public label you identify with. Again, don't hurt their life and work for your agenda and cause.
And third, don't think you speak or represent them. And you certainly don't speak for me. Keep your tune and tone, and especially your opinion, to yourself about other transgender or post-transistion employees and people. They just might not like or appreciate the consequences of your words.
Anyway, that's it. Enjoy government service. And remember you're appointed, not a permanent employee, so understand the latter are great people having worked for the American people in government service. Don't abuse or misuse them for political purposes or gain. They definitely won't like that.
Take care.
Being Oversensitive
After sitting on the sidelines watching the transcommunity for a number years, researching the history of the community, organizations, people, events, issues, and so on, and occasionally participating in discussions, I've come to the conclusion, really from my first group meeting, the transcommunity and especially the transgender part of the community, meaning mostly cross-dressers and transistioning women, are over sensitive and don't know when someone is making a point to poke fun, spark discussion, lighten the discussion or is making a tongue-in-cheek comment.
Not surprisingly few trans men join transgroups because historically they have a built-in support group in lesbian groups. Since they are female to male, most are or were butch lesbian (some use dykes), they don't need the transcommunity. For now anyway. Some lesbian groups are kicking transmen out because they want lesbians, not former lesbians turned straight guys. And they're not liking the testosterone effect on their former lesbians.
But that's off the point. Anyway, my point is that most of the people in the transcommunity haven't learned to lighten up in discussion and they take almost everything too seriously, especially internal opposition. And that's when it's worse. Question views or expresss alternative opinions or ideas and you will be verbally pummelled, if not expelled. As I have learned. Up to that point, you'll get criticized by the diehard transpeople (again mostly transwomen).
Extreme view? Maybe, but look at the recent situation with the appointment of Amanda Simpson to the Department of Commerce. I wrote as the first she will be the "token" women with a transgender past at such levels of government and she maybe (note maybe) a puppet for both sides, the administration to promote LGBT people and the transcommunity to promote one of them.
Except as I noted she's not one of them. She transistioned long ago and is legally female, not trans of any flavor, that's her past or history, not her present or future. And yes, she did work on LGBT boards and with LGBT groups as a transrepresentative. She even used it in her polticial campaign years ago. But now she's just a woman in a job.
It was the transcommunity who promoted the news release of a "transgender appointment" to the administration. And then they whined with the flak began. I kidding the "whining" part, but it was to be expected by the conservative and religious groups. What didn't the transcommunity not understand or see. They fired the first volley and didn't expect return fire, often as usually happens, very insulting and degrading?
It's why I walked away from the transcommunity and other than continue to watch from the sidelines, I don't get involved. There are many outsanding people and groups in the community, but like every larger issue, there are the often loud but always serious voices who don't tolerate opposition and especially dissent. And worst of all, they don't tolerate humor.
Don't poke fun at them in jest, least you want a verbal beating from members. I've always subscribe to the idea to take your issues serioulsy but not yourself seriously. But then always discuss any issue with an open mind and heart, to listen, understand and talk with honesty, fairness and always with some humor. There's humor in everything, it's makes life easier to swallow.
Unfortunately, in spite of all the good people in and good work of the transcommunity, they haven't learned to just smile at life. After all, it's funny it's in own right, just open your eyes and see. You'll feel better and learn to be more understanding and accepting, and yes, of opposition within and anger from outside.
Not surprisingly few trans men join transgroups because historically they have a built-in support group in lesbian groups. Since they are female to male, most are or were butch lesbian (some use dykes), they don't need the transcommunity. For now anyway. Some lesbian groups are kicking transmen out because they want lesbians, not former lesbians turned straight guys. And they're not liking the testosterone effect on their former lesbians.
But that's off the point. Anyway, my point is that most of the people in the transcommunity haven't learned to lighten up in discussion and they take almost everything too seriously, especially internal opposition. And that's when it's worse. Question views or expresss alternative opinions or ideas and you will be verbally pummelled, if not expelled. As I have learned. Up to that point, you'll get criticized by the diehard transpeople (again mostly transwomen).
Extreme view? Maybe, but look at the recent situation with the appointment of Amanda Simpson to the Department of Commerce. I wrote as the first she will be the "token" women with a transgender past at such levels of government and she maybe (note maybe) a puppet for both sides, the administration to promote LGBT people and the transcommunity to promote one of them.
Except as I noted she's not one of them. She transistioned long ago and is legally female, not trans of any flavor, that's her past or history, not her present or future. And yes, she did work on LGBT boards and with LGBT groups as a transrepresentative. She even used it in her polticial campaign years ago. But now she's just a woman in a job.
It was the transcommunity who promoted the news release of a "transgender appointment" to the administration. And then they whined with the flak began. I kidding the "whining" part, but it was to be expected by the conservative and religious groups. What didn't the transcommunity not understand or see. They fired the first volley and didn't expect return fire, often as usually happens, very insulting and degrading?
It's why I walked away from the transcommunity and other than continue to watch from the sidelines, I don't get involved. There are many outsanding people and groups in the community, but like every larger issue, there are the often loud but always serious voices who don't tolerate opposition and especially dissent. And worst of all, they don't tolerate humor.
Don't poke fun at them in jest, least you want a verbal beating from members. I've always subscribe to the idea to take your issues serioulsy but not yourself seriously. But then always discuss any issue with an open mind and heart, to listen, understand and talk with honesty, fairness and always with some humor. There's humor in everything, it's makes life easier to swallow.
Unfortunately, in spite of all the good people in and good work of the transcommunity, they haven't learned to just smile at life. After all, it's funny it's in own right, just open your eyes and see. You'll feel better and learn to be more understanding and accepting, and yes, of opposition within and anger from outside.
Monday, January 4, 2010
Please Remember
Please remember folks, the essays here are simply observations and thoughts on life from my perspective. My eyes and mind. Nothing more. And just my opinion from my knowledge, understanding and experience. As I knew then or know now. Nothing more. The essays don't necessarily mean anything beyond that, except occasionally some may have some general relevance.
While I'm not active in the LGBT community and through its organizations, far from it for personal reasons, I like to wander around a lot of areas of life looking in from the fringes and see what's there. And true that misses a lot of the details from being there, looking longer, or seeing more things, I've found most people inside aren't much different. It's being human with our own bias.
For all the words, just remember they're simply mine, open to discussion (through your comments), and always open to change when presented with good arguments, information and experience. I learn before, during and after writing, and often review and rewrite some of the essays. And I always quote the old adage you grandmother taught you.
What you don't know it or forgot it? It's the old adage, "If you can't say anything nice, don't say anything at all.", to which I've always added some rules. First, if you can't express a negative in a positive way, then don't say it. If you can't add suggestions for improvement or change, then don't say it. And if you can't say it with humor, meaning, say it with glint in your eye, your tongue in your cheek, or a smile on your face, then don't say it.
So, that's it. What I write is all said with an open, light-hearted intent to think out loud, and right or wrong, no verbal pummelling allowed. The positive will stay, the negative gets trashed. And both will show me more about yourself than your words.
While I'm not active in the LGBT community and through its organizations, far from it for personal reasons, I like to wander around a lot of areas of life looking in from the fringes and see what's there. And true that misses a lot of the details from being there, looking longer, or seeing more things, I've found most people inside aren't much different. It's being human with our own bias.
For all the words, just remember they're simply mine, open to discussion (through your comments), and always open to change when presented with good arguments, information and experience. I learn before, during and after writing, and often review and rewrite some of the essays. And I always quote the old adage you grandmother taught you.
What you don't know it or forgot it? It's the old adage, "If you can't say anything nice, don't say anything at all.", to which I've always added some rules. First, if you can't express a negative in a positive way, then don't say it. If you can't add suggestions for improvement or change, then don't say it. And if you can't say it with humor, meaning, say it with glint in your eye, your tongue in your cheek, or a smile on your face, then don't say it.
So, that's it. What I write is all said with an open, light-hearted intent to think out loud, and right or wrong, no verbal pummelling allowed. The positive will stay, the negative gets trashed. And both will show me more about yourself than your words.
Looking in the mirror
It's what all transwomen do, look at the face in the mirror, to see if the face they've known all those years is the new face they want to be and live with. Some who are comfortable with makeup, namely drag queens, transvestities and cross-dressers, and some who transistion who use it for life, rely on the face in the mirror for confirmation.
And if you notice, it's how the media portrays transwomen in stories, dressed nicely with makeup and jewelry. It's what's expected of women, to want to be pretty with makeup and want to always worry about their looks. In the transcommunity, there are those transwomen, usually self-described as "girly girls." To them, it's often all about looks, especially the face.
But there also are also those who do it because it's part of life as a woman. It's not the reason, the need or the want, but the expected. This is true in many professions and jobs where clothes and presentations are standards, whether it's saleswomen in stores, managers in public roles, senior managers and executives with government, organizations and corporations.
In all those cases, it's about the face in the mirror, and how best to make it pretty for the day or situation. But it's not the way they normally live outside those situations. The majority of women today wear little if any makeup. A much smaller percentage wear it outside the workplace. And it's mostly two types.
The young women who wear it because it's part of their life. And the older women who wear it because it's part of their looks, and often necessary to get by. For themit's their face which isn't there without out it. It's what they want to see in the mirror, not liking what they see without it or wanting to look like someone else with it.
These are the transwomen who swear makeup, and the rest of the typical woman's world of clothes, fashion, jewelry, shopping, etc. is what women do because it's what women are. The criticize women who don't wear it and condemn transwomen who don't want to wear it. To them, it's often more about playing dressup than being a woman.
That's because very few make any real effort to be physically women, and it's why all the clothes, make and jewelry are necessary. It's a play to get away from being male and men than being women. The largest group under the transgender umbrella are cross-dressers when and where these standards apply.
But it's those who transistion who ignore those standards because it's not about playing women but about being women and the normal life of one. It's not the occasional day/night excurion, weekends, or even conferences to dress as a woman for awhile, but return to being male and a man who they are and live. It's the 24/7 life as all women live.
And that is where the face in the mirror is important. It's the one without makeup. It's about losing the face of their past and seeing the face they've always wanted. And makeup is optional as part of life, used when it fits, and not as a necessity when it doesn't. It's about being ordinary as a woman, and yes, it's all the plain and ordinary being of women.
It's also raises the question about transistions. The problem I've noticed with many post-transistion women is that they focused their transistion on their public presentation to get through the initial experience, often called the real-life experience and get to the sex reassignment surgery (or gender reassignment surgery in many countries). They want the vagina to be whole.
But they forget the face. Their face. Hormones make a lot of changes, obviously to body, and the less obviously to the face. This is where women split in their transistion. Some decide, either naively, blindly or intentionally, to see a face they want than the face they have. And despite all the information that the first thing people use to judge others is the face, especially for gender, they find themselves "clocked", and then angry.
They're angry they weren't seen as women and forgot their male-like face. And even with all the makeup in the world, you can't hide those features. The very face they saw in the mirror is the one which betrays them in public. And they didn't notice or want to notice. And they get angry at the wrong people for the wrong reasons.
It's also why many in transistion focus to get facial feminization surgery for a female face, often spending $25-30K for the work, including extensive bone work. And even then, it's a gamble. The resulting face may pass but won't pass their view of what they wanted to see. Realistic expectations often gets lost in the hope and wishes.
This is where the two groups divide. In their thinking, their transistions and their life after their transistion. The face in the mirror. To see what it is or what you want. To see it with reality or imagination. To see it without and then with makeup to be a woman in heart and mind reflected in the mirror, than hiding what you don't want to see.
In the end, the face others see is reflected in the mirror, and we can choose which we see.
And if you notice, it's how the media portrays transwomen in stories, dressed nicely with makeup and jewelry. It's what's expected of women, to want to be pretty with makeup and want to always worry about their looks. In the transcommunity, there are those transwomen, usually self-described as "girly girls." To them, it's often all about looks, especially the face.
But there also are also those who do it because it's part of life as a woman. It's not the reason, the need or the want, but the expected. This is true in many professions and jobs where clothes and presentations are standards, whether it's saleswomen in stores, managers in public roles, senior managers and executives with government, organizations and corporations.
In all those cases, it's about the face in the mirror, and how best to make it pretty for the day or situation. But it's not the way they normally live outside those situations. The majority of women today wear little if any makeup. A much smaller percentage wear it outside the workplace. And it's mostly two types.
The young women who wear it because it's part of their life. And the older women who wear it because it's part of their looks, and often necessary to get by. For themit's their face which isn't there without out it. It's what they want to see in the mirror, not liking what they see without it or wanting to look like someone else with it.
These are the transwomen who swear makeup, and the rest of the typical woman's world of clothes, fashion, jewelry, shopping, etc. is what women do because it's what women are. The criticize women who don't wear it and condemn transwomen who don't want to wear it. To them, it's often more about playing dressup than being a woman.
That's because very few make any real effort to be physically women, and it's why all the clothes, make and jewelry are necessary. It's a play to get away from being male and men than being women. The largest group under the transgender umbrella are cross-dressers when and where these standards apply.
But it's those who transistion who ignore those standards because it's not about playing women but about being women and the normal life of one. It's not the occasional day/night excurion, weekends, or even conferences to dress as a woman for awhile, but return to being male and a man who they are and live. It's the 24/7 life as all women live.
And that is where the face in the mirror is important. It's the one without makeup. It's about losing the face of their past and seeing the face they've always wanted. And makeup is optional as part of life, used when it fits, and not as a necessity when it doesn't. It's about being ordinary as a woman, and yes, it's all the plain and ordinary being of women.
It's also raises the question about transistions. The problem I've noticed with many post-transistion women is that they focused their transistion on their public presentation to get through the initial experience, often called the real-life experience and get to the sex reassignment surgery (or gender reassignment surgery in many countries). They want the vagina to be whole.
But they forget the face. Their face. Hormones make a lot of changes, obviously to body, and the less obviously to the face. This is where women split in their transistion. Some decide, either naively, blindly or intentionally, to see a face they want than the face they have. And despite all the information that the first thing people use to judge others is the face, especially for gender, they find themselves "clocked", and then angry.
They're angry they weren't seen as women and forgot their male-like face. And even with all the makeup in the world, you can't hide those features. The very face they saw in the mirror is the one which betrays them in public. And they didn't notice or want to notice. And they get angry at the wrong people for the wrong reasons.
It's also why many in transistion focus to get facial feminization surgery for a female face, often spending $25-30K for the work, including extensive bone work. And even then, it's a gamble. The resulting face may pass but won't pass their view of what they wanted to see. Realistic expectations often gets lost in the hope and wishes.
This is where the two groups divide. In their thinking, their transistions and their life after their transistion. The face in the mirror. To see what it is or what you want. To see it with reality or imagination. To see it without and then with makeup to be a woman in heart and mind reflected in the mirror, than hiding what you don't want to see.
In the end, the face others see is reflected in the mirror, and we can choose which we see.
Trans Puppets
Reading about the appointment of Amanda Simpson to the Department of Commerce. No one doubts her creditials, but all the pundits are taking one of two sides. The first is that she is setting a trend for trangender employees to find jobs or careers with the federal government, except she's not the first, only the first political appointment. This is fine except for two things.
First, she's not transgender, but a post-transistion or legally-recognized woman. She transistioned years ago and long left the label and identity. Second, by using the term to describe her, she's becoming a puppet for both sides, or really all sides. She's used by the transcommunity as a shining example of a (trans)woman - they add the prefix trans. She's used by the LGBT community for equal opportunity. And she's used by the government to show they're trans-friendly.
All except she was appointed for her creditials, or maybe only mostly so, and I suspect partly because she's repesentative of "transgender" women. Meaning all post-transistion women aren't really women, despite all their effort to be physically (as medically possible) women and legally female. The world will still treat them as transgender. And that's the sad part.
Amanda accomplished a lot before she transistioned, and more afterward. And although she, like almost all transwomen, who transistioned on the job with the same company, she didn't advance during and after her transistion. Companies advertise support and protection for transgender people, but they always find a way to redirect their work and career out of the public eye and away from their career path as a man.
It's why all post-transistion women have big valleys in their career from the start of their transition to several years after they finish. Almost all never reclaim the same professional level after as before. If they do, it's usually outside the company they started with and more often in other careers or work. Generally only artist tend to stay in same profession because it's what they do and are known.
A few do go on to bigger and better things. But only after years of little or no work for years, sometimes near a decades, and after reinventing themselves. We are still a society that allows people to transistion, but we haven't allowed them their work and careers without professional and personal discrimination.
Until of course, it's happens to fit a political agenda. Like Amanda Simpson. I wish her well and know she will do well, but she's now stuck being the token transgender women during her career with the Department of Commerce. Something she likely didn't want but has, and will have to work harder to prove herself both as a manager and a woman. That's not different as any other woman, but she has an extra burden too, her transgender past.
Political puppets are that, and try as they do and as much as they succeed, in the end, they're still puppets. No different than other polticial puppets, only a different flavor one.
First, she's not transgender, but a post-transistion or legally-recognized woman. She transistioned years ago and long left the label and identity. Second, by using the term to describe her, she's becoming a puppet for both sides, or really all sides. She's used by the transcommunity as a shining example of a (trans)woman - they add the prefix trans. She's used by the LGBT community for equal opportunity. And she's used by the government to show they're trans-friendly.
All except she was appointed for her creditials, or maybe only mostly so, and I suspect partly because she's repesentative of "transgender" women. Meaning all post-transistion women aren't really women, despite all their effort to be physically (as medically possible) women and legally female. The world will still treat them as transgender. And that's the sad part.
Amanda accomplished a lot before she transistioned, and more afterward. And although she, like almost all transwomen, who transistioned on the job with the same company, she didn't advance during and after her transistion. Companies advertise support and protection for transgender people, but they always find a way to redirect their work and career out of the public eye and away from their career path as a man.
It's why all post-transistion women have big valleys in their career from the start of their transition to several years after they finish. Almost all never reclaim the same professional level after as before. If they do, it's usually outside the company they started with and more often in other careers or work. Generally only artist tend to stay in same profession because it's what they do and are known.
A few do go on to bigger and better things. But only after years of little or no work for years, sometimes near a decades, and after reinventing themselves. We are still a society that allows people to transistion, but we haven't allowed them their work and careers without professional and personal discrimination.
Until of course, it's happens to fit a political agenda. Like Amanda Simpson. I wish her well and know she will do well, but she's now stuck being the token transgender women during her career with the Department of Commerce. Something she likely didn't want but has, and will have to work harder to prove herself both as a manager and a woman. That's not different as any other woman, but she has an extra burden too, her transgender past.
Political puppets are that, and try as they do and as much as they succeed, in the end, they're still puppets. No different than other polticial puppets, only a different flavor one.
The space in between
It seems most people consider sex and gender to be binary, the either or thing with male-female and man-woman, and some people consider it to be both but usually distinctly either or, namely in the definition of transgender or transsexual people. But as the transcommunity has seen, some people live in between, often labelled the gender-queer, because even the transcommunity treats them differently.
We also know that transpeople aren't mutually exclusive of the opposite between their birth sex and mind gender, meaning they're not all distinctly trans, but somewhere between balanced and slightly on the other side. They're not comfortable being who they were but they're also not comfortable with the expectation of the other side and especially the trans-side.
In short, they live and are in the space in between sexes and genders. It's where they're comfortable, if only society, and even the transcommunity, would let them be and live. But that rarely happens as people want to know which they are and which they want to be. Like it matters? It doesn't to anyone. They're not hurting anyone, but people don't like them challenging that imaginary binary.
So, the pressure and stress on them isn't as people think, their confusion to decide, but from people pushing them from both directions, when all they want to do is live as they are and see themselves. It's hard when it's an either or world and you're an "and" person. The signs don't fit. You don't fit. And everyone makes assumptions about the way you dress, speak, behave, and everything else you.
And sadly, this is also prevalent in the transcommunity. They like little boxes to describe and fit people. They tolerate people moving between boxes or living in several boxes, but not people living outside their boxes, and living in their own space and only a box if there are others doing and being the same. The transcommunity is often as harsh or cruel as the public, except it's inside the community where people can't see.
Why this idea? Well, I've always been a non-box person, besides an out-of-the-box thinker. I've don't like being in or put in boxes. I don't fit in them. I like walking around and peeking over the tops of boxes to see who and what's inside. I like living in the space in between boxes. And I'm not much different with gender.
To be honest, I've never really fit inside any model of what to expect of being a boy or man. I've always just been myself and almost always by myself. I'm very comfortable being alone (and note not lonely or a loner, just being alone). And I'm the same with gender. When I was told it's what a man does, I wouldn't do it unless there was no other choice.
I didn't like doing it. But I also knew it's what family, friends, work, and so on up the scale of our life and world, expected men do. So I tried, but many times, I simply decided not to or walked away. It's my personality, character and temperament. But I also know that all of me would fit better inside a woman and than a man. And that's the conundrum in my life.
I don't consider or see myself as transgender or trans-anything, just me, and just trying to fit into an "or" world with an "and" mind, and living in the space in between.
We also know that transpeople aren't mutually exclusive of the opposite between their birth sex and mind gender, meaning they're not all distinctly trans, but somewhere between balanced and slightly on the other side. They're not comfortable being who they were but they're also not comfortable with the expectation of the other side and especially the trans-side.
In short, they live and are in the space in between sexes and genders. It's where they're comfortable, if only society, and even the transcommunity, would let them be and live. But that rarely happens as people want to know which they are and which they want to be. Like it matters? It doesn't to anyone. They're not hurting anyone, but people don't like them challenging that imaginary binary.
So, the pressure and stress on them isn't as people think, their confusion to decide, but from people pushing them from both directions, when all they want to do is live as they are and see themselves. It's hard when it's an either or world and you're an "and" person. The signs don't fit. You don't fit. And everyone makes assumptions about the way you dress, speak, behave, and everything else you.
And sadly, this is also prevalent in the transcommunity. They like little boxes to describe and fit people. They tolerate people moving between boxes or living in several boxes, but not people living outside their boxes, and living in their own space and only a box if there are others doing and being the same. The transcommunity is often as harsh or cruel as the public, except it's inside the community where people can't see.
Why this idea? Well, I've always been a non-box person, besides an out-of-the-box thinker. I've don't like being in or put in boxes. I don't fit in them. I like walking around and peeking over the tops of boxes to see who and what's inside. I like living in the space in between boxes. And I'm not much different with gender.
To be honest, I've never really fit inside any model of what to expect of being a boy or man. I've always just been myself and almost always by myself. I'm very comfortable being alone (and note not lonely or a loner, just being alone). And I'm the same with gender. When I was told it's what a man does, I wouldn't do it unless there was no other choice.
I didn't like doing it. But I also knew it's what family, friends, work, and so on up the scale of our life and world, expected men do. So I tried, but many times, I simply decided not to or walked away. It's my personality, character and temperament. But I also know that all of me would fit better inside a woman and than a man. And that's the conundrum in my life.
I don't consider or see myself as transgender or trans-anything, just me, and just trying to fit into an "or" world with an "and" mind, and living in the space in between.
Friday, January 1, 2010
What's with the word
What's with the word trans and add your own suffix, such as transgender, transsexual, etc.? I don't get why people want to use the term to describe themselves. I guess I can understand using gender identity condition, since it's not a disease or disorder, much against the American Psychiatrist Association (and the other American Psychological Association), but even then, that's just a medical description.
Gender Identity is not a personal one and not one I would use to describe myself, albeit I'm not far from it by some measures, but then we all have gender identity issues about ourselves. Well, most of us do, and those who don't, don't know they have issues about their identity. Sometimes blindness or ignorance is helpful if you don't want to challenge yourself.
But trans-anything when it comes to sex or gender baffles me. I read these blogs and the vast majority of the individuals call themselves transgender or transsexual. Like it's a button you're required to wear? They don't go through life wearing it, so why do it on their blog? So the reader won't find out and feel betrayed or worse?
Yes, I understand it to some degree. It gives someone identity to establish who they are by standards set by the medical community, society, media, etal, and to show people it's who they are, maybe different but still normal among all of us. And truthfully, there really isn't a good word to describe the places on the spectrum or myriad of humans.
Our language isn't like others which have different words for nuances of definitions, like the Inuits have for snow or the Japanese for rain. We're a lumping language instead of a splitting language. It simpliifies things with a word for a broad stroke but then requires either adjectives or supporting phrases to provide the details or finese.
But it's hard when you want to describe something so clear and subtle, but then find you need a sentence or a paragraph to explain something which could be said in a word. Simplicity has value, but not at the expense of the lack for it. We cherish great literary writers, for the great prose and use of words. But if they didn't need so many?
I find it somewhat sad our language is so difficult to describe the human heart and mind. And trans-sex/gender isn't a bad word, only often a misused, an abused or a derogatory word used to demean or condenmn people for being themselves, but different from others. And the truth is we're all trans to some degree. We're not immune from our own language. Only some people more so than others.
But what baffles me even more is when people use it to describe themselves even after their transistion to become legally recognized, or post-transtion, men and women. It's your past and not your present or future. It, however, gives the media something to key a story about you. But it's why I wouldn't use it and would hate someone describing me with it.
I write this after I read the public announcement of Amanda Simpson appointment to the Department of Commerce by President Obama. After the details of her career, it ended with an afterthought that she was a transgender person. LIke it mattered about her skills, intelligence, professional experience for the job? It didn't but it mattered to the LGBT community for one of their own.
Except she isn't having transistioned years earlier while working for Raytheon. I doubt she recognizes or identifies herself as a transwomen, only a woman. So why make it important? For one, they pushed her as a "transgender" woman to show they're supportive of the LGBT community and people. And for another, the LGBT community pushed her as "one of them."
Except she's not. Maybe was, but only if she wanted to use the word. Otherwise, it's irrelevant. And it does, would, and will, for me too.
Gender Identity is not a personal one and not one I would use to describe myself, albeit I'm not far from it by some measures, but then we all have gender identity issues about ourselves. Well, most of us do, and those who don't, don't know they have issues about their identity. Sometimes blindness or ignorance is helpful if you don't want to challenge yourself.
But trans-anything when it comes to sex or gender baffles me. I read these blogs and the vast majority of the individuals call themselves transgender or transsexual. Like it's a button you're required to wear? They don't go through life wearing it, so why do it on their blog? So the reader won't find out and feel betrayed or worse?
Yes, I understand it to some degree. It gives someone identity to establish who they are by standards set by the medical community, society, media, etal, and to show people it's who they are, maybe different but still normal among all of us. And truthfully, there really isn't a good word to describe the places on the spectrum or myriad of humans.
Our language isn't like others which have different words for nuances of definitions, like the Inuits have for snow or the Japanese for rain. We're a lumping language instead of a splitting language. It simpliifies things with a word for a broad stroke but then requires either adjectives or supporting phrases to provide the details or finese.
But it's hard when you want to describe something so clear and subtle, but then find you need a sentence or a paragraph to explain something which could be said in a word. Simplicity has value, but not at the expense of the lack for it. We cherish great literary writers, for the great prose and use of words. But if they didn't need so many?
I find it somewhat sad our language is so difficult to describe the human heart and mind. And trans-sex/gender isn't a bad word, only often a misused, an abused or a derogatory word used to demean or condenmn people for being themselves, but different from others. And the truth is we're all trans to some degree. We're not immune from our own language. Only some people more so than others.
But what baffles me even more is when people use it to describe themselves even after their transistion to become legally recognized, or post-transtion, men and women. It's your past and not your present or future. It, however, gives the media something to key a story about you. But it's why I wouldn't use it and would hate someone describing me with it.
I write this after I read the public announcement of Amanda Simpson appointment to the Department of Commerce by President Obama. After the details of her career, it ended with an afterthought that she was a transgender person. LIke it mattered about her skills, intelligence, professional experience for the job? It didn't but it mattered to the LGBT community for one of their own.
Except she isn't having transistioned years earlier while working for Raytheon. I doubt she recognizes or identifies herself as a transwomen, only a woman. So why make it important? For one, they pushed her as a "transgender" woman to show they're supportive of the LGBT community and people. And for another, the LGBT community pushed her as "one of them."
Except she's not. Maybe was, but only if she wanted to use the word. Otherwise, it's irrelevant. And it does, would, and will, for me too.
The silent majority
I follow the transgender community, along with many other issues, subjects and groups. I do this for a number of reasons which I won't say much beyond the fact the reasons are there. But following and participating are two vastly different matters, which is always intriquing to me because the transgender community assumes transpeople agree with them, or at least publically, but far too often not privately or personally, to avoid showing the deep divisions in the community amongst the different subgroups of people.
And this is what is interesting, because the smallest active group in the transcommunity are the legally recognized, or post-transistion, men and women, those who have finished the medical process and legal avenues to be physically their (target) sex or gender and to have all, or all those possible, legal documents changed, starting with the name change and birth certificate.
And this group has long been claimed by the transcommunity and long labelled by the media as transgender or transsexual. But they're not. The courts are more and more recognizing they're legally male or female, without any qualifier, especially trans-anythng. They're just one of the many men and women in life and the world.
But the interesing point is the numbers of those who after their transistion, silently leave the community if they ever were a part of it, whch sprisingly most do not because the resources available today allows them to simply go through their transistion without ever belonging to let alone being a member of any support group.
In earlier years the support groups were the only resource for transpeople, especially transistioning ones. Wth the Internet, some moved to and found the resources on Website and forums. It's all there, the information and the people, without ever really meeting other transpoeple let alone going or belonging to a group. It's the new indedepence of transpeople, and now the largest way people transistion.
The membership of transgroup is fairly stable at best and decling at worst, mostly becuase they depended on member for money. Without it, and the continued longterm membership getting tired of more and more costs for less return, groups are struggling in many places. And they're attracting fewer new people while the number of new people increases. Which leads to the new reality.
When you do the back of the envelope (or napkin wherever you are) calculations with the number of new legally recognized men and mostly women, simply using the statistics from the current number of surgeons performing sex reassignment surgery, required for women but not men, adding an estimate for the latter, and the number of active or public legally recognized men and women, you discover the reality.
The number of legally recognized men and women not active or public outnumbers the public or active, out of choice or circumstance such as career, life, etc., by a factor of greater than 10 to 1. The percentage of silent legally recognized men and women is about 95% of the total men and women. And this is a conservative estimate and possibly in the 98% range.
They're leaving because they don't see or identify themselves as transgender or transsexual, but simply men and women. The genes are different, and their anatomy is obviously slightly different, after all medical science and technology can only do so much to change the body between the sexes, but the mind isn't different. Even brain research is more and more showing the brain is physically more similar to their non-birth (transistion) sex than the norm.
That's why being transgender is a physical condition and not a mental one, and definitely not a mental disease or disorder, as currently catagorized in the DSM-IVTR. And it's why they think, act, and behave as their identified gender and not their birth gender. And why, once finished with their transistion, they are simply men and women.
Just like everyone else. Just normal like everyone else. Granted the differences, but let's remember we're all different, and we're all a mix of male and female, it's what makes us human. We're not exclusively male or female but some proportion, only transpeople are more the other. But that's a tanget point.
The point is that the transcommunity has no right to call legally recognized men and women transgender and claim them as one of them. They are exclusive of the community once they finish their medical and leagal transistion. And it's why 95+% walk away and never come back.
And it's why their silent. To speak out means coming out. And coming out means becoming public, the last thing they want if they can help it. They don't want to be one of "them" which people associate with drag queens, transvestites, cross-dressers and pre/in-transistion transpeople. They're not and don't want to be.
And it's why the silent majority will never be seen, let alone known. The sad reality of coming out. So silence is better than the alternative.
And this is what is interesting, because the smallest active group in the transcommunity are the legally recognized, or post-transistion, men and women, those who have finished the medical process and legal avenues to be physically their (target) sex or gender and to have all, or all those possible, legal documents changed, starting with the name change and birth certificate.
And this group has long been claimed by the transcommunity and long labelled by the media as transgender or transsexual. But they're not. The courts are more and more recognizing they're legally male or female, without any qualifier, especially trans-anythng. They're just one of the many men and women in life and the world.
But the interesing point is the numbers of those who after their transistion, silently leave the community if they ever were a part of it, whch sprisingly most do not because the resources available today allows them to simply go through their transistion without ever belonging to let alone being a member of any support group.
In earlier years the support groups were the only resource for transpeople, especially transistioning ones. Wth the Internet, some moved to and found the resources on Website and forums. It's all there, the information and the people, without ever really meeting other transpoeple let alone going or belonging to a group. It's the new indedepence of transpeople, and now the largest way people transistion.
The membership of transgroup is fairly stable at best and decling at worst, mostly becuase they depended on member for money. Without it, and the continued longterm membership getting tired of more and more costs for less return, groups are struggling in many places. And they're attracting fewer new people while the number of new people increases. Which leads to the new reality.
When you do the back of the envelope (or napkin wherever you are) calculations with the number of new legally recognized men and mostly women, simply using the statistics from the current number of surgeons performing sex reassignment surgery, required for women but not men, adding an estimate for the latter, and the number of active or public legally recognized men and women, you discover the reality.
The number of legally recognized men and women not active or public outnumbers the public or active, out of choice or circumstance such as career, life, etc., by a factor of greater than 10 to 1. The percentage of silent legally recognized men and women is about 95% of the total men and women. And this is a conservative estimate and possibly in the 98% range.
They're leaving because they don't see or identify themselves as transgender or transsexual, but simply men and women. The genes are different, and their anatomy is obviously slightly different, after all medical science and technology can only do so much to change the body between the sexes, but the mind isn't different. Even brain research is more and more showing the brain is physically more similar to their non-birth (transistion) sex than the norm.
That's why being transgender is a physical condition and not a mental one, and definitely not a mental disease or disorder, as currently catagorized in the DSM-IVTR. And it's why they think, act, and behave as their identified gender and not their birth gender. And why, once finished with their transistion, they are simply men and women.
Just like everyone else. Just normal like everyone else. Granted the differences, but let's remember we're all different, and we're all a mix of male and female, it's what makes us human. We're not exclusively male or female but some proportion, only transpeople are more the other. But that's a tanget point.
The point is that the transcommunity has no right to call legally recognized men and women transgender and claim them as one of them. They are exclusive of the community once they finish their medical and leagal transistion. And it's why 95+% walk away and never come back.
And it's why their silent. To speak out means coming out. And coming out means becoming public, the last thing they want if they can help it. They don't want to be one of "them" which people associate with drag queens, transvestites, cross-dressers and pre/in-transistion transpeople. They're not and don't want to be.
And it's why the silent majority will never be seen, let alone known. The sad reality of coming out. So silence is better than the alternative.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
