-Sexologists- ruining lives, and other things

So we’ve established beyond a reasonable doubt that there is only one type of  “transsexual”, and that is a person who suffers from a specific birth defect.  Transsexualism, then,  describes a particular set of symptoms experienced by a real, true transsexual.  And further, there is a treatment with a very good outcome, and most former transsexuals go on to lead happy lives.  There are no “other types” of transsexuals, just the one.  So who are all these pseudo-transsexuals created by the psychs?

In the United States we have a serious problem with the idea of variant sexualities.  This creates all sorts of problems for people whose experiences lie outside the norms.  There are two types of pseudo-transsexuals who emerge out of this situation.

The first is a gay or lesbian person who has trouble coming to terms with their sexuality.  This one came in two stages; the first stage happened when the effeminacy was forcibly ejected as an acceptable way to be from the gay scene.  Soon, nelly gays were not only rejected from mainstream society, but also found themselves scorned by their own community.  After a number of years this situation became the norm and a new generation of gay and lesbian youth were born into a world where they truly had no place.

Some of these rejected people found escape in the emerging “trans” identity.  Many people have difficulty dealing with a homosexual orientation, and the “trans” option gave them an escape route.  But this turned out to be a terrible mistake, leading to wrecked lives and a dialogue more confused than ever within the GLBT.  Eventually, the trans confusion reached a point where some women, who had previously been lesbian, started experimenting with hormones and finding they enjoyed a limited “male” existence.  Further, some other “heterosexual” women who simply had personal issues with relationships did the same, becoming “gay FtM’s”.  While there are such things as straight and gay TS men, there is a vast difference between TS men and transgender females.

We ended up with lesbian and gay “transmen” who didn’t want to abandon their female roots and maintained those connections, but who used their newfound status to access “male privilege” when they wanted.  These are the “FtM spectrum” types, or “female transgenders”.  And they make TS men just as livid as the transvestites and nelly gays make us TS women.  Just ask one if you can find him.  If you ever do meet a real TS man, there is no doubt that this is a man.  As in all dude, all the time, totally legit.

There is simply no comparison when you stand a TS man next to a female transgender, it’s pretty obvious.  One is not better than the other, but they are VERY different.  This is an ongoing problem for the men, but it all started with the confusion over TS women much earlier.

Although a young, effeminate boy may seem to be the “perfect transsexual”, it is now clear that there is no relationship between their homosexuality and the transsexual birth defect.  You can’t simply take a man, no matter how gay, and turn him into a woman.  It doesn’t work that way no matter what some people would have you believe.  Young effeminate males are simply young effeminate males; they do not have a birth defect, because this is a normal human variation and requires no medical attention or treatment whatsoever.

While there was some confusion among the less “effeminate” types about the “trans” thing,  the main outcome of driving effeminacy underground was to create a class of “non op transsexuals”.  Basically full time drag queens who thought they were transsexual despite not having any of the characteristics of transsexuals.

The fallout from this standard practice of enabling this escape, telling these people they are justified in transitioning to avoid their sexuality, has yet to reach its full effect.  It is hard to imagine how such a thing came to be these days in our increasingly litigious society.  You’d think that at least a few of the people involved would have a fear of lawsuit, as the age of permissiveness comes to a close.

The other pseudo-transsexual subtype is the transvestite who has been encouraged by the therapist that “transition” is possible, and that they are indeed a type of transsexual, though they do not desire surgery.  When a non-transsexual person says they are going to “transition”, what are they really talking about?  How?  Transition to what?

If you speak to the wives of the “afflicted” crossdressing husbands, many of them talk about how the problem started small and then grew out of control.  Fetish overtakes their lives, to the detriment of the wife and children.  This isn’t something to be encouraged by a permanent fetish state!  This is a tragedy that needs to be avoided.  Instead, we have certain people in the industry throwing “transition” gas on a transvestic addiction fire.  How irresponsible can they be?

I believe this practice of enabling of the fetish addiction is just as reprehensible as encouraging gay and lesbian people to transition.  In the case of the transvestic pseudo-transsexual, the mental health professional who encourages “transition” is actively participating in the progression of this addictive behavior, which is extremely troubling.  And to suggest that such people are good candidates for surgery is beyond the pale.

Such an approval from psychs for any of these non-transsexual people to access transsexual treatment seems practically designed to ensure a rash of regrettors suing the few surgeons who treat transsexuals, perhaps finishing the campaign against us that McHugh started.

Given that the psychs themselves will have the cover of the APA Bible, those who have been overseeing the transitions will probably escape all scrutiny and blame.  It will, however, result in the destruction of the careers of the very few medical doctors who treat us.  There can be no other result of allowing so many non-transsexual people to access the transsexual treatment regimen.

And in other news…

There are times when some of this stuff stretches the belief of even the most jaded watcher of the GLBT.  Take, for example, the case of the “non op” who feels that those who get surgery or dislike their parts are “immature”.

If you  go on to this most controversial of all body parts in transsexual MtF circles, the (wait for it, lifting my hand in front of my mouth and looking through the corner of my right eye at you whispering…) penis.  To me it had very good utility over my life time so far.  It is probably the best construction for pointed peeing (you know writing in the snow), it delivers sperm exactly where it should go if you do it right, and it contains so many nerve endings that it can deliver interesting sensations and resulting emotions including what we call relief.  Do I love it? Not really, it just is there.  And yes I am grateful it was and is there, part of what I was outfitted with.  Do I hate it then?  It is like asking the same question about a rock on a beach.  It is in short a stupid question.  And anyone who hates their genitals, or loves them is, I am sorry to say lacking some fundamental judgment.  It is incredibly immature, similar to naming your body parts.

What kind of “transition” will this person have?  And if that’s not enough to get you scratching your head, how about a little advice on how to get it up for men when you’ve taken too many hormones?

If you advertise for men looking for trans women, rather than tucking and hoping not to have an issue, then you’re going to be expected to use that something extra. And if you’re on hormone replacement therapy, this will be further complicated by the fact that Spironolactone or (worse) Androcur will reduce or even end all ability to do so. Not good. Some girls will use Viagra — I found that to be only marginally helpful, and certainly didn’t help with the mental squick.

Nothing is more womanly than taking viagra for some hot gay man sex.  And on another note, I was just thinking to myself it was about time we had another article like the aforementioned that brought the tranny hooker “meme” back into the spotlight.  Can you feel the progress?

With all the fakes, frauds, and just plain confused, how is anyone to sort out all the bs?  The only people who stand a chance are the born-transsexual, because we always eventually hit that wall and the solution becomes obvious.  In a lot of ways then, the sexologist clique is merely using knowledge of us to prey on the gay community.  Rather than helping people accept themselves, there are those who encourage the “pseudo-transsexual” people into the transsexual treatment program.  This is nothing but malpractice.

But we aren’t quite out of the fire yet.  TS men and woman are largely beyond the reach of the sexologists thanks to laws and regulations fought and won by courageous TS people long before any of this nonsense came about.  While the current DSM proposal contains the carrot of dismissal from disordered status from the psychs once surgery is complete, this is predicated on the notion that you approach them for approval in the first place, something that isn’t necessary at the present time.  This is an inroad to a transsexual population that currently doesn’t need them at all.

If this carrot is dangled before people who would otherwise avoid the psychs, and there are a lot, then you go on record as a transsexual.  Whether it is in private or government records, there is a paper trail of you being “disordered” in one way or another.  Right now, that may or may not be a very bad thing depending on your situation.  But who is to say it won’t get worse down the road?

The current trend is to try to pathologize more and more people.  Why would a significant exception be made for curing transsexualism?  It’s just a way to drum up more business, and it’s something none of us really need.  Keep the psychs irrelevant; they have nothing to offer most of us.  We simply don’t need them.

So please do carry on, and enjoy the Day of Forgettance!

Advertisements

28 Responses to -Sexologists- ruining lives, and other things

  1. frith2 says:

    The argument for keeping some kind of diagnosis in the DSM 5 was for health insurance purposes.

    This will be very interesting – mainly because health insurers aren’t silly and will have a strong legal case against accepting ‘gender incongruity’ as a diagnosis when they can prove it only exists to ‘game’ the system.

    Here are the current criteria required to claim SRS funding from Aetna. Anyone who cares to look will notice they bear no resemblance to the DSM-IV (TR), the ICD 10 or the WPATH fruit-loops.

    1. Member is at least 18 years old; and

    Member has met criteria for the diagnosis of “true” transsexualism, including:

    * A sense of estrangement from one’s own body, so that any evidence of one’s own biological sex is regarded as repugnant; and

    * A stable transsexual orientation evidenced by a desire to be rid of one’s genitals and to live in society as a member of the other sex for at least 2 years, that is, not limited to periods of stress; and

    * Absence of physical inter-sex of genetic abnormality; and

    * Does not gain sexual arousal from cross-dressing; and

    * Life-long sense of belonging to the opposite sex and of having been born into the wrong sex, often since childhood; and

    * Not due to another biological, chromosomal or associated psychiatric disorder, such as schizophrenia; and

    * Wishes to make his or her body as congruent as possible with the preferred sex through surgery and hormone treatment…

    http://www.aetna.com/cpb/medical/data/600_699/0615.html

    They bear a striking resemblance to Wållinder’s criteria – and are likely to stay that way…

    but more problematic is that this closed little circle of self-anointed experts are simply misleading both themselves and the rather sad clientele that hang off their every word.

    But then – when you look at the diagnosis expansion over time, and the booming numbers of self-declared TG’s, that has been the case for a long while.

    Problem is they have positioned themselves as an elite little group. Other ‘shrinks’ hang off their every word (proving that social contagion is omni-directional) and they cannot be held to account for their actions.

    Its a bit sad really…

    • Aria Blue says:

      Another thing these activists fail to mention is that many of the insurance companies do have provisions for TS treatment, it’s just that the employers choose not to pay for those clauses. That, and the fact that they do not want TS treatment, they want employer recognition of their “gender”.

      So while they are out campaigning to get these insurance companies to recognize their “needs”, what they are actually doing is trying to broaden the existing TS clauses to include non-TS stuff, rather than petitioning employers to buy the options on these insurance policies that would pay for doctors and surgery.

      They aren’t helping anyone but themselves. This is why I say that TS needs and TG campaigning are completely at odds, not even the slightest bit complimentary in any way. The lie is that we will be helped by their agenda because we are “transgender” too under that umbrella. But ask for specifics and you end up with weak arguments about marriage equality. Co-opting TS was one way to remove us as an impediment, as well as the other purposes it serves.

      • frith2 says:

        “…what they are actually doing is trying to broaden the existing TS clauses to include non-TS stuff, rather than petitioning employers to buy the options on these insurance policies that would pay for doctors and surgery.”

        The purpose it all serves is exploitation.

        Its been standard ideological TG practice for years, to raise situations such as the distress of pre-corrected T/S who cannot afford treatment, then proffer up TG solutions.

        i.e. Their problems can be resolved by changing their documentation.

        Its rather like arguing that an individual in need of a joint replacement can have their problem fixed by giving them a certificate saying they’ve had a joint replacement.

        The rather obvious point is that if a piece of paper which makes a false declaration can resolve the problem, then the problem itself is only imagined.

  2. Kathryn says:

    Interesting…. Your experiences mirror the situation here in NZ. There is a burgeoning number of “transgenders” and “non-op transsexuals” who are hijacking the “human rights” scene and getting their delusions taken seriously by those in power. This could (and probably will) mitigate very much against Core Trranssexuals…..

  3. Aria Blue says:

    Here in the states, the back of TG was broken when Gender Expression was removed from our ENDA bill, and then ENDA itself failed to materialize. The most fortuitous government for these sorts of comprehensive laws existed for 2 years and nothing come of anything. Every single initiative from Gay, Inc. has been stonewalled and then dropped. The party that was supposed to be the friend of these sorts of identity politicians had huge majorities in our legislature and had the White House, yet nothing came to pass.

    Americans simply don’t have the stomach for creating what they feel is another special class under our system of laws. And being a libertarian-based country, there is no statutory authority that can rule on this issue by fiat, despite the ever-burgeoning number of executive branch agencies that promulgate regulations without oversight.

    And now the opportunity to create a tranny protection law is gone, probably for quite a long time. The voters destroyed the majority that was supposed to deliver this agenda, and this is part of a long-term trend. People don’t particularly hate gays, and there will be less disgust of them in some quarters over time, but neither do they favor giving yet another group access to lawyers and lawsuits to sue business into yet more distress. And the notion of giving a special status to various favored groups is something that has always set people on edge. In our current crises mood, nobody is in favor of that anymore.

    And most of all, they don’t want “deviants” like “transvestites” around their children. One thing you won’t see remarked in the news stories is the shifting attitude of parents. When I was a child, there was a very permissive atmosphere toward parenting and people cared little what children did. Perhaps too permissive.

    These days, now that people my age are the driving force behind parenthood, they have gone overboard the other way. They try to put their kids in little bubbles so the children are safe in a way that we never were. Anything that threatens children brings out the anger in parents like you wouldn’t believe.

    And now that everyone lives in a permanent state of fear here, the mood is on a knife edge. While we are generally socially liberal and growing more so as time goes on, such a view will not take precedence over more important things like taking care of kids and making sure people have jobs. And that includes de-prioritizing things like having the freedom of expression in the classroom to crossdress.

    Serious TS people here have little trouble, but that discomfort people feel when they confront one these out TG types has manifested into a disgust of the whole Pride Parade image that typifies what the general public feels about gay rights. This is a lesson the gays need to learn if they want to create a workable movement towards normalization.

    Their strategy of appealing to authority to force the public to accede to their wishes is a huge failure, and if they keep doing that it will backfire terribly on them. It could set back the public acceptance of them by decades if they don’t stop. Some of the people at the grass-roots level of the gay rights movement are starting to rebel against their leadership, and in turn starting to rebel against their ownership by one party. All the old alliances are starting to crumble as everyone realizes they have been had.

    In all of this, the last thing on anyone’s mind is figuring out how transvestites can get into the ladies’ room.

    We’ve lived through times where people have forgotten what’s really important, lulled into a false sense of security by the lack of global conflict and the relative prosperity most of the Western world enjoys. For a time, even the poor in the US lived relatively well. Now all that is changing. We have 41 million people on the government food program, which means that 41 million people have hit rock bottom, below the poverty level. People are starting to realize that what seemed like prosperity was only an illusion, and we were in steep decline. Our middle class is losing all its homes as forclosures destroy mortgage agreements. There is little of it left now. And the worst part of the system here is that once you fall off that treadmill, these days there is little hope of climbing back on. All the old promises of work hard, play by the rules, and you’ll be taken care of have been shown to be lies. And people are scared.

    When economic crises starts marching around the globe, things are going to come back into focus in a very sharp way. I doubt we’ll be seeing many out and proud transvestites whining for their “rights” for much longer.

  4. Kathryn says:

    Thanks for that, Aria. W
    We do live in quite different countries, with vastly different political systems and social attitudes to many things.
    Homosexuality, prostitution and same-sex unions are quite legal here, although we do have our “conservatives” who would change that if they could (for the usual reasons).
    The TG’s, though, are stirring things up as they are in the States, and the fear of TS folk here is that the inevitable mainstream “backlash” against them will make our position much worse, in view of the fact that one of the TG’s main “weapons” is to blur the boundary between themselves and TS/HBS-born people.
    You are right about the vast changes that are on the horizon in the world’s financial and transport systems. Attempts by transvestites to get into female spaces will be treated with far less seriousness than seems to be the case in the present politically-correct world.
    Plus ca change, plus le meme chose …. huh?….

  5. Kathryn says:

    Good scheme….. will give that a try at the first opportunity…xx

  6. kathrynmartin says:

    Let tell you what my definition of transsexual is:

    a. a person whose birth gender is different from their biological gender through a biological accident during gestation or a genetic accident of their parents;and

    b. who experience dissociation from their physical body sufficient that they need to change their physical body to match their birth gender; and

    c. who make the decision to act on this experience.

    See, I have never needed the validation of psycho quacks, psychiatrists, psychologist, medical doctors or you, to define myself. What do they really know – nothing. But my narrative, my biography, which is unique and I am sorry to say matches none of the TS, TG, TV, AGP, or whatever other label you put on it, has convinced those that believe they understand, that hormones and transitioning my physical body is the correct decision I made.

    So just to get this clear, I understand that you think you had no choice in the matter of SRS. With respect that is nonsense, because you, some day called a surgeon, got your consultation, got your two letters of recommendation and went to the bank and got the money to do what you considered no longer to be an option for you, because you had made a choice.

    Or is your transsexualism a pathological condition? A physical condition no less. When you ask yourself whose pathology it really is and if you are truly a transsexual then you must concede that it is a pathological condition of your parents, their condition because they supplied you genetically with a body, or hormonally with a gestational environment, that produced a body that did not and does does not match your birth gender.

    I am a transsexual and I have come to the decision that I must take the step of getting GRS in order to overcome the handicap I was dealt by being given a body that is not congruent with my birth gender.

    The problem I have with your argumentation is this: You have let others (TG, Transvestites, Autogynephiliacs etc. or whatever you want to call them hijack your agenda and your narrative. Believe me I am fully cognizant of the differences.

    Now you believe that differentiating yourself from them and complaining about their audacity, is your agenda and narrative as a transsexual. Maybe it is time to own your own narrative and agenda in a convincing way that those who you are trying to convince, as you say the medical industry and the legislators, will actually understand that you are not differentiating yourself by setting yourself off from the others, but actually have your own story to tell. I think you do protest too much.

  7. Aria Blue says:

    There is only one form of transsexual and it has zero to do with your ideas about “gender identity”. Transsexualism is only about the body not being right for the brain. Transsexual is a birth defect, and believe me if you had it you would have known all along. It’s not something that simply springs up midlife. Your idea that its something that involves a meaningful choice as you say is an insult, and shows you haven’t got the slightest comprehension of what it means to be born transsexual. This confusion of people like you, who suddenly decide that you want to get surgery after getting into an argument with people like me, is a serious problem.

    What I have been trying to get through to you transgender types is that you are not transsexual. It’s as simple as that. The fact that you didn’t want surgery all along means that you don’t even fit the remotest, most pedantic definition of the condition which states that transsexuals are people who get sex change surgery due to lifelong problems. It’s not that complicated.

    We wouldn’t have this problem if people like you would stop attaching yourselves to transsexualism. For some reason you feel the need to talk bad about people who hate their bodies, and that is because you find yourself attached to a condition that you haven’t got the faintest clue about. We don’t like being attached to you any more than you like being attached to us.

    There is no definition of transsexual that doesn’t include surgery. You and your type of whatever you are do not get to redefine it. If you retain a male body and dress “like a woman”, there is already a word for that. If you aren’t transsexual, don’t get surgery. You will definitely regret it.

  8. frith2 says:

    Birth gender? Biological gender? This is too confusing for me.

    APA Style Guide
    Correct use of the terms “gender” and “sex”

    The term “gender” refers to culture and should be used when referring to men and women as social groups.

    The term “sex” refers to biology and should be used when biological distinctions are emphasized, for example, “sex differences in hormone production.”
    http://www.owled.com/apa1.html

    World Health Organisation (WHO)

    “Sex” refers to the biological and physiological characteristics that define men and women.

    “Gender” refers to the socially constructed roles, behaviours, activities, and attributes that a given society considers appropriate for men and women.
    http://www.who.int/gender/whatisgender/en/index.html

    You write:
    …because you, some day called a surgeon, got your consultation, got your two letters of recommendation and went to the bank and got the money to do what you considered no longer to be an option for you, because you had made a choice.

    If it was not perceived as an option, but rather a necessity, then it must have ceased to be choice at that point … unless of course you want to re-litigate the experience by arguing life and death is a choice.

    By that standard every time any person signs the consents for any life preserving surgery or medical treatment, be it heart by-pass, kidney transplant, or whatever, they are making a choice. To a large extent I would agree – though I would factor in the innate survival instinct that all complex organisms possess (with a few exceptions such as human suicide) and consequently be somewhat less injudicious with my finger pointing.

    You have let others (TG, Transvestites, Autogynephiliacs etc. or whatever you want to call them hijack your agenda and your narrative… Now you believe that differentiating yourself from them and complaining about their audacity, is your agenda and narrative as a transsexual.

    Unless I’m misinterpreting this part of your argument (its always possible) what I’m reading is a fairly standard variation on the ‘short skirt’ defence.

    The ‘short skirt’ defence, as I’m sure you will recall, used to run like this:

    “Its not my fault I raped her, your honour. It was hers. She was asking for it by wearing that short skirt!” Another version of it went, “…she must have wanted me to. She didn’t fight back and she didn’t try to stop me!”

    The essential ingredient to the ‘short skirt’ defence is that it reverses the responsibility. “Its their fault they got burgled … they shouldn’t have left the windows open…” & etc.

    You might as well argue that it was Poland’s fault it was invaded by Germany, or Tibet’s fault it was invaded by China!

    By the same logic it is not AriaBlue’s fault, nor the fault of any other woman of history, that their experience was so badly misinterpreted and reconstructed by gender theorists (I hold here to the sex/gender distinction) and psychological pseudo-scientists.

    The colonisation of classical or biological transsexualism will soon be mirrored with Intersex narratives and experiences. It will not be for a want of fight-back.
    See, for example:
    http://ts-si.org/guest-columns/27504-dsm-5-disordering-intersex-disobedience

    It will be as a result of disempowerment, denial and erasure : but then, in those cultures imbued with the Adam and Eve model of biological sex (though, not gender) the disempowerment, denial and erasure of human bio-diversity in sex formation is what its all about … isn’t it!

    How else can the obsessive genital mutilating, the shoe-horning, the force-fitting, redefining and denying be explained.

    • kathrynmartin says:

      I agree with what you have to say, except the “short skirt defense” statement.

      What I am saying is that if you define your narrative stating what you are not, i.e. TG, and forget to state what you are, then TG will rule the day because they will fill the void left by you. If you do not occupy your space by your narrative (not the differentiation from others, in this case TG) how can you possibly get legislators to leave the “convenience hook” they love to hang themselves off of. Legislators will always tend to the more inclusive touchy feely definition because it is politically convenient for them. So unless you provide the correct narrative and support it by credible research instead of grasping at the straws of anectdotal research then you really have an issue. Crying foul about other groups legislator want to cater to is not helpful.

      Really, the only issue with Aria is the aggressiveness with which she determines the narratives of other transsexuals. There are personal narratives and political narratives. Argue for the latter I am fully and completely with you but stop playing prosecutor, jury and judge over the lives of others. I am always open to a meaningful argument about how to advance your and my agenda and narrative, but just don’t presume my biography.

      Birth Gender: I was born as a woman

      Biological Gender: unfortunately my body was male

      In my view our narrative begins with owning the descriptive terms that describe us. We always buy the descriptions of others. Maybe that needs to change.

      • lisalee18wheeler says:

        I own my narrative. Maybe you should start owning your own…

      • frith2 says:

        I agree with what you have to say, except the “short skirt defense” statement.

        ? The short skirt defence attempts to transpose accountability – holding the person(s) being offended against responsible for the actions of the offender(s).

        What I am saying is that if you define your narrative stating what you are not, i.e. TG, and forget to state what you are, then TG will rule the day because they will fill the void left by you. If you do not occupy your space by your narrative (not the differentiation from others, in this case TG) how can you possibly get legislators to leave the “convenience hook” they love to hang themselves off of. Legislators will always tend to the more inclusive touchy feely definition because it is politically convenient for them. So unless you provide the correct narrative and support it by credible research instead of grasping at the straws of anectdotal research then you really have an issue. Crying foul about other groups legislator want to cater to is not helpful.

        This argument rests on a false premise and is absolutely an application of the short skirt defence. Firstly AriaBlue has quite clearly offered up a definition: namely Wållinder’s.

        Furthermore every post she writes is part of a counter-narrative. You go on to argue that TG’s fill a void created by TS. With respect, this is conceptually wrong. The space occupied by TS people wasn’t abandoned by us – it was colonised by others, with a great deal of encouragement and assistance from psycho-gender theorists and various mental health professionals who purposfully ignored the *somatic dissonance* experienced by transsexed children, preferring instead to develop the socio-cultural narrative which now allows them to erase biological diversity in the area of human sex formation.

        The consequence of that narrative is the routine systematic mutilation of intersex genitalia solely for the purpose of attempting to control “gender identity” development and the ongoing erasure of biological transsexualism by redefinition as a ‘gender’ issue.

        You argue that these outcomes are the fault of the respective groups – and you reason that as a failure to put up a credible counter narrative.

        What the heck is that article on TS-Si, that I put up the URL to the other day? There are counter narratives all over the internet. They hardly matter precisely because this discourse is not controlled by TG’s – although they are validated by it. It is not controlled by Intersex or Transsexed people – who are totally invalidated by it.

        Its controlled by psychologists and gender theorists who have not the slightest intention of listening to anybody, or for that matter, any counter discourse that doesn’t reenforce there own predetermined positions. To rationalise it the way you have is to hold those who live with the consequences of their impositions responsible for the impositions.

        That is without doubt a manifestation of the ‘short skirt defence’!

        Really, the only issue with Aria is the aggressiveness with which she determines the narratives of other transsexuals. There are personal narratives and political narratives. Argue for the latter I am fully and completely with you but stop playing prosecutor, jury and judge over the lives of others. I am always open to a meaningful argument about how to advance your and my agenda and narrative, but just don’t presume my biography.

        Birth Gender: I was born as a woman

        Biological Gender: unfortunately my body was male

        In my view our narrative begins with owning the descriptive terms that describe us. We always buy the descriptions of others. Maybe that needs to change.

        I suspect that what you interpret as Aria’s ‘aggressiveness’ has more to do with the way she repulses the colonisation process. Its a perspective thing and a matter of personal judgement.

        Finally, A woman is a physically and socially mature female. A girl is a physically and socially immature female. The same definitions apply to male, as juxtaposed with boy and man.

        Gender discourse = the erasure of variation in sex formation. It was developed for that purpose and is rejected by large numbers of biologically diverse people for that reason.

        Buying into Gender theory and gender narrative is buying into erasure and denial.

        And it surely does need to change!

  9. kathrynmartin says:

    So let’s compare notes:

    Aria:
    “Transsexual is a birth defect”

    Kathryn:
    “a person whose birth gender is different from their biological gender through a biological accident during gestation or a genetic accident of their parents;and”

    Aria:
    “transsexuals are people who get sex change surgery due to lifelong problems”

    Kathryn:
    “who experience dissociation from their physical body sufficient that they need to change their physical body to match their birth gender; and”

    Aria:
    “There is no definition of transsexual that doesn’t include surgery”

    Kathryn:
    “who make the decision to act on this experience.”

    Based on the foregoing, arguing with me is really a serious problem for you. I predict (and it is evident in your last post) that you will begin calling me names soon instead of facing a serious discourse. Or, in the alternative you might just tell me to f*ck off and stop posting comments on your blog.

    You are confusing transsexual with capital T Transsexual capital P politics. As long as you do that you will never ever own your own narrative and must rely on diminishing others to elevate yourself and your agenda. If you quit talking about Transgenderism and what it negatively does to you and talk about small t transsexualism and what it really is maybe you could gain your own narrative and actually accomplish something that would resonate.

    • lisalee18wheeler says:

      Honestly, I think you should go sit in the corner and shut the fuck up! You might learn something. Or better still, go have some surgery if it will make you feel better.

      Here’s a head’s up:

      Evoking Godwin’s Law = Instant Fail.
      My parents and other relatives were Holocaust survivors.
      If you’re not ts, STOP USING MY FUCKING NARRATIVE!

      Any questions?

  10. frith2 says:

    ROFL!

    Hello kathrynmartin,

    “…you will begin calling me names soon instead of facing a *serious discourse*. Or, in the alternative you might just tell me to f*ck off and stop posting comments on your blog.”

    Well … I offered you a serious dicourse – interestingly it was been completely ignored in your last post.

    ????

  11. Kathryn says:

    I must confess that I have been hard put to it, through most of this discourse, to detect significant differences of view between Aria and kathrynmartin.
    They are mostly, it seems, saying the same thing, albeit with varying degrees of cogency.
    Is that a personal thing between you two…. or is there a point that I am missing?

  12. Aria Blue says:

    No its not personal at all. I took issue with Kathrynmartin characterizing transsexualism as an “immature attitude”. i.e. people who hate their body and get surgery for that reason are simply deluded.

    I’m tired of people thinking that the hatred of the body aspect of transsexualism is simply irrelevant, usually while trying to explain how they are a type of transsexual who doesn’t mind their body. They can do that rationalization without mentioning a serious medical condition and trying to denigrate the people who suffer from a birth defect.

    They have no right, and no right to speak on something of which they are completely ignorant. Much less replace us, the real transsexuals, with themselves. If they want to campaign to create a name for their “condition”, that’s fine. Transsexual is taken.

  13. kathrynmartin says:

    Frith2, I completely understand the dilemma regarding DSM 5 and the need to have medical coverage for surgery that by any stretch of the imagination is reconstructive surgery. This type of surgery should receive coverage like any other surgery required to amend a congenital birth defect. The problem is though that everyone seems to want to pin it on a mental disorder. That includes Jan Walinder who after developing his limiting definition of transsexualism says: “These factors are specific of transsexualism, and because of them it is not difficult to delimit,transsexualism from
    other forms of sexual aberration”. The implication being that transsexualism is a form of sexual aberration. He comes to that conclusion because of the abhorrence factor that Aria seems to think is so important. It is a psychiatric issue when you “hate” body parts possibly to the point that you self mutilate.

    Aria: to be fair, I said hating body parts was “immature” because the collection of tissue is really value neutral. If I have a congenital birth defect I may have very strong emotions about the way it looks, what it represents, how it makes me feel.

    So this is then what I said verbedum:

    “anyone who hates their genitals, or loves them is, I am sorry to say lacking some fundamental judgment. It is incredibly immature, similar to naming your body parts.

    I was born with many body parts. For this post I want to concentrate on genitalia and secondary gender characteristics such as breasts. I have never identified myself through my body parts. I was not a male because I had a penis and a flat chest. I am not a female because I will develop breasts and some day have my penis surgically shaped into a vagina. ”

    If you prefer having your condition hijacked as a mental condition such as was done by all of experts from Benjamin to Walinder to Blanchard, then understand that for that reason alone you must be lumped in with whomever else travels along the mental condition, sexual aberration, philia and deviance road. They cannot help themselves, they will always take that position. And the consequence of this is that so many people whom you don’t want to be associated with will think you are albeit different from them one of their group.

    This whole field of dreams in my view simply lacks scientific and intellectual rigor and because both transsexual and transgender communities cannot get their narrative straight and their ducks in a row, we have had zero, nil, zip really meaningful research. Maybe it’s time to concentrate on what really matters instead of clubbing others on the head over what they are or not are. In the full measure of time it will evidence itself through their actions.

  14. Aria Blue says:

    If you think there is no research, you haven’t looked very hard. And there is no transsexual community because this isn’t an identity issue. There never will be, just as there never will be a “cleft palate” community. This is simply a birth defect like any other, and that fact has long been obscured by nonsense such as you have written above. Simply put, YOU are part of the problem

    What you fail to understand is that the hatred, self-mutilation and all the rest, are merely the symptoms, or effects of transsexualism; they are not the cause. The cause is purely physiological.

    You also fail to understand the significance of Wallinder and the others. They describe the symptoms to a greater or lesser degree. They are not actually talking about what causes it though some of them posit a tentative psychiatric opinion. Words like “sexual aberration” when used by Wallinder or Benjamin do not have the meaning you suggest in your post. Like “deviance”, they are terms that must be placed in context to understand them. But I think you know that. They may not have known what the root cause was, but they saw a “clear difference” between the transsexuals and all the rest.

    The fact remains that if you do not grasp what transsexuals are talking about when speaking of the lifelong alienation from their bodies prior to treatment, you do not grasp what it means to be transsexual. All the selective parsing and spin is just an excuse. People like you seem to think that transsexualism is simply about feelings, dreams, and wishes. Nothing could be further from the truth, and you expose the difference between yourself and us every time you insult us in this fashion.

    If there is any lack of scientific rigor, it’s in the idea that you can just “feel like a woman” and get surgery and have it all work out, family and everything. Transsexualism is not “feeling like a woman”, or feeling like anything else. That is something that the transgender need to understand.

    Transsexual surgery is a physical cure for a physical problem. Transgender people will never, ever, understand that. But I think the success rate for the treatment speaks for itself.

  15. leighspov says:

    If I may …

    Arguing the fine points of what this or that so called expert has said or written is compleatly nonsense in and of itself. In the final analysis, nobody outside of the academic world even knows who the experts are or what they say, and could care even less.

    What really matters is public opinion, and that my friends is in the toilet due to the selfishness of those like sandeen and co, who work tirelessly in the media to promote the GLB affilliation with transsexualism. That is what needs to be exposed for what it is, and all this back and forth bs about which expert is correct is nothing but 2 vultures fighting over the same road kill while arguing over which truck ran over it.

  16. kathrynmartin says:

    Aria, I think you underestimate the dilemma you create for yourself when you adopt approaches of researchers whose conclusions include among other things the identification of transsexualism as a mental disorder. Take Walinder, who identifies the fundamental difference but then goes on to say that this disorder is easily distinguished from OTHER SEXUAL ABERRATIONS. You cannot own Walinder and then explain the sexual aberration part by saying he did not mean what he said. Which is essentially what you do in your previous post. So if you talk to your legislator what are you going to say? That Walinder got it right but did not mean what he said when he identified your condition as a sexual aberration? How far do you think you are going to get in asserting that your “sexual aberration” condition is nothing but a congenital birth defect however delimiting it might be. And do you really think we now need to interpret the meaning of these words in order for the general population including transsexual people to understand them? If that’s the case it sounds to me you are just attempting to occasion a result. You would be insulting Walinder and yourself.

    Then this: “If there is any lack of scientific rigor, it’s in the idea that you can just “feel like a woman” and get surgery and have it all work out”

    How do you discover that you were a woman. You started at age 4 or whenever waking up one morning and say to yourself I hate my penis I must have surgery. By common understanding if you acted on THAT you would be a eunuch not a woman or a transsexual. If transsexual is not about recognizing that your physical gender is not your birth gender then it has nothing to do with gender at all and you are welcome to THAT definition. Because it is then about castration rather than transformation of your body which unfortunately has been equipped with by some biological or genetic accident.

    The whole transition begins with realizing your body is not the gender with which you were born. Then you feel dissociation with your physical body and then you get surgery.

    If you look at the accessible research, no matter who performed it, is simply not to be taken seriously. The sample basis is in most cases so small that you cannot even call the results a hypothesis. Have you ever looked at the questions on which Blanchard bases his paper in which he hypothesized about autogynephilia. They are worse than the Cogiati test, which is worth nothing. Walinders paper in which he develops his definitions of transsexual was an anecdotal case study of 43 patients. Is this really something you want to have your narrative associated with.

    I understand that surgery is a physical cure for a physical problem. But unless you talk about castration and being a eunuch, it is invariably a subset of transition of a person from one gender to another as far as their physical body is concerned and to affirm the actual gender they were born with. Do not cut off your nose despite your face.

  17. Aria Blue says:

    I don’t think you grasp what I am saying, even after all this. The point of the researchers is not that they have the explanation for transsexualism. The point is that despite a complete lack of understanding the cause of transsexualism, many different people using different approaches were easily able to sort out the transsexuals from the pseudotranssexuals. Therefore, their musings about the cause aren’t particularly relevant. The main show is the differential.

    We have a fairly good idea of what causes the brain/body dichotomy. And that’s what it is. It has nothing to do with “gender”, which is merely a descriptor for social conduct. If you want to try to create some theology out of gender theory and apply it to the brain you will have lots of company but little success. You could also follow in the footsteps of some of the crossdressers who want to find a biological reason for someone to eschew social convention (wearing dresses) without any other effects such as having the wrong body parts. Good luck.

    Once again, one doesn’t “discover” that one is a woman, and that is a central issue with TG people who think they are transsexual. It is not about feelings or wishing. It is simply a realization that your body is wrong. The fallout from the body mismatch will entail a “sex change”, but the social categorization of the curative act is not the definition of the condition.

    Your own continuing characterization of the surgery as merely ancillary to the transsexual condition shows, yet again, that you have absolutely no understanding of what you are talking about when it comes to this subject. You keep making references to woman and womanhood and that simply isn’t part of the equation when getting to the source of the issue.

    Remember, everyone here that you are talking to has far more experience with this that you, and when you attempt to lecture us on the topic it comes across as very patronizing in a silly sort of way. We all know what its like to be born with a variant biology and the fallout of this over a lifetime. And most of the people who comment here have been through the surgery you are contemplating.

    It’s extremely irritating for you to continually refer to the surgery as castration. This belies a fear of the surgery that simply doesn’t occur in a born transsexual. The surgery results in a fully functional vagina that is nothing like the mutilation you describe. Even so, if it is a removal of the offending appendage and an imperfect result, it is indeed a cure for the problem. The brain expects the vagina to be there, and that is a definition of a female in crude biological terms, which is then parsed into these conversations as “woman”.

    It’s not about creating pink clouds and glitter and dubbing someone a woman. That is the social fallout of transition to having the right body. The TG position always puts the cart before the horse. i.e. Your feelings about “gender” create a need for surgery. This simply isn’t so. If you get surgery for any other reason than to bring your body back into balance, you are doing it for the wrong reason. Gender, the social label, does not enter the picture at all with transsexualism. That is a TG fantasy.

  18. Kathryn says:

    Aria and kathrynmartn, what is being achieved here? It seems to me that it’s become a case of point-scoring, with the addition of some misquoting of adages and bad spelling, punctuation and grammar here and there.
    I assume Aria is post-op TS; what about kathrynmartin?
    What are her credentials for the assertions she makes?
    It’s all very well to quote (or denigrate) this or that authority in the psychological or clinical field, but “being there” is really the only way to understand the issue of transgender incursion into transsexual territory. Similarly, to dismiss the growing body of clinical evidence in support of the causes of transsexuality on the basis of sample sizes, is disingenuous. Samples sizes will never be large simply because true transsexuality is quite a rare condition.
    I’m trying to discover kathrynmartin’s purpose in making the original post that has led to this whole series. Right now, unless it was merely to cause an altercation, that is far from obvious.

  19. Kathryn says:

    Now we are getting to it. That is very very clear, Aria.
    If kathrynmartin doesn’t “get it” now, then it’s obvious in which camp (as it were!) she resides.

%d bloggers like this: