Transsexualism has zero to do with being gay

As I wrote before, there is currently a campaign to erase true transsexuals from the books and replace them with effeminate gay men and transvestites.  There are some serious obstacles in the way for those who pursue this though.  Hard science contradicts their wishes, and their own soft-science evidence often does as well.

When I pointed out that transsexual children (reproductively male) are not effeminate, I had a specific purpose in mind.  While it is true that these children displayed little outward sign of the true problem, that is because by that point the window of opportunity for observing them had passed.  There is no data at all on true ts children prior to this wall of silence.  At the point the child is being put to the question by a cold, authoritative figure, the child has withdrawn from the world and you will gain no insight into them whatsoever.  You other TS people will understand why this is so.  Others can just guess.

By 7-10 years of age the transsexual individual has long passed the stage where their self-knowledge can be expressed freely; the real world has come crashing in and the bleakness of their fate is clear.  Whether its the admonitions of their parents or the evidence of their own eyes, these kids are all too aware of reality.  Transsexual kids have a physical birth defect; that doesn’t mean they are crazy.

So while the “effeminate” young boy (pre-homosexual) is expressing himself freely with gender play and his open mannerisms, such things are clearly forbidden to the transsexual child and serve only as a reminder of the horror that awaits them later in life.  As time goes on, dreams are dashed before they were dreamt, and the future descends into a dark cloud of sadness.  The affectations of gender as social play are meaningless to the TS child.  And this is where you can draw clear distinction between the young pre-homosexual and the TS child.

Of course this says nothing about the child before this point, during that window when they could be observed.  And in fact these TS kids appear to be completely left out of the literature.  I hope it stays that way for a long time, long enough for the current crop of sexologist jerks to be pushed aside.  But assuming you could watch them, they would probably seem no different from the other boys and girls… until the onset of self-knowledge when they clam up and fall silent to the world.  The reasons for their behavior and lack of obvious cues will be completely inexplicable to sexologists who assume everything is about sexual orientation.  I could explain it to them clearly, and it would simply pass in one ear and out the other.

In fact, Zucker’s own work shows that “non-gay” kids have no preference as to who they play with, while “pre-gay” kids prefer opposite sex kids as playmates more often.  Where do you suppose a transsexual child will fit in before the moment of clarity that silences them?  This will further confound the researcher who wants to study these kids as if they are little lab rats.  The more these hacks bathe in their own theorizing the less they actually know.

I read with some amusement the writing of people who claim they were just so effeminate that they couldn’t help themselves.  They couldn’t stop themselves from making out with boys when they hit puberty, and the reason they want a sex change (or in some cases already had one supposedly) was because they need to have sex with straight men.  Sorry to inform you, that’s just called being gay.

The only reason to get surgery is because your body is driving you mad.  All that nonsense about playing out the proper gender roles is fluff from people who have no clue about the core condition.  Sex and marriage are a result of the bodies we wear, they are huge aspects of a full life.  But they are not the cause of transsexualism.  That little lie is put out there by people who want to change the condition from a birth defect to two conditions of sexuality- namely the “HSTS” and the “AGP” argument.  These people want everyone to go along with them when they chant the mantra.

Its also interesting to see these people, claiming the top of the TG-inspired hierarchy by their “HSTS” status”, then handing out judgments on the rest based on sexual orientation.  If you aren’t an effeminate homosexual as they were, then you are an AGP.  Over the last 5 years I have seen this scenario time after time on the internet.  These are the same people pushing the same harmful agenda.  They prey on those who may in a difficult place in their life.  They are trying to get momentum behind their false little model, using people in distress as fuel.

While it is difficult to win these arguments in the “soft science” of psych literature, there are some clear differentials between homosexual men and transsexual women in the neuroscience that has been done to date.

There is a clear difference between the super-chiasmic nucleus of gay men and transsexual women.

There is a clear difference between the INAH-3 area of gay men and transsexual women.

There is a clear difference between the BSTc of gay men and transsexual women.

So already at this early point, we have three solid points of difference before we even get to EEG and fMRI.  In any other area, this would be enough to create a separate category.  But in the soft “science” of sex, we have people trying to mash everyone into the same bin because base prejudice is still acceptable there.

Thinking back to the lives of children, what would you expect from a little girl once she realizes something is very wrong?  Would you expect her to go blithely about her life, knowing that she is horribly deformed, with no ill effect whatsoever?  Knowing that everyone has labeled her wrong, would she then stupidly proceed to act out “effeminately” and chase boys as if nothing is wrong?  Of course not.  It’s the basic definition of the condition itself.  And that lack of self-knowledge would be a sign of delusion, not transsexualism.

Transsexualism is not defined by sexual orientation no matter what some people would have you believe.  When someone tries to make you feel “less than” because of who you love, treat that person as you would any random stranger started talking down to you because of your sexuality.  Don’t give self-appointed trans “experts”, whom you don’t even know past the internet persona, the power to make you feel insecure about yourself simply because you don’t fit some ancient scale that has been misapplied in the first place.

There are transsexual men, and transsexual women.  There are transsexual gay men, and transsexual lesbian women.  There are transsexual men and women who are bisexual.  Being gay, or lesbian, or bisexual is not a pathology, and neither is it diagnostic of TS.  Sexuality has no bearing on TS whatsoever.

There is only one kind of TS.  It is a birth condition that has specific characteristics.  It is not defined by sexuality, but by the sexually dimorphic brain.  Reject attempts to categorize you by your orientation.  Don’t let these people split us up.  They have succeeded at the divide and conquer strategy far too long.

Advertisements

20 Responses to Transsexualism has zero to do with being gay

  1. Kathryn says:

    Aria…. your third paragraph brought tears to my eyes….. it describes so exactly how I felt at about that age. We learn to hide our feelings and knowledge at a very early age. The desire to “fit into the herd” is very strong in our species.
    There are folk like us that cannot bear the thought of HBS folk running the gamut of sexual orientation….One wonders, if they had been born with all the right bits, they would be homophobic…..Probably, as they are as TS.
    I always tell the curious about the three defining factors of us all…. biological phenotype, sexual orientation and sexual identity (brain sex if you like). Once people realise that these three factors are sometimes not congruent with the majority, and that we put the labels “gay” and/or “TS/HBS” on such folk, the light dawns.
    I have been saying for years that sexual preferences have nothing to do with sexual identity, or biology for that matter….. It’s all in the labelling….
    Like many of my kind (if they are honest about it) I am bisexual…. That is quite a separate issue from my HBS. For monosexual HBS people, what label you pin on their sexual preference depends on whether you judge it from their chromosomes or their brain sex…… go figure….. Who, in the final analysis, gives a damn about with whom they like to have sex?….. It’s irrelevant to the issue of HBS….

    • Aria Blue says:

      “…your third paragraph brought tears to my eyes…”

      Me too. I suppose that’s one reason I get so angry at these characters who so blithely go about talking of TS like it is a blessing. To a crossdresser living the dream, I am sure it is. To a small, terrified child it is a horrible birth defect that threatens their existence.

      It’s time to put that word out. No more dividing things up by orientation- that just plays into the hands of the TG and the sexologists.

      And no more putting up with trans* people telling us this birth defect is just a delusion. How insulting can they be?

  2. saphirenz says:

    I can imagine that post being highly unpopular in some circles but I find it quite refreshing. The pioneering transitioners did their thing and wrote their autobiographies and subsequently the somewhat hackneyed phraseology was trotted out ad infinitum. I think though, that by then, I had stopped reading them . my feeling being that “if you read one you have read them all.”…and in any case…”All that glisters is not gold”

    Certainly it did not take long before the HSTS and tg imposters discovered these ready made “syndromes” and their huge betrayal begun …by compromising the transsexual condition.

    • Aria Blue says:

      They are bait, aren’t they? The crossdressers of either orientation love these categories to death because it gives them psuedo-medical legitimacy and erases ours.

  3. lisalee18wheeler says:

    My two cents, and I know it’s going to be unpopular, is that all these first gen transitioners are leaving something out, or distorting the truth entirely. And as nice a man as Harry Benjamin was, he was far from being a humanitarian.

    Take the red pill… 🙂

  4. annierose55 says:

    I o agre with you Aria that TS’ism has little to do with sexual orintation. As Liz pinted out on her blog, Harry found the same distribution of gay/straight/bi in TS women as was apparrent in the Gen’l population.

    I think that Liz’s seeming pre-occupation with HSTS has to do with the terminlogy of the times. Remember, that Benjamin was understandably influence by his contemporries of the late 50’s and early 60’s.

    I can confirm from my own experience that I did not to my knowledge displayy any overt ‘femininity’ (playing with dolls etc.) as a child and as the testosterone wreaked its havoc during puberty, girls or their accouterments were my only outlet despite my just plain KNOWING that it was all wrong.

    As I have mentioned before, I never much studied this beyond what I could learn as a teenager, which was not much. Once it was clear to me that an actual total physicl transformation was possible, (I was about 20, by then), that became my sole goal and focus.

    What I was most surprised to experience, was the seemingly normal, natural transition from women to men as my perferred sexual partner. This occurred during that prolonged transition beginning with an almost total disappearnce of libido with the onset of strong doses of depo provera and then a gradual increase post srs when the dosages were much less and sensation in my genital area went gradually from excruciating pain to no pain to non painful snsation to a finally plesureable sensation. It took a while.

    What is even more interesting is that over maybe the last ten years or so, I seem to be developing a growing interest in women. Curiouser, and curiouser.

    @Lisa. I am curious what ou think us “1st generation” transitioners, left out. FYI..I never knew or met Harry.

    • Aria Blue says:

      Lol, what’s Liz’s problem now? I stopped taking that person seriously after the series of gaffes they made with their story on the blog awhile back.

      Not that I ever really took them very seriously in the first place. I don’t think whoever they are is very bright. They certainly can’t follow an argument or train of thought.

    • leighspov says:

      I was the same as you growing up. To all outward appearance, other than my uncles who liked to often infer my “girlyness” as a slur, I was just another kid doing all the things boys did. I honestly don’t remember much of my early childhood years, save they were happy years, loving parents etc, but the fact is back in the day, any kid with half a brain knew to shape up amongst the kids on the block, even if it were only to prevent you getting your teeth knocked out…
      I was no different. I too knew something was different and it wasnt until the April Ashly story hit that I knew where I wanted to go … but how .. and then it was the rest of the story 🙂

  5. leighspov says:

    Most of the under 40 crowd has no problem with people’s sexual orientation and didn’t experience the level of shame or the social ostracization that older people had to endure

    er now wait just a minute …

    As a fully indentured member of the old farts of america club I need to point out to you that during the 60’s and 70’s, when we were occupying the position of youth that you have inherited, we didnt have a problem with sexual orientation issues either! In point of fact, some of the most popular clubs around were gay oriented and often filled with straights who couldnt give a shit as long as they didnt mess with their junk … lol

    Your generation is no more or less on board with sexual orientation differences than ours were. The only difference between now and then was the level of politcs and religion involved, which the GLBT has brought upon themselves. Most people dont give a crap, then or now.

    • Aria Blue says:

      Yes but you had to contend with the dominant old fart culture from the GI’s, which was decidedly NOT friendly to any kind of wavering from the straight line. That took time to change, and there were a lot of less-enlightened people running around still propagating it. The people who study such things, as they may be, remarked that a lot of the prejudice in the US died with the GI gen.

      And I am speaking in broad sociological terms. Individuals may vary of course. The “average level” of internalized homphobia is greater in the segment of people who grew up further back.

      Yet for transsexual-born people, I think its very different. Our understanding of the world is shaped by our internal conflict, and as a result many of us naturally tend away from prejudice based on bodies and sexual orientation. Because we are all individuals, people vary.

      So while I know you didn’t have those problems, there are a significant number of older transitioners born here in the US who do.

      And those feelings of prejudice bequeathed to us by our forbears can be used against us through the magic of guilt and shame. I despise this practice, and it is often the chief weapon of sociopaths. Many people’s problems can be traced back to these twin terrors.

      • leighspov says:

        Most of the GI gen are dead or dying. I fail to see how they have any influence today. What I see today is hypocricy from my generation. These are the same people that lived through the woodstock era, sex, drugs and rock and roll, now all grown up with families, sold out to the corporations and looking for religion and government to shore up their new found status.

        Thankfully, I am not one of them.

        • Aria Blue says:

          The other part you are missing is the large Calvinist/Puritan influence that everyone here absorbs when they are children. You didn’t internalize that because you grew up elsewhere. It’s hard to explain what a profound effect that has. Much of the US’s angst and schizophrenic attitude lies in this struggle against that tradition within people who don’t even know they are afflicted by it.

  6. leighspov says:

    Do I think that people the likes of Sandeen and helms are gay? Yes, I think its plainly obvious to anyone looking on. Gays know their own. I say this because in the early years I frequented gay clubs fairly often and nobody ever hit on me, except lesbians and some straight women. Gay men instinctivly knew I was not one of them, and they respected that. Sandeen’s mannerisms are gay, no other way to put it. Every time I watch one of those video’s, it screams of those young gay men, the one’s we used to lable the nellies, queens and flamers. Nothing’s changed, they just became the TG.

  7. saphirenz says:

    ve to thank everyone who has contributed to this thread for their candour. I find it quite refreshing that we can , with some self examination, accept that everyone’s life experience is not identical in all respects and that our sexuality is just that..

    I was born in England in the early years of World War II (1940). Vey different times, as I am sure you can imagine . I had a strict Catholic education and upbringing (never underestimate the power of religion) This , in fact proved to be a classic double edged sword.. My childhood was fairly happy , given the circumstances . I was a child and sex meant nothing to me until much, much later. Briefly, the point is that I carried my “dreadful” secret locked inside for too many years for I believed that I was the only person in the world so afflicted.. The light began to dawn for me in 1955 when I read the autobiography of Roberta Cowell, who was the first Brit to undergo gender correction in 1951….. I suppose I am probably bisexual .

    The “march of transgender politics” irritates and frustrates me

  8. enuja77 says:

    Aria, please post this.

    I would like to officially apologize to the people on this site who have stood behind Aria through all the fighting that was started by people who continue to remind everyone that they have certain privilege because they are more this, or more of that than everyone else.

    I got into the middle of these fights awhile back, thinking that I could help resolve the problem. I couldn’t. I just made matters worse. 😦

    I had previously received several private mails from several people here. They were so nice to me. It meant a lot to me. Now I can see that I made a great error assuming that Aria wasn’t what she says, and that those others had credibility. I was very wrong. The more I tried to get to know them, the more I realized that their goal had nothing to do with eliminating all the dissension, but rather to create more of a divide through their arrogance, and ignorance. Aria blocked them, (and me) for good reason. I now understand.

    Even if I’m allowed back, I would probably not be able to contribute too much any more. I am sincerely trying to move on with my life. I’ve seen enough of the TG agenda to make me ill. Honestly I have. 😦

    I respect what Aria is doing. She brings the “truth” to light, and the mere dialog will help to contribute to some form of resolution of the TG – TS misconceptions. Please remain strong as you are Aria.

    June Hingle

  9. Aria Blue says:

    Actually the main problem is the nutjobs they put on the DSM committee who perpetrate this stuff in the first place. They created the whole TG thing with their talk of identity in place of biology. If this crazy sex-obsessed bunch was out of the way things would get a lot better, and it would mean an end to use of the transsexual treatment regimen for people who don’t need it.

    The reason to point out these categories is to discredit them. I know certain people want to see them used as much as possible on the theory that any press is good press, but the kind of press they are going to get is going to be anything but helpful to them when this all plays out.

    The other point of the anti-TG campaign was to draw clear lines so that people would know where they need to go. I’ve had enough of non-TS people talking about mutilated crotches and calling themselves “transsexual” in the same breath. They are not going to be calling themselves TS for much longer if they refer to the cure for the condition as a mutilation. It’s nonsensical and we have the silly sexologists to thank for that.

    The problem for the activists who fought the sexologists in the clique has been that they use the language and social constructs of the very people they seek to displace. In effect the game was rigged before it started, and people can learn from that.

    But there may be little to worry about at this point. McHugh is largely discredited and his influence is waning. His ties to the Catholic crusade have not gone unnoticed by people in the APA. And his wheedling to get Blanchard on the DSM committee is a one time deal; this is their last shot at doing any damage. Zucker is going to be having a series of his own problems soon, and there will be nothing left for that control freak Cantor to inherit.

    Things are really looking up these days. The lines of separation are being redrawn and true villains are going to get their come uppance. I don’t see a lot of point to beating up on people who are essentially victims of the sexologists. Their ability to get in the way of the true diagnosis is fast disappearing, along with the power of those who used them as fodder. I’ll still bite the head off “transsexuals” who dilute the condition to avoid surgery, but that active phase of the game is over.

    The real issue now, internet-wise, is to root out all the sock puppets and trolls who try to get people set at each others throats all the time. What needs to happen is a kind of truce between the separate categories, so that everyone who is targeted by these sexologist freaks can handle their own part of the struggle.

    This divide and conquer that has been going on is at an end.

  10. melissa0859 says:

    Your 3rd paragraph hit me, too. Heck, by 7, I was just trying to forget, bury it all. Being almost four and sure something was wrong? Sure I wasn’t a boy? A bad dream, some silly phase, is all. it was 1964, and being a little kid,what did I know? By 5, I knew the world around me wasn’t going to listen or understand…I’d better just shut the frick up. The intense sadness that was my companion followed me as I fought it until the bitter end. The thing is, whenever I had the guts to check after that, I didn’t fit their paradigm. Effeminate? No. A desire to play with dolls and the like? No. Worried about being gay? No. So buck up and forget about it. Do what the world expects from you. The only thing I knew for certain was that sex, and who I thought I liked, had nothing whatsoever to do with any of the sadness I felt, how out of place I always was. Gay wasn’t even on my radar. The sexologists almost ruined me.

    Being old hasn’t brought me a damn bit of insight. Just that I wish I had listened to myself, way back when, and once and a while after that, before the breakdown came. But that voice was buried and too dim to hear.

    Afterwards, Trying to find a “community” has brought mostly a feeling of not belonging. And I thought it was MY fault! Now I know why. That community is fake. Alien to my feelings and experiences. I suppose I was naiive, thinking I was just like them and they were my friends. If I had done this in 1980, it would have been alot harder to deal with the world, but at least so many of the obstacles, phony dichotomies, profiteers, people with agendas, and all the other silliness weren’t firmly entrenched yet. It’s a minefield built by those who know better. How sad. I hope it is getting better, as have said elsewhere. -Mel