Monday, 9 November 2009

Some for the Reference Library

Some excellent Definitions, and a really cogent exposition of the "True Transsexual" philosophy, where there are only two sexes, and TS people are unfortunately born with the body of the opposite sex. I happen to think that this is a reasonable first approximation, but only that. I disagree on what some would consider minor details, and others, vital ones.

It is the view that I used to hold before my own transition, by the way. It's convenient and simple, captures most of the truth, and is generally useful. Generally. Just don't look too closely at the fine details.

Anyway, although I don't agree with this simplification, Purple Speaks is a very good blog to learn about the HBS movement. Written by someone sane, rational, polite and witty. e.g. This one, that brought a smile:
There are people who do not know the difference between the medical condition of True-Transsexualism and the choice and perversion of transgenderism. That includes those who are ignorant, practicing perversion, Wikipedia writers, and people with agendas
On to Transsexual Surgery, its Pros and Cons by Anne Lawrence. To say that Dr Lawrence is "controversial" is like saying the core of a supernova is moderately warm. I disagree with her views completely on Autogynephilia (AGP) theory, and believe she is trying to universalise her own personal experience to everyone else. Views of her own experience that were the result of painfully honest introspection on her part. I also believe she's been most unfairly treated by many in the TS community, especially as regards allegations of personal misconduct which, after some investigation, I believe were the result of prejudice.

That doesn't stop me from believing that while she's excellent at data gathering, her conclusions are usually very iffy. But she has Integrity.

Anyway, it's about time I was a little less monocultural myself. If my opinions are valid, they can do with a bit of challenging.


Kiera Bacon said...

There is certainly a contentious debate here - who is a 'true transsexual' or has 'Harry Benjamin Syndrome' vs. who is 'transgender' or simply 'transsexual'. Who is better than who? Who deserves more respect? Who is doing good for the rest of society and who is merely breaking down norms and values (or working to perpetuate them against the greater good).

It's tiring. I am who I am, regardless of what made me me. Diagnose me as having HBS, or autogyniphilia, or label me as a 'homosexual transsexual', or label me as whatevertheheckyoulike, and it doesn't affect what's going on inside. Certainly, I can relate to the desire to shun those who defy gender norms - I consider myself cisgender, and reject the label of transgender with vehemence - yet what justifies labeling myself as better than anyone else? Luckier? Happier?

The issue I see with Pruple Girl is not the contentiousness of her opinions - afterall, if contentiousness where an issue none of us here would be online - but the anger that she expresses against those who defy gender norms. I guess it would be easy for me to feel that those who defy the gender binary are shunning me and attempting to label me, inaccurately, as transgender for their own ends, but I get labelled as queer as well, I fit under the LGBT acronym soup that has never and can never represent everyone. The question of whether or not I identify with the T or with the I that usually gets left out is little more than semantics when placed in the context of my day to day life.

At the same time, my boyfriend and I have had long discussions about what it means to be a woman. He would love it if, once I have had my bottom surgery, I simply identify as a woman and shed transsexualism altogether. I ask him: if you immigrate to Canada, are you still Iranian? Of course he is, he will always have that in his past, as I can never fully shed that embodying womanhood has been a long journey for me.

Sorry - it's late at night and my mind is wondering, I hope I made some cohesive point in all that.

Zoe Brain said...

Kiera - that makes two of us. I'm of like mind.

Laserlight said...

"People should be more important than labels".

It occurs to me that doesn't just apply to TS/IS.
I have a friend who I love dearly. She knows I'm a Christian. When she smokes weed incessantly, or when she brings home four guys from the bar, she can't really grasp that I'm not condemning her--because her expectations, based on her perception of the label, get in the way of her seeing how I actually treat her.

Anonymous said...

I am astounded at the level of rancor displayed in that definitions link.
It blows me away that we can be so vicious to eachother.

Cynthia Lee

Eric said...

I'm stuck on the idea that non-op transwomen aren't true transsexuals and her assertion that transsexuality conforms to the gender-sex binary. If it can be crossed, there is no binary as you have to be in between at some point. That one person's sex and gender can be different only suggests to me that it can be a continuum, especially with cases like the previously mentioned non-op. It's not right to call her a "man" when she has female secondary sex characteristics and a feminine mind.

Just like with autogynephilia, even if it is a fetish, to be willing to undergo HRT and SRS for it, there's got to be more than a simple fetish going on. Besides, aren't genetic girls masturbating exhibiting a form of autogynephilia?

Stephanie said...

Speaking of HBS, I was wondering what your (Zoe) viewpoint is of this post regarding Intersex & HBS:


Anonymous T-Girl said...

"Written by someone sane, rational, polite and witty."

Are you being serious, or sarcastic?

i'm slow. Spell it out for me.

Anonymous said...

[I'm stuck on the idea that non-op transwomen aren't true transsexuals]

TSs aren't transwomen, TGs are. TSs are a part of mainstream society and fit the same dichotomy. TGs are part of the LGBT community. Despite the rhetoric, TSs are not a type of TG. It's impossible to be born with a female gender identity without wanting a feminine social role, appearance, and body to match. TG men merely pretending to be women lack the level of inborn femininity required to want their bodies corrected. They might not be men, but they aren't women either, and are completely opposite from those who were wrongly born with genitals that are directly opposite their true gender identity.

[and her assertion that transsexuality conforms to the gender-sex binary.]

True TSs fit the binary, TGs and other LGBTs don't. Unlike TGs, True-TSs were born with a brain that is fully female or fully male, and they have a need to have a body that matches who they have always been. TGs are a totally different group. They have more in common with LGBs than with mainstream men or women. TSs have more in common with mainstream persons than LGBTs.

[If it can be crossed, there is no binary as you have to be in between at some point.]

TSs don't "cross" their gender, and TGs cannot. Gender is fixed and inborn and can never change. What TSs do is CORRECT (not cross) their outward gender role and physical sex to match who they have always been. True-TSs have a brain that is reasonably feminine or reasonably masculine. TGs don't. A true-TS's gender identity is cisgendered and not a blend, and they are physically cisgendered after surgery. Unlike for TGs (whose motives are almost always based on pleasure of some sort), the whole reason a TS transitions is to be cisgendered, mainstream, and congruent. Congruence is impossible for the TG and not really even a goal of theirs.

True TSs don't really even "transition." They correct their body and correct their social role to be what it should have been all along. TGs only opt for an incomplete "transition" due to not being completely one or the other. Most TGs were born with a masculine brain wiring, and that is why they don't want the surgery (nobody with a male gender identity is happy without a penis). They merely take on a social role that is at odds with their anatomy and gender identity.

[That one person's sex and gender can be different only suggests to me that it can be a continuum, especially with cases like the previously mentioned non-op.]

It is only a continuum for TGs. TSs are not on that continuum. There is no competition here. TGs love to think of gender as a continuum because it strokes their masculine egos and need to compete and measure. They cannot admit TGs and TSs are in different groups with differing needs and goals.

[It's not right to call her a "man" when she has female secondary sex characteristics and a feminine mind.]

It is right to call him a man. If he was born with a penis, keeps his penis, uses his penis, and is unable or unwilling to socially conform as a woman, then he is a man. It is dishonest for him to lie and dilute what it means to be a woman. Non-op implies transgender, whereas TS always implies preop (with plans or a strong desire for surgery) or postop. The "secondary sexual characteristics" only count when the brain matches. Any man who grows breasts due to deliberately taking female hormones despite his male brain wiring has essentially mutilated himself. Likewise, a man who chooses to put on a dress, or have sex with other men, is still a man. If you're not born with the brain wiring and motives of women, then you're not a woman, period. Create a term for people who are in-between, and work to get society to recognize it. Then you can be a woman, man, or TG, with TSs falling either to the man or woman side.

TGs need to learn to accept themselves and accept that fact they are not women nor ever will be. They can never get ahead without owning, admitting, and embracing that part of themselves.

MgS said...

My concern with Anne Lawrence is that she is prone to interpreting evidence in a way that confirms her assumptions and in doing so denies others the validity of their experiences and narrative. (especially wrt the notion of 'autogynephilia')

She is, unquestionably very intelligent - but that doesn't make her right.

Eric said...


TS are born one sex and the opposite gender, how does that fit into a binary? It is crossed during transition. What do you think about intersexuals? Where do they fit?

Also, even if there is a difference between TG and TS women (I use women because non-op transwomen live every aspect of their lives as women, except she has different genitalia), non-op still have Gender Identity Disorder. From here:

"Gender identity disorder can affect children, adolescents, and adults. Individuals with gender identity disorder have strong cross-gender identification. They believe that they are, or should be, the opposite sex. They are uncomfortable with their sexual role and organs and may express a desire to alter their bodies.

While not all persons with GID are labeled as transsexuals, there are those who are determined to undergo sex change procedures or have done so, and, therefore, are classified as transsexual. They often attempt to pass socially as the opposite sex. Transsexuals alter their physical appearance cosmetically and hormonally, and may eventually undergo a sex-change operation."
(emphasis mine)
The sex change operation, srs, is only a possibility, not a necessity for being transsexual. You are in the same category as non-op transsexual and I use "transsexual" for a reason, it is medically correct.

Also, back up your assertion that non-op transsexuals don't have a feminine brain. The closest I have found is this where one of the transsexuals in the study still has her testicles. For all I know, she was pre-op, but she very well could have been non-op considering the authors would be using the medical definition of transsexual. This is the closest I have found to a study on non-op transsexuals. It's hard enough to find a study on transsexuals at all.

You said, "A true-TS's gender identity is cisgendered and not a blend, and they are physically cisgendered after surgery." which is in itself a contradiction of terms. Also, how is a transwoman physically cis after surgery? She still has the prostate, a very male organ. I'm not saying that she's not a woman, but she is not physically the same as a ciswoman as ciswomen don't tend to need prostate exams.

"Likewise, a man who chooses to put on a dress, or have sex with other men, is still a man. If you're not born with the brain wiring and motives of women, then you're not a woman, period."
What about a non-op transsexual who has sex with women? How about both? Gender identity and orientation are independent from each other. Speaking of orientation, it makes sense for transsexuals to be included with homosexuals and bisexuals. Even if it is not an orientation, TS are still a sexual minority. And your existence means that the state of the genitals is not as important as claimed.

You break the binary. You were not born male and you were not born female. You were born both. Medically speaking, no transsexual can ever fully escape his or her birth sex.

Marja Erwin said...


You claim that "It's impossible to be born with a female gender identity without wanting a feminine social role, appearance, and body to match."

Tell that to any butch womon, whether she was assigned female or male at birth.

Anonymous said...

Ah, baloney.

"TG freaks" ?

Gosh, Zoe, do you really think this is "polite and witty"? Or are you just having us on?

This is a hateful bullshit. Sexual differentiation (including brain morphology) doesn't fall into two tidy pigeonholes (ordained by God! Phew!).

Is the concept of a bimodal distribution so hard to grasp?

Contrary to what purple seems to think, transsexualism has occurred over the ages, long before modern chemical wizardry started producing side effects. It takes very little time or effort to ascertain that a number of cultures historically recognized that some men (and in some some cultures women also) aren't born with a typical gender orientation, and have socially-recognized roles for them (some respectful, some awful). Purple might try reading Joan Roughgarden before she starts slinging around the "pervert" label. (Diversity is normal.)

It wasn't so long ago that women were held by "mainstream society" to be fainting daisies, unfit to engage in such quintessentially masculine activities as... driving a car.

For that matter, maybe purple should try getting into the "Islamist mainstream" and donning a chador. Hey, Allah wills it!

(Personally I was a little surprised when I took Bem's gender test and came out somewhat feminine... I had expected to come out middle-of-the-road androgynous.)

-- bonze

Lloyd Flack said...

Off topic, but of interest because of its potential to make possible more satifsctory sugical results for female-to-male transsexuals. Experimenters have successfuly regrown erectile tissue in rabitts.

Zoe Brain said...

@Anon T-Girl -

I wasn't being sarcastic.

I disagree with her, and strongly. I think I can prove her wrong too.

But she presents her views in a clear manner, and there's the occasional bit of wit in there too. Sometimes there's some unfortunate turns of phrase, bit compared to the more rabid HBS people, she's a breath of fresh air. Just look at the comments here for example.

Zoe Brain said...

@ MgS
Re Anne Lawrence - concur.

Nicole said...

I'll have another go at reading all of this later on.

I must say that I tend to start forming opinions the moment I see references to fairy tale verses and words like "immoral lifestyles" and "sexual sin". I wish they wouldn't do that.

I am looking forward however to learning just where the author of this list of definitions places themselves within the heirarchy, for it's quite rare y'know for them to place themselves at the very, very bottom. I wonder why that is?

Zoe Brain said...

@ Stephanie

I draw your attention to some posts about the author.

The Fire Departments know him of old, where he's been ejected under another of his many identities. Some were less tolerant than I've been. He played the Military hero card first. Things started to go downhill from there, when he posted:
Sc, You ever say shit about me once more, I'll come down and beat the living shit out of you. You ain't nothing but a fucking tshit, fire cathing fireman who's freeloading off the firehouse. If you say shit about Me, You better hope that i don't see u face to face, i'll beat the the living shit out of you myself. U ain't nothing but a fucking asshole.

Shut you mouth before i bitch slap your mother fucking ass. The same goes to SC.

He was soon rumbled - he'd done this kind of thing before:
Lurker Lurker :
The return of Nick Chaleunphone
Originally Posted by 1 *
I was just looking at Komodo's public profile, and except for nude hiking in the woods, it bears a stricking resemblance to that PJ rescue dudes profile. Curoius minds want to know, could this be a reborn PJ rescue ???
I think we have a WINNER!

In his "no spin zone' blog he is contemplating a return to Maryland and become a thirty year old live-in firefighter in Rockville or Kensington. About a third of his 46 posts are about getting on in Montgomery, half are on this thread - bashing.

I see that he still hates PG. Good call 1 *!


What does the USCG "code of conduct" cover when you identify yourself as an auxilliary member and then make violent threats on a public website? I have saved the thread so far, so I can send an copy of it to your commander.

If it is Nick, I predict a sudden removal of all of Komodo's postings. (and I will remove mine.)

He's been at this for a long time. Ad not everyone is as tolerant as I am.

The Coast Guard is not impressed with him. To say the least.

No-one can be that psychotic without someone noticing. He needs professional help.

That post of his may contain something worthwhile, but it's really difficult sorting it out from the ravings of someone who's psychotic, and getting worse.

I still think that there's a good, intelligent person in there somewhere. In his saner moments (one of his personalities?) he shows insight and logic, and a clear writing style. In others... not so much.

The prognosis for Dissociative Identity Disorder though is not good, assuming that's what it is, rather than than Schizophrenia.

I wish I was a psych so I could at least diagnose him, and get him the help he deserves. I'd rather be cyberstalked by a healthy obnoxious troll than someone who needs some fairly high-powered psychiatric intervention. Neither has any effect on me.

Anonymous said...


I don't appreciate you arrogantly speaking for me. How dare you lump someone with my medical birth defect in with homosexual men who wear dresses, have gay sex with other men, obtain HRT without a doctor to grow breasts to satisfy his sexual fetish, and who cannot conform to mainstream society. How dare you presume to speak for me.

[TS are born one sex and the opposite gender, how does that fit into a binary?]

Gender identity is the only important thing here. In TSs, they were born with a female brain, making their gender nature and behavior cisgendered. TGs have a gender nature of males or somewhere between male and female (but never more than maybe half). Unlike TSs, TGs born with male parts have a male inborn brain wiring. MtF TSs were supposed to have female genitalia, but MtF TGs are supposed to have male genitalia. MtF TSs truly are women and were born with female brain patterns. Their bodies are wrong due to their disease. So they are mainstream, cisgendered women with a correctable birth defect, and are supposed to be treated 100% the same as other born females. TSism is a medical condition, TGism is a choice and is based on attention or pleasure, not an actual need to transition.

[It is crossed during transition.]

No, it is corrected to what it was supposed to be all along. Most TGs transition from "normal man with a fetish" to who knows what.

[What do you think about intersexuals? Where do they fit?]

They were born with a physical birth defect. It is not a "natural" difference, but a mutation that needs correction. However, they need to be the ones to decide when/if they get correction. They often have a number of unwanted surgeries anyway. Most born with an intersex condition choose one gender identity or the other. And they are just as capable of being TGs as anyone else. There are TS-Identified IS, TG-Identified IS, and those who are in between. Some support mainstream society and assimilate (like TSs), and some defy the gender norms (like TGs).

[Also, even if there is a difference between TG and TS women (I use "women" because non-op transwomen live every aspect of their lives as "women," except she has different genitalia), non-op still have Gender Identity Disorder.]

True-TSs have no "gender" disorder. Their disorder is in their physical sex. It is the TGs who has a disordered gender. If you cannot be comfortable in a male role or a female role, you have a disorder. MtF TGs are properly known as men. They were born with a male or hybrid brain. Any surgery a person with a male brain gets to become more "feminine" is mutilation and unjustified. TSs have a medical reason to correct their sex that TGs don't have. And really, TGs cannot really be masculine or feminine, but are of the TG gender.

[The sex change operation, srs, is only a possibility, not a necessity for being transsexual.]

Despite the rhetoric you quoted, true-TSs always want it, and they don't "change sex," but make their phenotype match their brain sex. If you have a female brain, you WILL want female parts. If you like having a penis (other than a strap-on), you are a man no matter what.

[You are in the same category as non-op transsexual and I use "transsexual" for a reason, it is medically correct.]

I am not in the same category as the non-op TG man who lies and pretends he is a "TS" and a woman. Trans+ means cross, and sexual means the body. To cross the body, you have to have surgery and HRT. That implies only 2 states. I was born with something that caused me to correct my sex that the non-op TG male pretender doesn't have. Take me to a non-op TG, and I can tell by their behavior and actions that they are a TG, and I can usually read them right away. Their attitude, motivations, and body language give it away, and you can feel a masculine aura and sexual tension coming off of them. Their behavior and actions are based on sex, pleasure, domination, and attention. Take me to a preop or postop TS, and I can tell who they are from the TGs.

Anonymous said...

Eric, continued,

[You said, "A true-TS's gender identity is cisgendered and not a blend, and they are physically cisgendered after surgery." which is in itself a contradiction of terms. Also, how is a transwoman physically cis after surgery?]

A "transwoman" (TG "woman") is never cisgendered. A TS always has been. For a post correction female TS, their female born brain, feminine behavior/dress, AND genitals completely match, just like other women.

[She still has the prostate, a very male organ.]

But unlike the TG male who merely pretends to be a woman, she was never supposed to have one.

[I'm not saying that she's not a woman, but she is not physically the same as a ciswoman as ciswomen don't tend to need prostate exams.]

She has a vagina, breasts, AND an inborn female gender identity that is totally divorced from sexual motives and practices. A TG is never truly masculine nor feminine in the brain. In mixed groups, they behave like other men. The reason for his habitual cross dressing and self-mutilation is usually due to sexual fetish.

[What about a non-op *TG* who has sex with women? How about both?]

He is a straight or bisexual man who somehow thought being a woman would be more fun or get him more sex. It is a common theme of men to pretend to be lesbians.

[Gender identity and orientation are independent from each other. Speaking of orientation, it makes sense for transsexuals to be included with homosexuals and bisexuals.]

Wrong. A TS woman is born with a female brain and is supposed to have a vagina and sex with men. Attraction to women is a red flag that this is a TG instead, but not a solid one since GGs can be lesbians. A gay man has a masculine drive and an attraction to men. TG men who pretend to be a "woman" so they can have sex with other men are gay men, and TG straight men pretending to be lesbians might as well be considered LGB too.

[Even if it is not an orientation, TS are still a sexual minority.]

No, we are a MEDICAL minority. TGs are a type of sex-having minority. It is possible for a TS women to make love to a heterosexual man and live a totally heterosexual female lifestyle.

[You break the binary. You were not born male and you were not born female.]

I was born a female with a birth defect, and therefore just as valid as a female who was born with a vagina. I was supposed to have one, MtF TG males are not. Besides, it is the brain wiring that determines someone's place in the gender binary. The body is totally irrelevant. SRS is not required to be a TS, but ALL true-TSs NEED and desire it. The lack of a truly female nature is why TG males usually don't get SRS.

[You were born both.]

More presumption and bias on your part. I was born with a completely female gender, despite my physical birth defect.

[Medically speaking, no transsexual can ever fully escape his or her birth sex.]

However, she was never supposed to have those features, and it is immoral to destroy her life, prevent her from living a mainstream lifestyle where she is treated as a 100% born female, nor lump her in with people who behave in a very masculine or controlling nature or practice immoral/objectionable sexual behaviors.

Nicole said...

Can I rephrase something I said in my previous response?

I said that I'd read this "later on", can I rephrase that to "much later on".

I'm penciling it in for 2032!

Zoe! What have you done to your blog?

Eric said...

I must say, Purple amuses me.

I mean, really, claiming that transsexuals are cisgender? Seriously? I see what she's doing, she's just trying, fruitlessly, to distance herself from the 'undesirable perverts.' Just look at the words, calling all non-op transsexuals homosexual men? Nevermind that they could be attracted to women or both men and women. Absolutely hilarious. And I just love the way both a medical dictionary is ignored just as a peer review article is ignored. The best part of the article is that she completely ignored my request to provide evidence that a non-op transsexual's brain is different than a pre- or post-op transsexual's brain.

And she calls all intersex conditions a result of a mutation. Even more hilarity when ones like Turners or Klinefelters are the result of a non-disjunction event and ones like de la Chappelle Syndrome are caused by unequal crossing over during meiosis.

Also, we're all mutants, the average person have 50-100 mutations (source). That you misunderstand this is, yet again, hilarious. Unlike her claims, they are perfectly natural.

You're fun lady, but stick to your superstitions. And leave the biology to those of us with degrees.

Zoe Brain said...

Commenters are expected to be polite to each other, but the same standard doesn't apply to comments regarding me.

Apologies are warranted. If someone is wrong, say so without snide comments. No condescension, just the facts.

For example these ones. Or the work of Ronnie Drantz on neuroanatomy.

Battybattybats said...

Hi Purplespeaks!

What is your view of the studies Zoe has posted here at her blog showing cross-sex activity and anatomy in the brains of Gays and Lesbians?

Doesn't that make GLB merely varients of the same phenomena? Like Aspergers is related to Autism?

And speaking of Autism, isn't it possible, even perhaps likely, that the neurological phenomena you describe may occur in degrees of severity just like in Autism and pther neurological variations?

What would a hypothetical mild or partial case of Transsexual Neurological Variation present as symptoms?

something like perhaps... transgender? Wouldn't occams razor suggest, till conclusive data were obtained that this is the most probable explanation for the existence of transgender people? Especially considering those Gay and Lesbian neurology results?

A simple scientific test would be to get a bunch of transgender people and a bunch of extremely cisgender and cissexual people and comparatively examine them with the same tests done on transsexuals looking for milder versions of the same results. That wont preclude other biological causation of course but will explore if they are mild forms of the same phenomena.

Sophie said...

So whats the difference between someone supporting cutting up intersex infants in the 60's, and someone who by placing an arbitrary demarcation between pervert and person is effectively trying to influence surgical choices ?
Apart from wilful ignorance of a couple of decades of research, I'm afraid I can't see much.

Zimbel said...

Interesting theories. I'd like to see any papers that support your theories.

@A.E. Brain-
"Anyway, it's about time I was a little less monocultural myself. If my opinions are valid, they can do with a bit of challenging."
- I'll remember to do that next time I disagree with you.

Anonymous said...

The amount of vitriol I have just read has me baffled. Why does it even matter enough to argue about. We have theorys and ideas with only a handful of reliable studies. At the end of the day people are trans, it doesnt matter if you are a "pervert" or a preacher if you get read you get the same treatment. We all are treated like scum for basicaly doing the same thing. We are refusing to conform to the societal norms. A basher doesn't care if you are a 'true' tranny or not. To them your just a man in a dress. Its a cruel world. Lets not make it crueler.

/Hugz all around
Cynthia Lee

Nicole said...

On the continuum known as "perverseness", I'm not sure I agree that the opposite to "pervert" is "preacher".

But I agree with everything else you said Cynthia.

Anonymous T said...

"Just look at the comments here for example."

You know full well i am familiar with Enough Non-Sense, Zoe. If you're aching to post it for comparison to Purple speaks, you don't have to use me as a sort of cover excuse to point it out to others.

i'm not particularly appreciative of the display you and KAA decided to dump there.

Here's the thing.

A.) i am pro-gay marriage. Anybody who has spent any amount of time reading me knows that.

B.) i don't paricularly give a damn what people think of me. By extension of that, i can make friends with anyone, on any side, without concern for what others think of me as a result.

C.) i can have a long-term, on-going discussion out of public view with people i like, who may disagree with me on something.

And sometimes, i can change their mind.

KAA showing up and picking a fight for ego gratification, and having a cheerleader to boot, only angered and entrenched others with their views.

Destroying any progress i may have made, and any chance i may have in the future of getting anyone to reconsider their opinions.

Actual change for the better, you know?

But i'm sure egos involved felt a flush of moral superiority arguing with them, didn't they? That must be what's important.

And for the record...i am not ashamed of a single thing i have ever written online, past or present.

But then again, i have never claimed to be educated, polite or even civilized.

Anonymous said...


Transsexuals ARE cisgendered. I don't understand your problem with that.

There is a word that describes the term non-op transsexual, and that is oxymoron. The word for a person you are calling a non-op transsexual is transgender. It's not a bad word, and it's not a "better than" or "worse than" word. I don't believe in any hierarchy.

A better term than transgender might be intermediate gender, which would indicate someone between the two extremes. A person who wants to live as a woman but enjoys being physically male is somewhere between the gender extremes, and cannot be called transsexual.

I don't understand why some people are so in love with the term transsexual, and hate the term transgender so much, that they feel compelled to co-opt the term transsexual for themselves. They feel they have to change the definition of transsexual to the point that almost anyone could use the term for themselves. I really think that they must accept the idea of a hierarchy, and think that being called transsexual places them on a higher level somehow.

The word transSEXual refers to changing one's physical SEX, which is what transsexuals want to do. If someone doesn't want to change their physical SEX then they can't be transSEXual. The word SEX in transSEXual refers to the sex organs.

See, all you have to do is break up a word into it's parts to understand the meaning.


Battybattybats said...

As there are whats often termed both Primary and Secondary sexual characteristics wouldn't it make sense for terminology to be based on changing some of either even if it's merely secondary sex characteristics?

More importantly might the lines we are drawing be primarily cultural anyways?

As doesn't the gay and lesbian cross-sexed neurology evidence as well as that of transsexuals and predictions of the same for the whole gender spectrum suggest that we are dealling with sub-catagories of Intersex?

Which suggests does it not that we might have to, scientifically and medically at least, re-catagorise the entirety of definitions of sex, gender and sexuality? And completely reconsider the distinctions and relationships between each catagory?

Nomenclature aside the same sort of human rights issues are faced by each group no matter our nomenclature. And I wonder how much more progress could be achieved if more people directly attcked the Universal Human Rights issues at the heart of the matter rather than fighting not to be associated with one or another also-discriminated-against group. Something I think everyone should ponder and ask themselves why so much fuss over mere labels when people are dying?

Thus far this seems to the hypotheses of the mechanism of the phenomena which best describes the data i've observed and suggests at least ways to resolve the problem.

Nicole said...

Let me also ask this,

Somebody who cannot have surgery because they are obese? Somebody who cannot have surgery because of another medical condition, perhaps a psychiatric one, perhaps any number of other ones? Are these people labeled "transgender" until such time as they've lost weight, overcome a medical condition?

What of the people who have attempted genital mutilation through sheer frustration at their genitalia, yet their psychiatric condition prevents them from having corrective surgery? Are they "transsexual" or "transgender"?

What about those that suffer a lack of finances, another reason many people remain non-op, (and there are lots, and not all choose to be non-op), would their lack of finances prevent them from being labeled "transsexual"? If so, then it seems that money buys that label huh?

What about those throughout history that didn't undergo surgery because it simply wasn't around then, or that it didn't exist as we know it now.

Oh, and one last question, what about those quite rare cases, yet they exist, where complete surgery has taken place yet the recipients regret it? Would it be fair to say that if they've completed all the surgeries required under this labeling system, that they'd be categorically labeled "transsexual" and then when they admit to any regret, they become "transgender" again?

Anonymous said...

Here are some loose ends. Yes, the language in the original essay is rough. The reason for that was that it was written to a mainstream Baptist minister. This is how true-TSs and other mainstream persons talk, and TSs who want to sway others in the mainstream community needs to use their language and be like them as much as possible.

Also, another reason for such language is to help sort the TSs from the TGs. That works due to the inborn ratios of serotonin and dopamine receptors. Despite popular perception, men are generally more sensitive. That is part of their stronger sense of ego and why TGs are more sensitive, territorial, and more crude. That is also why more males take ADHD drugs and more women take anti-depressants. ADHD drugs make persons more submissive, attentive, responsive, and better able to take orders, which are usually considered female traits. SSRIs cause persons to have a more flat affect, act more lazy, and simply not care. Such emotional detachment is associated mainly with men.

There are other differences such men having more neurons in the preoptic area. That is connected to men being more aroused by sight. As an example of this, I was wearing black, shiny leggings and checking the mail when the neighbor's toddler ran up to me and felt my leggings. So he was emotionally aroused via visual stimulation. That was a possible indication of healthy male brain patterns.

And I know an IS type who was extremely feminine and was raised as a boy, and violence was even employed. Well, she had to have an EEG and the tech told her father that it couldn't be a boy being examined. The father attacked the doctor.

So, using information such as the above, I have honed my writing style as a diagnostic instrument to be able to detect who is TS and who is TG. The TSs don't react as much because it doesn't apply to them, but the TGs get all defensive and are quick to claim hate. (Remember what I said above about serotonin receptors and being over-sensitive, and how less dopamine receptors makes a person less mature and less feminine?)

Anonymous said...

As for surgery, it is all about motivation, not actually having it. A person who has bad health or is in poverty is still a preop. Need and desire never goes away despite the conditions. A non-op TG would never have the surgery. He would consider it a mutilation. His masculine mental core, despite any acquired "feminine" affect and any fetishes or addiction to dressing a certain way, would never let him want to "mutilate" (as far as his subconscious is concerned) his body.

Non-op always implies a choice against surgery. If you CANNOT get it, you are just as preop as the one who can. What is important here is motives. The non-op TG's mind "resonates" with having a penis. The preop TS, including those who are permanently disqualified from surgery, functions better emotionally without one. Sure, they can learn to repress the awareness of this need, but it never goes away.

Lets compare this to Christianity. Good works does not make you a Christian (a relationship with Christ is what determines this), but a Christian will have good works in their life. Now, if someone accepted Christ on their death bed, they would not have the time to have outward evidences of salvation. So, back to our topic, you don't get the surgery to become a woman, but a part of having a female inner core is wanting a body and lifestyle that matches that of other females. If you want less than the complete outside, then you have less than the complete inside.

Battybattybats said...

Some interesting views you have there purplespeaks, especially as your diagnostic text indicates i'm TS and not TG because of my calm respectful responses.

Now as i mentioned before.. cross-sex neurology results in studies of Gays and Lesbians mentioned here on Zoe's blog etc... how do these fit into your perspective on things?

Jacqui B. said...

I'm terribly sorry, but ALL transsexuals are transgendered. "Transgendered", even if it might not be the best word ever, means you were BORN with a body that doesn't match your gender.

To me, transgendered individuals insisting they're cisgendered only seem like naive, insecure people who desperately want to distance themselves from the trans community (as if it's a BAD thing to be trans!) and want to pretend they're cis and are exactly like cis people.

Interestingly enough I've never seen a trans man with viewpoints like this. Maybe men are smarter after all... -_-'

Zoe Brain said...

Jacqui B - that definition is not the common one, which includes drag queens etc.
You could say that I'm transsexual, but cisgendered, as I fit neatly into the binary gender model. However, biologically, I'm about as far away as you can get from the binary sex model.
According to your definition though, I'm obviously transgendered. But many, possibly most people commonly thought of as transgendered, are not.