Privileged and Pretty Equals Success
September 2, 2009
Filmmaker Kevin Smith Loves Brazilian Transsexuals!
September 4, 2009

Trans and Stealth

I used to be pretty arrogant about the whole stealth vs. out thing.  Today reading Dyssonance’s To Stealth Or Not To Stealth, I had to reflect on how my perspective has changed, and not. I’ve worked jobs where no one knew I was transgender/transsexual and I’ve worked at places where my entire story was posted on page one of the Indianapolis Star.

The bottom line for me is this: I am a woman, but I am not  female (Gender=social construction, sex=biological function). Technically, I am no longer male either. I have sexual characteristics of both sexes. But most people that I interact with on a daily basis don’t need to know my genital history.

That being said, I don’t hide the fact that I’m trans, either. So I’m not stealth, but sometimes I wear camouflage. 😉

132 Comments

  1. Marti Abernathey says:

    This post reminds me of a usenet thread, so I’m going to close it. No one here is hearing each other, it’s just a chance to punk each other. There’s plenty of other places to do that on the internet.

  2. Marti Abernathey says:

    This post reminds me of a usenet thread, so I’m going to close it. No one here is hearing each other, it’s just a chance to punk each other. There’s plenty of other places to do that on the internet.

  3. Dyssonance says:

    Unrelated and personal to aria blue:

    You will note that wile I am commenting, I am not arguing on your blog. Nor will I — You already perceive me as being an inciter, and I have no wish to incite at your your space.

    If you would like me to not comment, ask me nicely and I shall not.

  4. Dyssonance says:

    Unrelated and personal to aria blue:

    You will note that wile I am commenting, I am not arguing on your blog. Nor will I — You already perceive me as being an inciter, and I have no wish to incite at your your space.

    If you would like me to not comment, ask me nicely and I shall not.

  5. Ariablue says:

    The definition of transsexual is plain. I’m not sure why you feel the need to change it to suit you. You are either born with it or your aren’t. Those of us who were can spot phonies a mile away.

    • Dyssonance says:

      Interestingly enough, the definition of a transsexual *is* plain, and is provided in the ICD-10 and, under the name of “Gender Identity Disorder”, in the DSM-IV.

      Any other assertions that do not fall in line with those criteria are going to be matters of speculative opinion and emotional politics.

      As for those who can spot phonies a mile away, that is strictly an emotive argument without any substantiative merit.

  6. Ariablue says:

    The definition of transsexual is plain. I’m not sure why you feel the need to change it to suit you. You are either born with it or your aren’t. Those of us who were can spot phonies a mile away.

    • Dyssonance says:

      Interestingly enough, the definition of a transsexual *is* plain, and is provided in the ICD-10 and, under the name of “Gender Identity Disorder”, in the DSM-IV.

      Any other assertions that do not fall in line with those criteria are going to be matters of speculative opinion and emotional politics.

      As for those who can spot phonies a mile away, that is strictly an emotive argument without any substantiative merit.

    • Dyssonance says:

      Interestingly enough, the definition of a transsexual *is* plain, and is provided in the ICD-10 and, under the name of “Gender Identity Disorder”, in the DSM-IV.

      Any other assertions that do not fall in line with those criteria are going to be matters of speculative opinion and emotional politics.

      As for those who can spot phonies a mile away, that is strictly an emotive argument without any substantiative merit.

  7. Evangelina says:

    You used the word facist not me. As it happens I am a bit of a socialist but this isn’t politics. I ask that you cease to identify as transsexual that is all. I am speaking up for myself right now. I often do. I am also speaking up for others whom I KNOW want me to speak for them.
    Advocate for Transgender, gay gender queer what ever you like I don’t care tuppence. But Leave Transsexual out of it.
    Why in heavens name would I want to identify as “trans” I have no need for the labels of “other” you seem so fond of. Woman suits me just fine.
    Oh and I’d avoid avoid sarcasm in future if I were you, you’re not very good with it.

    • Marti Abernathey says:

      And I ask you to not dictate who or how I identify, as you don’t know me or anything about my life, oh granter of transsexual status.

      • No one is dictating how you identify. We are simply pointing out the problems with what you claim. You can call yourself what ever you want, but it will not change reality.

        • Dyssonance says:

          This is incorrect.

          Just above, Aria Blue *did*, directly, dictated to someone how they should identify by telling them to just give up the word transsexual.

          So you lied, unless you think of Aria Blue as no one, in which case I’m going to have to take the gloves off and rip you a new asshole.

          • For somone who claims a Ph.D. your reading and reasoning abilities seem rather poor. I said, “No one is dictating how you idenitfy. We are simply pointing out the problems with what you claim. You can call yourself whatever you want, but it will not change reality.” Simply put, one can call oneself a “transsexual” but if they are not a transsexual, it will not magically make them one. Now, I cannot tell someone WHAT they think they are. I cannot tell someone what they CAN, or DO call themselves. But both Aria and I can tell them that we disagree with WHAT they claim to be. Do you see the difference? And more to the point, if you do, will you admit to it, or will you play the usual games that TGs wish to engage in?

          • Dyssonance says:

            @jennifer

            I have difficulty reading and reasoning?

            You repated the line you used earlier yourself, just now:

            “No one is dictating how you idenitfy.”

            I pointed out this is a lie.

            Care to demonstrate how that properly punctuated sentence is not so?

            Aria didn’t disagree. Aria said — and *before* your comment was made (check the time stamps):

            “Let transsexual go, and you won’t have a problem”.

            That is, indeed, dictating to someone how to identify — inclusive of an actual punishment should it not be done.

            I really need to know — how long have you used the lies, strawmen arguments, and direct avoidance tactics in your commenting? Because you’ve apparently been around a while you totally suck shitballs at this, woman.

            Personal attacks, well “eh” — those are kinda par for the course, but the utter lack of capability to defend yourself against someone who actually reads your words is a huge weakness on your part.

      • Obviously you do. I explained the differences in what I said, and what Aria said, quite carefully, and you simply ignore that and continue on. As I said, one can identify as they please, but that does not make it true. As many have pointed out, TG is rooted in fantasy. You want to be a woman, simply say you are, and poof, magically you become a woman. I think we, perhaps should refer to this as HPS for Harry Potter Syndrome. A nice contrast to Harry Benjamin Syndrome. What Aria said is quite true. People who are not transsexual want to co-opt the term. Tell me, what is wrong with words actually meaning something? What is wrong with transsexual being reserved for those who actually have a brain that is sexually differentiated at odds with their body, and who seek to correct that as much as possible? That would exclude things like the oxymoron “non-op transsexual.” What, pray tell is wrong with that? Again, one can identify as one wishes, but that does not make it true. Is this distinction really lost on you? If so, that does explain a lot.

        Beyond that, as I said, you are really not that clever. If you actually read my words, then please respond to what I actually said. Simply ignoring it, and acting as though you have actually refuted anything is not at all clever. In fact, it is a quite common tactic. Funny that you should be accusing me of straw arguments. Perhaps you should actually research what the term means.

        • Dyssonance says:

          More avoidance.

          Aria Blue’s speech is pantently speaking tpo identity, Jennifer — you lie, once again.

          In order for her to make the statement: “Let transsexual go, and you won’t have a problem. Stop trying to speak for a group of people who don’t want you, and you won’t have a problem.”

          She has to have, contextually, a basis for asserting a group — in this case, transsexuals, and when she says “speaking for” the context (in relation to the post she was applying to) demonstrates she is referring to speaking on behalf politically for an identity group.

          In short, your explanation is a lie. And a bad one. You had better ones earlier. And my son lies better than you (with about the same degree of success).

          Your next lie is that I ignored what you wrote. I did not ignore such. IT was, bluntly, more of what you love to call obfuscation — a vain attempt at reframing what is visibly present already to everyone.

          You continue to make the assumption that I’m coming into this with some sort of political agenda on behalf of the TG or the TS or whatever the hell else you twits want to call it.

          I’m not. I’m coming in according to rules and ideas that you have no freaking clue about, because, to start with, you don’t even know what the basic facts of the matter are, given you lied about the current understanding already.

          What was that? I’m sorry? Did you try to speak to credibility when your entire argument is predicated n a bigotry and selfish delusion?

          um, no thank you.

          I don’t give a rat’s ass about your “well, if you’re a woman then just say you are a woman, not this other stuff” claptrap because I am not interested in being a fuckwit. Jennifer. That’s your cause, your illusion, and you are most welcome to it.

          But don’t come here and lie about about no one trying to dictate someone else’s identity when it’s right there and you were too damn lazy to read it in the first place.

          You do not have the authority to say who is and who is not co-opting the term.

          For anyone. At all. That assertion, that very concept, itself, is a lie, and it is the falsehood that I am going after, Jennifer. I don’t care about your dislike of those who give you the willies, I don’t care about your personal opinions on the matter.

          But the words *do* mean something, and it is NOT what you are saying they mean. You are lying.

          Lastly, I have responded to what you said.

          Exactly what you said.

          I have provided quotes of yours when I do so. Now, if you don’t mean what you say, then perhaps you should say what you mean. IT would, after all, take away from me the ability to do this to you.

          Refutations take a considerable amount of time and energy — if you would truly like me to refute your assertions line by line, I’m quite capable of doing so. It is, after all, why I have the reputation on the “tg side” of being a pain in the ass and why ya’ll don’t like me either.

          All you have to do is ask me to do so.

          As for who is and who isn’t, well, that’s *really* simple: what’s their diagnostic code?

          Anything else is wishful thinking.

  8. Evangelina says:

    You used the word facist not me. As it happens I am a bit of a socialist but this isn’t politics. I ask that you cease to identify as transsexual that is all. I am speaking up for myself right now. I often do. I am also speaking up for others whom I KNOW want me to speak for them.
    Advocate for Transgender, gay gender queer what ever you like I don’t care tuppence. But Leave Transsexual out of it.
    Why in heavens name would I want to identify as “trans” I have no need for the labels of “other” you seem so fond of. Woman suits me just fine.
    Oh and I’d avoid avoid sarcasm in future if I were you, you’re not very good with it.

    • Marti Abernathey says:

      And I ask you to not dictate who or how I identify, as you don’t know me or anything about my life, oh granter of transsexual status.

      • No one is dictating how you identify. We are simply pointing out the problems with what you claim. You can call yourself what ever you want, but it will not change reality.

        • Dyssonance says:

          This is incorrect.

          Just above, Aria Blue *did*, directly, dictated to someone how they should identify by telling them to just give up the word transsexual.

          So you lied, unless you think of Aria Blue as no one, in which case I’m going to have to take the gloves off and rip you a new asshole.

          • For somone who claims a Ph.D. your reading and reasoning abilities seem rather poor. I said, “No one is dictating how you idenitfy. We are simply pointing out the problems with what you claim. You can call yourself whatever you want, but it will not change reality.” Simply put, one can call oneself a “transsexual” but if they are not a transsexual, it will not magically make them one. Now, I cannot tell someone WHAT they think they are. I cannot tell someone what they CAN, or DO call themselves. But both Aria and I can tell them that we disagree with WHAT they claim to be. Do you see the difference? And more to the point, if you do, will you admit to it, or will you play the usual games that TGs wish to engage in?

          • Dyssonance says:

            @jennifer

            I have difficulty reading and reasoning?

            You repated the line you used earlier yourself, just now:

            “No one is dictating how you idenitfy.”

            I pointed out this is a lie.

            Care to demonstrate how that properly punctuated sentence is not so?

            Aria didn’t disagree. Aria said — and *before* your comment was made (check the time stamps):

            “Let transsexual go, and you won’t have a problem”.

            That is, indeed, dictating to someone how to identify — inclusive of an actual punishment should it not be done.

            I really need to know — how long have you used the lies, strawmen arguments, and direct avoidance tactics in your commenting? Because you’ve apparently been around a while you totally suck shitballs at this, woman.

            Personal attacks, well “eh” — those are kinda par for the course, but the utter lack of capability to defend yourself against someone who actually reads your words is a huge weakness on your part.

      • Obviously you do. I explained the differences in what I said, and what Aria said, quite carefully, and you simply ignore that and continue on. As I said, one can identify as they please, but that does not make it true. As many have pointed out, TG is rooted in fantasy. You want to be a woman, simply say you are, and poof, magically you become a woman. I think we, perhaps should refer to this as HPS for Harry Potter Syndrome. A nice contrast to Harry Benjamin Syndrome. What Aria said is quite true. People who are not transsexual want to co-opt the term. Tell me, what is wrong with words actually meaning something? What is wrong with transsexual being reserved for those who actually have a brain that is sexually differentiated at odds with their body, and who seek to correct that as much as possible? That would exclude things like the oxymoron “non-op transsexual.” What, pray tell is wrong with that? Again, one can identify as one wishes, but that does not make it true. Is this distinction really lost on you? If so, that does explain a lot.

        Beyond that, as I said, you are really not that clever. If you actually read my words, then please respond to what I actually said. Simply ignoring it, and acting as though you have actually refuted anything is not at all clever. In fact, it is a quite common tactic. Funny that you should be accusing me of straw arguments. Perhaps you should actually research what the term means.

        • Dyssonance says:

          More avoidance.

          Aria Blue’s speech is pantently speaking tpo identity, Jennifer — you lie, once again.

          In order for her to make the statement: “Let transsexual go, and you won’t have a problem. Stop trying to speak for a group of people who don’t want you, and you won’t have a problem.”

          She has to have, contextually, a basis for asserting a group — in this case, transsexuals, and when she says “speaking for” the context (in relation to the post she was applying to) demonstrates she is referring to speaking on behalf politically for an identity group.

          In short, your explanation is a lie. And a bad one. You had better ones earlier. And my son lies better than you (with about the same degree of success).

          Your next lie is that I ignored what you wrote. I did not ignore such. IT was, bluntly, more of what you love to call obfuscation — a vain attempt at reframing what is visibly present already to everyone.

          You continue to make the assumption that I’m coming into this with some sort of political agenda on behalf of the TG or the TS or whatever the hell else you twits want to call it.

          I’m not. I’m coming in according to rules and ideas that you have no freaking clue about, because, to start with, you don’t even know what the basic facts of the matter are, given you lied about the current understanding already.

          What was that? I’m sorry? Did you try to speak to credibility when your entire argument is predicated n a bigotry and selfish delusion?

          um, no thank you.

          I don’t give a rat’s ass about your “well, if you’re a woman then just say you are a woman, not this other stuff” claptrap because I am not interested in being a fuckwit. Jennifer. That’s your cause, your illusion, and you are most welcome to it.

          But don’t come here and lie about about no one trying to dictate someone else’s identity when it’s right there and you were too damn lazy to read it in the first place.

          You do not have the authority to say who is and who is not co-opting the term.

          For anyone. At all. That assertion, that very concept, itself, is a lie, and it is the falsehood that I am going after, Jennifer. I don’t care about your dislike of those who give you the willies, I don’t care about your personal opinions on the matter.

          But the words *do* mean something, and it is NOT what you are saying they mean. You are lying.

          Lastly, I have responded to what you said.

          Exactly what you said.

          I have provided quotes of yours when I do so. Now, if you don’t mean what you say, then perhaps you should say what you mean. IT would, after all, take away from me the ability to do this to you.

          Refutations take a considerable amount of time and energy — if you would truly like me to refute your assertions line by line, I’m quite capable of doing so. It is, after all, why I have the reputation on the “tg side” of being a pain in the ass and why ya’ll don’t like me either.

          All you have to do is ask me to do so.

          As for who is and who isn’t, well, that’s *really* simple: what’s their diagnostic code?

          Anything else is wishful thinking.

  9. Ariablue says:

    Dyss: “Furthermore, it is a managed condition, not a cured one.”

    This is demonstrably untrue. Open your eyes and take in the world. It’s there, I promise.

    “But I am an advocate for ALL transgender people, even ones I have little in common with.”

    As long as you leave transsexual out, you can advocate all you want without problems from people who were born with that condition and had it treated. But what is “transgender advocacy” without transsexual?

    Transsexual and transgender are polar opposites. Transgender is a chosen identity. Transsexual is a birth condition. They have absolutely nothing to do with each other.

    A person who chooses a public transgender identity has no authority to speak for people born with birth defects. It’s silly, and way out of line. It is also an act of political violence.

    Let transsexual go, and you won’t have a problem. Stop trying to speak for a group of people who don’t want you, and you won’t have a problem. See, simple?

    “But you can’t advocate for yourself. You can’t post pictures of yourself online, you can’t even be out as trans, that goes against your code of ethics. It also insulates you from being judged the same way you judge others transness. It’s pretty damn convenient.”

    These kinds of threats may have worked on people in the past, but I promise you they won’t work this time. We can and do advocate for ourselves- in all sorts of venues you aren’t aware of.

    We don’t need you. We don’t want you. We can speak for ourselves. That’s what we’re doing right here, right now.

    • Dyssonance says:

      Its a demonstratable fact, supported by the WPATH SoC, which directly states, unequivocally, that treatment seeks to *manage* the issue, not cure it.

      Your argument is based on the premise that since your dysphoria is not present at this time, that it would not, in fact, return were you to go back to your originally assigned sex.

      Nor are they polar opposites — transgender is understood by the general public to be anyone who is appearing to have or be in the process of changing their sex.

      In a more academic sense, it varies. ON a personal level, my understanding is in line with yours, but I base that on an analysis of facts available.

      The facts available establish that its actually one of multiple possible variances permissible within the diagnostic criteria.

      In a political sense, I don’t mind the argument so much — its fairly obvious that you do indeed, have a set nature of dogma, and what I’m doing is presenting you with the greater societal dogma of the nation in which I live (and, presumably, you do as well).

      May I ask what birth defect, and what is the specific diagnostic code for it? Or is this a political aspect, given the nature of our metadisagreement in terms of philosophical approach to dealing within the community as a whole?

      Lastly, regardless of what you may personally feel about the matter — or what I may personally feel about the matter — if someone in government or law wants the input of someone of our nature, then, de facto, that person, at that time, is speaking on behalf of all of us.

      Such as Mara Keisling — who has indeed, had that opportunity. Such as the panel that was interviewed by Congress earlier this year. Such as the transman who has been lobbying in congress for much of the last 16 months or so.

      I can assure you I’ve had disagreements with all of them — and all of them know it.

      That doesn’t not change the basic fact that at those moments, they do indeed do so.

      I will not let transsexual go. I cannot — it is my diagnosis and my nature. Neither you nor I have the ability to make that change, either, such that your request is an idle dream — a bit of windmill tilting — that improbable dream.

      As you know quite well, I like windmill tilting, so I don’t have a problem with you doing it, just be aware that you will fail where I am concerned.

      IF you wish to speak for yourself, then do so — but, as noted before, doing so and using a word that you have neither the social authority nor medical capability of denying to others is, well, asinine, appropriative (directly so), and, as you so unpleasantly put it, an act of “political violence”.

      You do not have the power to make the determination of who is or who is not when it comes the word transsexual for everyone — only those few who are your patients or clients, assuming you are a qualified psychiatrist or psychologist or social worker.

      And as one myself, I can assure you that you wouldn’t be for long if you applied the sorts of restrictions I’ve seen in use thus far.

      I realize you will likely take much of this as a “personal attack” of some sort, and there’s not much I can do about it.

      It just strikes me as sad that you, of all of the people I’ve come to read of late, would step away from factual understanding into dogmatic understanding.

      • You claim to be a Ph.D. and yet you do not seem to understand that research often is ahead of medical dogma. You also seem to wish to obfuscate the fact that medicine is often steered by politics. No, it should not be, but it is.

        And, unfortunately, it is far too easy for someone, especially someone who is a member, so to speak, of the “club” to obtain a disagnosis of transsexualism when it is not a correct one.

        Quite frankly, you are the one pushing dogma. Based on your viewpoint, Michael Bailey and Ray Blanchard are correct, simply because they are able to fake some results and apply poor science and get a few therapists to accept it.

        In a sense, your arguments are not really that different from those who argue that “transgender” is correct because there are more of them, and they have been able to bully people into using it improperly.

        Sorry, but you really are not as clever as you seem to believe you are.

        • Dyssonance says:

          Research, Jennifer? You mean the research being done by the same people who establish that standard? Why, um, indeed, to make that particular leap of conclusion — for which there is no effective implicature in my post nor in yours — requires you to be making a few interesting errors of thought.

          Since my personal opinion of you is fairly well know, we needn’t consider my lack of surprise.

          Note: not *merely* a PhD, but two Master’s, as well. Just saying.

          The medicine is steered by politics is irrelevant to the current diagnosis, the politics for which would have been established some 50 years ago, since ts remained fairly consistent since then, and has been merely fleshed out in terms of treatment since its introduction into the DSM in the 1980’s.

          Ergo, your pathetic attempt as insinuating that the definition is due to some sort of modern day politicking is, well, horseshit and instead shows that you prefer to talk out your hind end when backed into a corner rather than admit you were wrong.

          I will say the “based on your viewpoint” attack is fairly creative (especially given it has no bearing whatsoever to your description of it).

          However, lying through your teeth about my position is merely going to get you a tad more of the same, except I’ll proceed to apply my particular version of the Golden Rule to you.

          So, in the interest of fairness and because I love watching people dig their own holes, I’d like for you to go ahead and establish, in detail, just how the statements I made lead you to the false correlation with an admittedly unproven hypothesis.

          Oh, and, um, just so you know — there are not enough “transgenders” to bully anyone into using anything. That argument fails on statistical, relational, and pragmatic levels (then again, you likely have no clue what the pragmatic level I’m talking about is).

          What I am pushing is facts, hon. If you’d like to actually make a real attempt at debunking them, instead of using strawmen and aversion tactics to make it seem like you are actually having a debate (when you aren’t), then by all means, please do.

          Otherwise, shut the hell up.

          • The standards you speak of, the DSM and WPATH, have little to do with actual research, and quite a bit to do with politics and dogma. Is it really lost on you that there is considerable research that shows that transsexualim is a physical condition, and not simply a “choice?” I imagine it is. After all, that is contrary to your dogma.

            Now, if I am lying about your position, please explain how this is so. Otherwise, I believe the term “straw man,” will rather ironically apply.

            Actually, I have seen no facts from you. Just bluster, and a lot of obfuscation.

            Really, I am not at all impressed. Please, present actual facts, waving your alleged credentials does not impress.

          • Dyssonance says:

            @jennifer

            ” Is it really lost on you that there is considerable research that shows that transsexualim is a physical condition, and not simply a “choice?” ”

            No. Because that’s a lie.

            Is it really lost on you that the current standards, based on actual studies, hold the same position? Indeed, explicitly so.

            I ask because apparently you haven’t read the current standards, which say that quite clearly. Would you like quotes for establishing that, or are you capable of doing that research yourself? I will merrily supply you with such if you are not capable of doing so.

            It’s fairly simple for me to provide facts (indeed, I just finished the first chunk f essays dealing with this at my site not too long ago, wherein I provided references and facts.) So, truly — if you aren’t capable of doing so, just let me know and I will provide you with such.

            So your imagining is just that: imagination.

            “Based on your viewpoint, Michael Bailey and Ray Blanchard are correct, simply because they are able to fake some results and apply poor science and get a few therapists to accept it.”

            In order for that to be first, pertinent to the discussion, it would need to be something more than just an idea that has not undergone peer review. It hasn’t. Indeed, its only practical value within the overall scheme of things at present is that it pisses off transfolks and makes money for Bailey through sales of his book.

            Which you would realize if you understood my viewpoint as you describe yourself as doing.

            So you lied, and, since that also shows that it isn’t pertinent to the discussion (which is about transsexualsim, GID, and the DSM/ICD) you used it as a straw man argument to shift discussion to a different area.

            That’s both. SO yes, you lied, and yes you used a strawman. Now, if I had used the blanchard crap in my post, you’d have had a cause to do so, but you didn’t. So, there’s avoidance, because you apparently didn’t want to tackle, head on, the specifics of the post, instead seeming to spend your time thinking not about what I wrote, but rather about what you thought I meant.

            As a point of fact, I am very precise in what I say. Which isn’t obfuscation, and is a fairly well established reality. So that’s another lie.

            On the other hand, your use of the Blanchard hypothesis is an obfuscation (strawman), so, in reality, the one obfuscating stuff is you. Making a sin of omission, as well.

            Would you like to keep going? I ask because at this rate, I’ll have pegged you as a liar and a fraud without any real merit to your arguments here.

            Credibility down the tubes, and I’m doing it all with your own words.

            If I were trying to impress you, you would be impressed. I am not trying, however, although what am doing is toying with you and using you as an excuse to point out some of the basic lies that are told by you.

            Were you not to lie or present in accurate and misleading information, I would, ultimately run out of anything to say to you.

            Fortunately, I don’t appear to need to have to worry about that.

          • Let’s see…you are saying that Blanchard and Bailey have not produced peer reviewed papers? Okay…. That says a lot. I mean, you are aware that Bailey based his book on Blanchard’s peer reviewed papers. As well as some of his own. So, the fact that something is “peer reviewed” means little.

            So, you ignore my point (that your reliance on select papers and studies does not trump my reliance on select studies and papers) and proceed with your rather clumsy approach, which seems to be to keep calling me a liar.

            Now, you may want to play your little game, but it isn’t working.

            BTW, you should not be so quick to dismiss Blanchard and Bailey since their friend Zucker is having a sttrong influence on the DSM. As I said, my point was that the DSM is not always based on actual, legitimate research, as it is politics and dogma.

  10. Ariablue says:

    Dyss: “Furthermore, it is a managed condition, not a cured one.”

    This is demonstrably untrue. Open your eyes and take in the world. It’s there, I promise.

    “But I am an advocate for ALL transgender people, even ones I have little in common with.”

    As long as you leave transsexual out, you can advocate all you want without problems from people who were born with that condition and had it treated. But what is “transgender advocacy” without transsexual?

    Transsexual and transgender are polar opposites. Transgender is a chosen identity. Transsexual is a birth condition. They have absolutely nothing to do with each other.

    A person who chooses a public transgender identity has no authority to speak for people born with birth defects. It’s silly, and way out of line. It is also an act of political violence.

    Let transsexual go, and you won’t have a problem. Stop trying to speak for a group of people who don’t want you, and you won’t have a problem. See, simple?

    “But you can’t advocate for yourself. You can’t post pictures of yourself online, you can’t even be out as trans, that goes against your code of ethics. It also insulates you from being judged the same way you judge others transness. It’s pretty damn convenient.”

    These kinds of threats may have worked on people in the past, but I promise you they won’t work this time. We can and do advocate for ourselves- in all sorts of venues you aren’t aware of.

    We don’t need you. We don’t want you. We can speak for ourselves. That’s what we’re doing right here, right now.

  11. Ariablue says:

    Dyss: “Furthermore, it is a managed condition, not a cured one.”

    This is demonstrably untrue. Open your eyes and take in the world. It’s there, I promise.

    “But I am an advocate for ALL transgender people, even ones I have little in common with.”

    As long as you leave transsexual out, you can advocate all you want without problems from people who were born with that condition and had it treated. But what is “transgender advocacy” without transsexual?

    Transsexual and transgender are polar opposites. Transgender is a chosen identity. Transsexual is a birth condition. They have absolutely nothing to do with each other.

    A person who chooses a public transgender identity has no authority to speak for people born with birth defects. It’s silly, and way out of line. It is also an act of political violence.

    Let transsexual go, and you won’t have a problem. Stop trying to speak for a group of people who don’t want you, and you won’t have a problem. See, simple?

    “But you can’t advocate for yourself. You can’t post pictures of yourself online, you can’t even be out as trans, that goes against your code of ethics. It also insulates you from being judged the same way you judge others transness. It’s pretty damn convenient.”

    These kinds of threats may have worked on people in the past, but I promise you they won’t work this time. We can and do advocate for ourselves- in all sorts of venues you aren’t aware of.

    We don’t need you. We don’t want you. We can speak for ourselves. That’s what we’re doing right here, right now.

    • Dyssonance says:

      Its a demonstratable fact, supported by the WPATH SoC, which directly states, unequivocally, that treatment seeks to *manage* the issue, not cure it.

      Your argument is based on the premise that since your dysphoria is not present at this time, that it would not, in fact, return were you to go back to your originally assigned sex.

      Nor are they polar opposites — transgender is understood by the general public to be anyone who is appearing to have or be in the process of changing their sex.

      In a more academic sense, it varies. ON a personal level, my understanding is in line with yours, but I base that on an analysis of facts available.

      The facts available establish that its actually one of multiple possible variances permissible within the diagnostic criteria.

      In a political sense, I don’t mind the argument so much — its fairly obvious that you do indeed, have a set nature of dogma, and what I’m doing is presenting you with the greater societal dogma of the nation in which I live (and, presumably, you do as well).

      May I ask what birth defect, and what is the specific diagnostic code for it? Or is this a political aspect, given the nature of our metadisagreement in terms of philosophical approach to dealing within the community as a whole?

      Lastly, regardless of what you may personally feel about the matter — or what I may personally feel about the matter — if someone in government or law wants the input of someone of our nature, then, de facto, that person, at that time, is speaking on behalf of all of us.

      Such as Mara Keisling — who has indeed, had that opportunity. Such as the panel that was interviewed by Congress earlier this year. Such as the transman who has been lobbying in congress for much of the last 16 months or so.

      I can assure you I’ve had disagreements with all of them — and all of them know it.

      That doesn’t not change the basic fact that at those moments, they do indeed do so.

      I will not let transsexual go. I cannot — it is my diagnosis and my nature. Neither you nor I have the ability to make that change, either, such that your request is an idle dream — a bit of windmill tilting — that improbable dream.

      As you know quite well, I like windmill tilting, so I don’t have a problem with you doing it, just be aware that you will fail where I am concerned.

      IF you wish to speak for yourself, then do so — but, as noted before, doing so and using a word that you have neither the social authority nor medical capability of denying to others is, well, asinine, appropriative (directly so), and, as you so unpleasantly put it, an act of “political violence”.

      You do not have the power to make the determination of who is or who is not when it comes the word transsexual for everyone — only those few who are your patients or clients, assuming you are a qualified psychiatrist or psychologist or social worker.

      And as one myself, I can assure you that you wouldn’t be for long if you applied the sorts of restrictions I’ve seen in use thus far.

      I realize you will likely take much of this as a “personal attack” of some sort, and there’s not much I can do about it.

      It just strikes me as sad that you, of all of the people I’ve come to read of late, would step away from factual understanding into dogmatic understanding.

      • You claim to be a Ph.D. and yet you do not seem to understand that research often is ahead of medical dogma. You also seem to wish to obfuscate the fact that medicine is often steered by politics. No, it should not be, but it is.

        And, unfortunately, it is far too easy for someone, especially someone who is a member, so to speak, of the “club” to obtain a disagnosis of transsexualism when it is not a correct one.

        Quite frankly, you are the one pushing dogma. Based on your viewpoint, Michael Bailey and Ray Blanchard are correct, simply because they are able to fake some results and apply poor science and get a few therapists to accept it.

        In a sense, your arguments are not really that different from those who argue that “transgender” is correct because there are more of them, and they have been able to bully people into using it improperly.

        Sorry, but you really are not as clever as you seem to believe you are.

        • Dyssonance says:

          Research, Jennifer? You mean the research being done by the same people who establish that standard? Why, um, indeed, to make that particular leap of conclusion — for which there is no effective implicature in my post nor in yours — requires you to be making a few interesting errors of thought.

          Since my personal opinion of you is fairly well know, we needn’t consider my lack of surprise.

          Note: not *merely* a PhD, but two Master’s, as well. Just saying.

          The medicine is steered by politics is irrelevant to the current diagnosis, the politics for which would have been established some 50 years ago, since ts remained fairly consistent since then, and has been merely fleshed out in terms of treatment since its introduction into the DSM in the 1980’s.

          Ergo, your pathetic attempt as insinuating that the definition is due to some sort of modern day politicking is, well, horseshit and instead shows that you prefer to talk out your hind end when backed into a corner rather than admit you were wrong.

          I will say the “based on your viewpoint” attack is fairly creative (especially given it has no bearing whatsoever to your description of it).

          However, lying through your teeth about my position is merely going to get you a tad more of the same, except I’ll proceed to apply my particular version of the Golden Rule to you.

          So, in the interest of fairness and because I love watching people dig their own holes, I’d like for you to go ahead and establish, in detail, just how the statements I made lead you to the false correlation with an admittedly unproven hypothesis.

          Oh, and, um, just so you know — there are not enough “transgenders” to bully anyone into using anything. That argument fails on statistical, relational, and pragmatic levels (then again, you likely have no clue what the pragmatic level I’m talking about is).

          What I am pushing is facts, hon. If you’d like to actually make a real attempt at debunking them, instead of using strawmen and aversion tactics to make it seem like you are actually having a debate (when you aren’t), then by all means, please do.

          Otherwise, shut the hell up.

          • The standards you speak of, the DSM and WPATH, have little to do with actual research, and quite a bit to do with politics and dogma. Is it really lost on you that there is considerable research that shows that transsexualim is a physical condition, and not simply a “choice?” I imagine it is. After all, that is contrary to your dogma.

            Now, if I am lying about your position, please explain how this is so. Otherwise, I believe the term “straw man,” will rather ironically apply.

            Actually, I have seen no facts from you. Just bluster, and a lot of obfuscation.

            Really, I am not at all impressed. Please, present actual facts, waving your alleged credentials does not impress.

          • The standards you speak of, the DSM and WPATH, have little to do with actual research, and quite a bit to do with politics and dogma. Is it really lost on you that there is considerable research that shows that transsexualim is a physical condition, and not simply a “choice?” I imagine it is. After all, that is contrary to your dogma.

            Now, if I am lying about your position, please explain how this is so. Otherwise, I believe the term “straw man,” will rather ironically apply.

            Actually, I have seen no facts from you. Just bluster, and a lot of obfuscation.

            Really, I am not at all impressed. Please, present actual facts, waving your alleged credentials does not impress.

          • Dyssonance says:

            @jennifer

            ” Is it really lost on you that there is considerable research that shows that transsexualim is a physical condition, and not simply a “choice?” ”

            No. Because that’s a lie.

            Is it really lost on you that the current standards, based on actual studies, hold the same position? Indeed, explicitly so.

            I ask because apparently you haven’t read the current standards, which say that quite clearly. Would you like quotes for establishing that, or are you capable of doing that research yourself? I will merrily supply you with such if you are not capable of doing so.

            It’s fairly simple for me to provide facts (indeed, I just finished the first chunk f essays dealing with this at my site not too long ago, wherein I provided references and facts.) So, truly — if you aren’t capable of doing so, just let me know and I will provide you with such.

            So your imagining is just that: imagination.

            “Based on your viewpoint, Michael Bailey and Ray Blanchard are correct, simply because they are able to fake some results and apply poor science and get a few therapists to accept it.”

            In order for that to be first, pertinent to the discussion, it would need to be something more than just an idea that has not undergone peer review. It hasn’t. Indeed, its only practical value within the overall scheme of things at present is that it pisses off transfolks and makes money for Bailey through sales of his book.

            Which you would realize if you understood my viewpoint as you describe yourself as doing.

            So you lied, and, since that also shows that it isn’t pertinent to the discussion (which is about transsexualsim, GID, and the DSM/ICD) you used it as a straw man argument to shift discussion to a different area.

            That’s both. SO yes, you lied, and yes you used a strawman. Now, if I had used the blanchard crap in my post, you’d have had a cause to do so, but you didn’t. So, there’s avoidance, because you apparently didn’t want to tackle, head on, the specifics of the post, instead seeming to spend your time thinking not about what I wrote, but rather about what you thought I meant.

            As a point of fact, I am very precise in what I say. Which isn’t obfuscation, and is a fairly well established reality. So that’s another lie.

            On the other hand, your use of the Blanchard hypothesis is an obfuscation (strawman), so, in reality, the one obfuscating stuff is you. Making a sin of omission, as well.

            Would you like to keep going? I ask because at this rate, I’ll have pegged you as a liar and a fraud without any real merit to your arguments here.

            Credibility down the tubes, and I’m doing it all with your own words.

            If I were trying to impress you, you would be impressed. I am not trying, however, although what am doing is toying with you and using you as an excuse to point out some of the basic lies that are told by you.

            Were you not to lie or present in accurate and misleading information, I would, ultimately run out of anything to say to you.

            Fortunately, I don’t appear to need to have to worry about that.

          • Let’s see…you are saying that Blanchard and Bailey have not produced peer reviewed papers? Okay…. That says a lot. I mean, you are aware that Bailey based his book on Blanchard’s peer reviewed papers. As well as some of his own. So, the fact that something is “peer reviewed” means little.

            So, you ignore my point (that your reliance on select papers and studies does not trump my reliance on select studies and papers) and proceed with your rather clumsy approach, which seems to be to keep calling me a liar.

            Now, you may want to play your little game, but it isn’t working.

            BTW, you should not be so quick to dismiss Blanchard and Bailey since their friend Zucker is having a sttrong influence on the DSM. As I said, my point was that the DSM is not always based on actual, legitimate research, as it is politics and dogma.

          • Let’s see…you are saying that Blanchard and Bailey have not produced peer reviewed papers? Okay…. That says a lot. I mean, you are aware that Bailey based his book on Blanchard’s peer reviewed papers. As well as some of his own. So, the fact that something is “peer reviewed” means little.

            So, you ignore my point (that your reliance on select papers and studies does not trump my reliance on select studies and papers) and proceed with your rather clumsy approach, which seems to be to keep calling me a liar.

            Now, you may want to play your little game, but it isn’t working.

            BTW, you should not be so quick to dismiss Blanchard and Bailey since their friend Zucker is having a sttrong influence on the DSM. As I said, my point was that the DSM is not always based on actual, legitimate research, as it is politics and dogma.

      • You claim to be a Ph.D. and yet you do not seem to understand that research often is ahead of medical dogma. You also seem to wish to obfuscate the fact that medicine is often steered by politics. No, it should not be, but it is.

        And, unfortunately, it is far too easy for someone, especially someone who is a member, so to speak, of the “club” to obtain a disagnosis of transsexualism when it is not a correct one.

        Quite frankly, you are the one pushing dogma. Based on your viewpoint, Michael Bailey and Ray Blanchard are correct, simply because they are able to fake some results and apply poor science and get a few therapists to accept it.

        In a sense, your arguments are not really that different from those who argue that “transgender” is correct because there are more of them, and they have been able to bully people into using it improperly.

        Sorry, but you really are not as clever as you seem to believe you are.

    • Dyssonance says:

      Its a demonstratable fact, supported by the WPATH SoC, which directly states, unequivocally, that treatment seeks to *manage* the issue, not cure it.

      Your argument is based on the premise that since your dysphoria is not present at this time, that it would not, in fact, return were you to go back to your originally assigned sex.

      Nor are they polar opposites — transgender is understood by the general public to be anyone who is appearing to have or be in the process of changing their sex.

      In a more academic sense, it varies. ON a personal level, my understanding is in line with yours, but I base that on an analysis of facts available.

      The facts available establish that its actually one of multiple possible variances permissible within the diagnostic criteria.

      In a political sense, I don’t mind the argument so much — its fairly obvious that you do indeed, have a set nature of dogma, and what I’m doing is presenting you with the greater societal dogma of the nation in which I live (and, presumably, you do as well).

      May I ask what birth defect, and what is the specific diagnostic code for it? Or is this a political aspect, given the nature of our metadisagreement in terms of philosophical approach to dealing within the community as a whole?

      Lastly, regardless of what you may personally feel about the matter — or what I may personally feel about the matter — if someone in government or law wants the input of someone of our nature, then, de facto, that person, at that time, is speaking on behalf of all of us.

      Such as Mara Keisling — who has indeed, had that opportunity. Such as the panel that was interviewed by Congress earlier this year. Such as the transman who has been lobbying in congress for much of the last 16 months or so.

      I can assure you I’ve had disagreements with all of them — and all of them know it.

      That doesn’t not change the basic fact that at those moments, they do indeed do so.

      I will not let transsexual go. I cannot — it is my diagnosis and my nature. Neither you nor I have the ability to make that change, either, such that your request is an idle dream — a bit of windmill tilting — that improbable dream.

      As you know quite well, I like windmill tilting, so I don’t have a problem with you doing it, just be aware that you will fail where I am concerned.

      IF you wish to speak for yourself, then do so — but, as noted before, doing so and using a word that you have neither the social authority nor medical capability of denying to others is, well, asinine, appropriative (directly so), and, as you so unpleasantly put it, an act of “political violence”.

      You do not have the power to make the determination of who is or who is not when it comes the word transsexual for everyone — only those few who are your patients or clients, assuming you are a qualified psychiatrist or psychologist or social worker.

      And as one myself, I can assure you that you wouldn’t be for long if you applied the sorts of restrictions I’ve seen in use thus far.

      I realize you will likely take much of this as a “personal attack” of some sort, and there’s not much I can do about it.

      It just strikes me as sad that you, of all of the people I’ve come to read of late, would step away from factual understanding into dogmatic understanding.

  12. Marti Abernathey says:

    My point of this post was mostly to talk about how my viewpoint has changed, especially given my own life circumstances. While I don’t hide the fact that I’m trans, I don’t broadcast it either. The way I figure is that if another transwoman sees me at work, she’ll know.

    What concerns me most really in this thread is the suggestion that transgender identified people are trying to subjugate HBS or WBT identified people’s identities. I’m hugely for live and let live. But I am an advocate for ALL transgender people, even ones I have little in common with. And believe me, in my advocacy work I’ve come among many a crossdresser that I feel no sense of commonality with. That being said, when we are discriminated in the work place or murdered, the perp isn’t going to ask if we are TS, TG, HBS, WBT, or anything else. Those who feel the need to advocate on the behalf of TS women alone, I say go for it! I stand by your right to do that.

    Yet there are people in this thread who seem to be able to decide what I AM, and if I have a penis or not, and I’m the one who’s a “fascist”? Please.

    • And yet, in this very reply, you subjugate bye identity of HBS people by labeling us as transgender,

      And to be honest, whether you have a penis, or not, is only part of the issue.

      • Marti Abernathey says:

        I’ve never labeled YOU as transgender. I cannot speak for you. But I do ID as transgender as defined via Merriam-Webster: Transgender of, relating to, or being a person (as a transsexual or transvestite) who identifies with or expresses a gender identity that differs from the one which corresponds to the person’s sex at birth.

        • Evangelina says:

          Oh but you do you see. YOU call transsexuals transgender. It is as a result of YOU and those who hold views like yours that transsexual and transgender have become confused and fused in the eyes and minds of the public with Lesbian and Gay issues. YOU claim to be an advocate for transgender and transsexual issues.
          Do you ever read what YOU write, Do you understand it or even believe it or do you just repeat dogma? When will YOU and the rest get it through your heads YOU do NOT speak for real transsexuals/classic transsexuals. Please do not speak as if you do. As for your Merriam -Webster dictionary you are so fond of quoting, it is wrong because YOU and those like you over the past 25 years have colonised a medical condition I doubt you have. As for stealth Marti Abernathy, you have no experience of it.

          • Marti Abernathey says:

            Oh but you do you see. YOU call transsexuals transgender. It is as a result of YOU and those who hold views like yours that transsexual and transgender have become confused and fused in the eyes and minds of the public with Lesbian and Gay issues. YOU claim to be an advocate for transgender and transsexual issues.

            Yes, I do. That’s how I chose to identify. And as such, that’s how I advocate as well.

            Do you ever read what YOU write, Do you understand it or even believe it or do you just repeat dogma? When will YOU and the rest get it through your heads YOU do NOT speak for real transsexuals/classic transsexuals. Please do not speak as if you do.

            You could ask yourself the same thing. I’m glad that you’re the head of “real/classic transsexuals”, who can grant me my own trans status. Who the hell is the fascist here?

            As for your Merriam -Webster dictionary you are so fond of quoting, it is wrong because YOU and those like you over the past 25 years have colonised a medical condition I doubt you have. As for stealth Marti Abernathy, you have no experience of it.

            Yes, me and good ole Merriam-Webster have an evil union, a conspiracy of sorts. Glad you’re my therapist and my medical doctor.

            As for as if I’m stealth or not, I’m glad you seem to know my life better than I do. If you don’t like the fact that I’m speaking for you, then speak up for your self, but please don’t tell me who or what to advocate for. Again, who the hell is the fascist here?

            But you can’t advocate for yourself. You can’t post pictures of yourself online, you can’t even be out as trans, that goes against your code of ethics. It also insulates you from being judged the same way you judge others transness. It’s pretty damn convenient.

          • As for as if I’m stealth or not, I’m glad you seem to know my life better than I do. If you don’t like the fact that I’m speaking for you, then speak up for your self, but please don’t tell me who or what to advocate for. Again, who the hell is the fascist here?

            But you can’t advocate for yourself. You can’t post pictures of yourself online, you can’t even be out as trans, that goes against your code of ethics. It also insulates you from being judged the same way you judge others transness. It’s pretty damn convenient.

            You do realize you are contradicting yourself here….you are objecting to someone pointing out that you are not stealth, and then attacking them for not being out like you are. Actually, pictures of me are posted online. They are just not associated with my medical condition. I don’t flaunt my past. And no, it is not “stealth,” it is simply being a woman, not a transwoman. That is what some cannot grasp. Being a woman is all some of us desire.

            Again, you don’t get it, and you remain deliberately oblivious to the fact that you don’t get it. You really are co-opting others experiences. We are not being elitist when we say we are different, we are just being honest. And we would appreciate you being honest, and recognizing that.

            For you, it is about “identity.” For us, it is about reality. We did not choose to identify as transsexual. It was forced on us by nature. We have chosen to deal with it, take the cure, and move on with our lives. Choosing to “identify” as transsexual makes as much sense as someone to “identify” as having the flu.

      • Dyssonance says:

        Would you please indicate where, specifically, that assertion was made?

        I’m dying to see it.

  13. Marti Abernathey says:

    My point of this post was mostly to talk about how my viewpoint has changed, especially given my own life circumstances. While I don’t hide the fact that I’m trans, I don’t broadcast it either. The way I figure is that if another transwoman sees me at work, she’ll know.

    What concerns me most really in this thread is the suggestion that transgender identified people are trying to subjugate HBS or WBT identified people’s identities. I’m hugely for live and let live. But I am an advocate for ALL transgender people, even ones I have little in common with. And believe me, in my advocacy work I’ve come among many a crossdresser that I feel no sense of commonality with. That being said, when we are discriminated in the work place or murdered, the perp isn’t going to ask if we are TS, TG, HBS, WBT, or anything else. Those who feel the need to advocate on the behalf of TS women alone, I say go for it! I stand by your right to do that.

    Yet there are people in this thread who seem to be able to decide what I AM, and if I have a penis or not, and I’m the one who’s a “fascist”? Please.

    • And yet, in this very reply, you subjugate bye identity of HBS people by labeling us as transgender,

      And to be honest, whether you have a penis, or not, is only part of the issue.

      • Marti Abernathey says:

        I’ve never labeled YOU as transgender. I cannot speak for you. But I do ID as transgender as defined via Merriam-Webster: Transgender of, relating to, or being a person (as a transsexual or transvestite) who identifies with or expresses a gender identity that differs from the one which corresponds to the person’s sex at birth.

        • Evangelina says:

          Oh but you do you see. YOU call transsexuals transgender. It is as a result of YOU and those who hold views like yours that transsexual and transgender have become confused and fused in the eyes and minds of the public with Lesbian and Gay issues. YOU claim to be an advocate for transgender and transsexual issues.
          Do you ever read what YOU write, Do you understand it or even believe it or do you just repeat dogma? When will YOU and the rest get it through your heads YOU do NOT speak for real transsexuals/classic transsexuals. Please do not speak as if you do. As for your Merriam -Webster dictionary you are so fond of quoting, it is wrong because YOU and those like you over the past 25 years have colonised a medical condition I doubt you have. As for stealth Marti Abernathy, you have no experience of it.

          • Marti Abernathey says:

            Oh but you do you see. YOU call transsexuals transgender. It is as a result of YOU and those who hold views like yours that transsexual and transgender have become confused and fused in the eyes and minds of the public with Lesbian and Gay issues. YOU claim to be an advocate for transgender and transsexual issues.

            Yes, I do. That’s how I chose to identify. And as such, that’s how I advocate as well.

            Do you ever read what YOU write, Do you understand it or even believe it or do you just repeat dogma? When will YOU and the rest get it through your heads YOU do NOT speak for real transsexuals/classic transsexuals. Please do not speak as if you do.

            You could ask yourself the same thing. I’m glad that you’re the head of “real/classic transsexuals”, who can grant me my own trans status. Who the hell is the fascist here?

            As for your Merriam -Webster dictionary you are so fond of quoting, it is wrong because YOU and those like you over the past 25 years have colonised a medical condition I doubt you have. As for stealth Marti Abernathy, you have no experience of it.

            Yes, me and good ole Merriam-Webster have an evil union, a conspiracy of sorts. Glad you’re my therapist and my medical doctor.

            As for as if I’m stealth or not, I’m glad you seem to know my life better than I do. If you don’t like the fact that I’m speaking for you, then speak up for your self, but please don’t tell me who or what to advocate for. Again, who the hell is the fascist here?

            But you can’t advocate for yourself. You can’t post pictures of yourself online, you can’t even be out as trans, that goes against your code of ethics. It also insulates you from being judged the same way you judge others transness. It’s pretty damn convenient.

          • As for as if I’m stealth or not, I’m glad you seem to know my life better than I do. If you don’t like the fact that I’m speaking for you, then speak up for your self, but please don’t tell me who or what to advocate for. Again, who the hell is the fascist here?

            But you can’t advocate for yourself. You can’t post pictures of yourself online, you can’t even be out as trans, that goes against your code of ethics. It also insulates you from being judged the same way you judge others transness. It’s pretty damn convenient.

            You do realize you are contradicting yourself here….you are objecting to someone pointing out that you are not stealth, and then attacking them for not being out like you are. Actually, pictures of me are posted online. They are just not associated with my medical condition. I don’t flaunt my past. And no, it is not “stealth,” it is simply being a woman, not a transwoman. That is what some cannot grasp. Being a woman is all some of us desire.

            Again, you don’t get it, and you remain deliberately oblivious to the fact that you don’t get it. You really are co-opting others experiences. We are not being elitist when we say we are different, we are just being honest. And we would appreciate you being honest, and recognizing that.

            For you, it is about “identity.” For us, it is about reality. We did not choose to identify as transsexual. It was forced on us by nature. We have chosen to deal with it, take the cure, and move on with our lives. Choosing to “identify” as transsexual makes as much sense as someone to “identify” as having the flu.

        • Evangelina says:

          Oh but you do you see. YOU call transsexuals transgender. It is as a result of YOU and those who hold views like yours that transsexual and transgender have become confused and fused in the eyes and minds of the public with Lesbian and Gay issues. YOU claim to be an advocate for transgender and transsexual issues.
          Do you ever read what YOU write, Do you understand it or even believe it or do you just repeat dogma? When will YOU and the rest get it through your heads YOU do NOT speak for real transsexuals/classic transsexuals. Please do not speak as if you do. As for your Merriam -Webster dictionary you are so fond of quoting, it is wrong because YOU and those like you over the past 25 years have colonised a medical condition I doubt you have. As for stealth Marti Abernathy, you have no experience of it.

      • Dyssonance says:

        Would you please indicate where, specifically, that assertion was made?

        I’m dying to see it.

  14. Dyssonance says:

    Um, no, Jennifer.

    Transsexual is a medical term, not an objective one. (indeed, as a medical term, it is specifically subjective).

    And it has a specific medical diagnosis. Right now. Today. One that holds that it is a physical condition that creates suffering.

    Little details like that tend to get forgotten in such arguments — obfuscated by whatever politics the individual in question is promoting.

    Furthermore, it is a managed condition, not a cured one. And, as a medical condition it does indeed confer a status on the individual in question.

    A smart gal like yourself should be able to figure out what that status is, even if you don’t like it and remain in denial about it.

    • Transsexual is a medical term, not an objective one. (indeed, as a medical term, it is specifically subjective).

      And it has a specific medical diagnosis. Right now. Today. One that holds that it is a physical condition that creates suffering.

      It appears that you do not understand the difference between objective, and subjective. A specific medical diagnosis would be objective. Subjective would mean the opposite.

      What transsexualism, or preferably HBS does not confer on an individual is the status of “transgender.”

      • Dyssonance says:

        Give that I’m a psychologist who has the capability of making that diagnosis, I’d say I;m in a more authoritative position to determine and use the correct language accordingly.

        All dx are subjective, and they are based on objective criteria — something you would likely have learned had you bothered to examine the facts of the matter.

        HBS is not preferable, as noted, *directly* by the major organizations involved across four disciplines. The preferablke terminology is either transsexualism (F.64) or Gender Identity Disorder/Dysphoria — depenidng on the particular code being sought.

        HBS is a political term, not a scientific one, and is based in a poor understanding of schema.

        Please do try to avoid making mistakes of logic and knowledge like this in the future.

        Dyssonance, PhD, MS, MA

  15. Dyssonance says:

    Um, no, Jennifer.

    Transsexual is a medical term, not an objective one. (indeed, as a medical term, it is specifically subjective).

    And it has a specific medical diagnosis. Right now. Today. One that holds that it is a physical condition that creates suffering.

    Little details like that tend to get forgotten in such arguments — obfuscated by whatever politics the individual in question is promoting.

    Furthermore, it is a managed condition, not a cured one. And, as a medical condition it does indeed confer a status on the individual in question.

    A smart gal like yourself should be able to figure out what that status is, even if you don’t like it and remain in denial about it.

  16. Dyssonance says:

    Um, no, Jennifer.

    Transsexual is a medical term, not an objective one. (indeed, as a medical term, it is specifically subjective).

    And it has a specific medical diagnosis. Right now. Today. One that holds that it is a physical condition that creates suffering.

    Little details like that tend to get forgotten in such arguments — obfuscated by whatever politics the individual in question is promoting.

    Furthermore, it is a managed condition, not a cured one. And, as a medical condition it does indeed confer a status on the individual in question.

    A smart gal like yourself should be able to figure out what that status is, even if you don’t like it and remain in denial about it.

  17. Dyssonance says:

    Um, no, Jennifer.

    Transsexual is a medical term, not an objective one. (indeed, as a medical term, it is specifically subjective).

    And it has a specific medical diagnosis. Right now. Today. One that holds that it is a physical condition that creates suffering.

    Little details like that tend to get forgotten in such arguments — obfuscated by whatever politics the individual in question is promoting.

    Furthermore, it is a managed condition, not a cured one. And, as a medical condition it does indeed confer a status on the individual in question.

    A smart gal like yourself should be able to figure out what that status is, even if you don’t like it and remain in denial about it.

    • Transsexual is a medical term, not an objective one. (indeed, as a medical term, it is specifically subjective).

      And it has a specific medical diagnosis. Right now. Today. One that holds that it is a physical condition that creates suffering.

      It appears that you do not understand the difference between objective, and subjective. A specific medical diagnosis would be objective. Subjective would mean the opposite.

      What transsexualism, or preferably HBS does not confer on an individual is the status of “transgender.”

      • Dyssonance says:

        Give that I’m a psychologist who has the capability of making that diagnosis, I’d say I;m in a more authoritative position to determine and use the correct language accordingly.

        All dx are subjective, and they are based on objective criteria — something you would likely have learned had you bothered to examine the facts of the matter.

        HBS is not preferable, as noted, *directly* by the major organizations involved across four disciplines. The preferablke terminology is either transsexualism (F.64) or Gender Identity Disorder/Dysphoria — depenidng on the particular code being sought.

        HBS is a political term, not a scientific one, and is based in a poor understanding of schema.

        Please do try to avoid making mistakes of logic and knowledge like this in the future.

        Dyssonance, PhD, MS, MA

  18. “So I guess your strategy when responding to comments is to obfuscate as much as possible? I was pointing out there are things that only trans women go through, and that there’s a reason to mentor or support. I personally don’t feel a need to be out just to do that, but if someone else does, I think it’s a good thing.”

    Well, there is the problem right there. You see, I am not a “trans” woman. I am simply a woman. I suppose that is why we don’t see things the same way.

    “Can you explain your logic a bit here? Just because something is a political or social construct doesn’t mean that it doesn’t exist. A debutante is a socially constructed term, but it doesn’t mean they don’t exist. ”

    Now, “debutante” is a good example. It is a highly subjective term. It is not something that can be applied to anyone who does not wish to identify that way. No one is “forced” to be a debutante. Pressured perhaps, but ultimately it is a choice. I am not saying that trangender people do not exist. I am just saying that it is an identity, not an objective term. It is appropriate only for those who chose to call themselves that.

    *’eyeroll’, it was sarcasm based the fact that people in this thread seem to know if I have a penis, and make a judgment on if I’m really a transsexual.”

    Again, “transsexual” is an objective term. You either are, or you are not. You can’t really choose to be one. That is one reason some of us push the HBS model. It would provide a specific medical diagnosis. Calling yourself a transsexual, if you are not, is as ridiculous as someone with normal blood sugar calling themselves a diabetic. It is not a label that confers any additional status, though some transgender people think it does. It is all part of that imaginary hierarchy, the one that says that a transsexual is better than a crossdresser, and being physically interesex is better than being transsexual. There is no hierarchy because two of these things really have nothing in common, and two are only partially related. Crossdressing and transsexualism are not remotely related, and while transsexualism is probably a form of intersex, and there is often some overlap between being transsexual and being physically intersex that is not always the case. Many people who are physically intersex show no sign of transsexualism at all. And many people who are transsexual have no physical intersex conditions.

  19. “So I guess your strategy when responding to comments is to obfuscate as much as possible? I was pointing out there are things that only trans women go through, and that there’s a reason to mentor or support. I personally don’t feel a need to be out just to do that, but if someone else does, I think it’s a good thing.”

    Well, there is the problem right there. You see, I am not a “trans” woman. I am simply a woman. I suppose that is why we don’t see things the same way.

    “Can you explain your logic a bit here? Just because something is a political or social construct doesn’t mean that it doesn’t exist. A debutante is a socially constructed term, but it doesn’t mean they don’t exist. ”

    Now, “debutante” is a good example. It is a highly subjective term. It is not something that can be applied to anyone who does not wish to identify that way. No one is “forced” to be a debutante. Pressured perhaps, but ultimately it is a choice. I am not saying that trangender people do not exist. I am just saying that it is an identity, not an objective term. It is appropriate only for those who chose to call themselves that.

    *’eyeroll’, it was sarcasm based the fact that people in this thread seem to know if I have a penis, and make a judgment on if I’m really a transsexual.”

    Again, “transsexual” is an objective term. You either are, or you are not. You can’t really choose to be one. That is one reason some of us push the HBS model. It would provide a specific medical diagnosis. Calling yourself a transsexual, if you are not, is as ridiculous as someone with normal blood sugar calling themselves a diabetic. It is not a label that confers any additional status, though some transgender people think it does. It is all part of that imaginary hierarchy, the one that says that a transsexual is better than a crossdresser, and being physically interesex is better than being transsexual. There is no hierarchy because two of these things really have nothing in common, and two are only partially related. Crossdressing and transsexualism are not remotely related, and while transsexualism is probably a form of intersex, and there is often some overlap between being transsexual and being physically intersex that is not always the case. Many people who are physically intersex show no sign of transsexualism at all. And many people who are transsexual have no physical intersex conditions.

  20. “Nice try. Most transsexuals do have a time of not completely pass or at the very least fearing being read, especially in restrooms. But if you want to argue that into a corner, be my guest.”

    That is why it is called “transition.” We outgrow that sort of silliness and move on. We don’t cling to it as an excuse to not be women.

    “The definition of transgender INCLUDES transsexuals, so your comment doesn’t make sense. ”

    This is why some people are referred to as “gender fascists.” They insist on telling others how they can, and cannot identify. Transgender is an artificial political/social construct. It is not an objective reality, but is instead only a very subjective identity. If you wish to identify as transgender, that is your right. I don’t identify that way, and do not appreciate having someone try to force that term on me.

    ?Wait, maybe I don’t exist…. Or better yet, I wasn’t born transsexual, I grew into it! Not sure what to tell ya on that one. Apparently you know my situation better than I do.”

    Quite simply, one does not grow into being a transsexual. One grows into being other things, but not transsexual. The term is an objective one. Claiming to grow into it is a bit of a stretch. And thinking you can, is a recipe for disaster.

    • Marti Abernathey says:

      That is why it is called “transition.” We outgrow that sort of silliness and move on. We don’t cling to it as an excuse to not be women.

      So I guess your strategy when responding to comments is to obfuscate as much as possible? I was pointing out there are things that only trans women go through, and that there’s a reason to mentor or support. I personally don’t feel a need to be out just to do that, but if someone else does, I think it’s a good thing.

      This is why some people are referred to as “gender fascists.” They insist on telling others how they can, and cannot identify. Transgender is an artificial political/social construct. It is not an objective reality, but is instead only a very subjective identity. If you wish to identify as transgender, that is your right. I don’t identify that way, and do not appreciate having someone try to force that term on me.

      Can you explain your logic a bit here? Just because something is a political or social construct doesn’t mean that it doesn’t exist. A debutante is a socially constructed term, but it doesn’t mean they don’t exist.

      Quite simply, one does not grow into being a transsexual. One grows into being other things, but not transsexual. The term is an objective one. Claiming to grow into it is a bit of a stretch. And thinking you can, is a recipe for disaster.

      *eyeroll*, it was sarcasm based the fact that people in this thread seem to know if I have a penis, and make a judgment on if I’m really a transsexual.

  21. “Nice try. Most transsexuals do have a time of not completely pass or at the very least fearing being read, especially in restrooms. But if you want to argue that into a corner, be my guest.”

    That is why it is called “transition.” We outgrow that sort of silliness and move on. We don’t cling to it as an excuse to not be women.

    “The definition of transgender INCLUDES transsexuals, so your comment doesn’t make sense. ”

    This is why some people are referred to as “gender fascists.” They insist on telling others how they can, and cannot identify. Transgender is an artificial political/social construct. It is not an objective reality, but is instead only a very subjective identity. If you wish to identify as transgender, that is your right. I don’t identify that way, and do not appreciate having someone try to force that term on me.

    ?Wait, maybe I don’t exist…. Or better yet, I wasn’t born transsexual, I grew into it! Not sure what to tell ya on that one. Apparently you know my situation better than I do.”

    Quite simply, one does not grow into being a transsexual. One grows into being other things, but not transsexual. The term is an objective one. Claiming to grow into it is a bit of a stretch. And thinking you can, is a recipe for disaster.

    • Marti Abernathey says:

      That is why it is called “transition.” We outgrow that sort of silliness and move on. We don’t cling to it as an excuse to not be women.

      So I guess your strategy when responding to comments is to obfuscate as much as possible? I was pointing out there are things that only trans women go through, and that there’s a reason to mentor or support. I personally don’t feel a need to be out just to do that, but if someone else does, I think it’s a good thing.

      This is why some people are referred to as “gender fascists.” They insist on telling others how they can, and cannot identify. Transgender is an artificial political/social construct. It is not an objective reality, but is instead only a very subjective identity. If you wish to identify as transgender, that is your right. I don’t identify that way, and do not appreciate having someone try to force that term on me.

      Can you explain your logic a bit here? Just because something is a political or social construct doesn’t mean that it doesn’t exist. A debutante is a socially constructed term, but it doesn’t mean they don’t exist.

      Quite simply, one does not grow into being a transsexual. One grows into being other things, but not transsexual. The term is an objective one. Claiming to grow into it is a bit of a stretch. And thinking you can, is a recipe for disaster.

      *eyeroll*, it was sarcasm based the fact that people in this thread seem to know if I have a penis, and make a judgment on if I’m really a transsexual.

    • Marti Abernathey says:

      That is why it is called “transition.” We outgrow that sort of silliness and move on. We don’t cling to it as an excuse to not be women.

      So I guess your strategy when responding to comments is to obfuscate as much as possible? I was pointing out there are things that only trans women go through, and that there’s a reason to mentor or support. I personally don’t feel a need to be out just to do that, but if someone else does, I think it’s a good thing.

      This is why some people are referred to as “gender fascists.” They insist on telling others how they can, and cannot identify. Transgender is an artificial political/social construct. It is not an objective reality, but is instead only a very subjective identity. If you wish to identify as transgender, that is your right. I don’t identify that way, and do not appreciate having someone try to force that term on me.

      Can you explain your logic a bit here? Just because something is a political or social construct doesn’t mean that it doesn’t exist. A debutante is a socially constructed term, but it doesn’t mean they don’t exist.

      Quite simply, one does not grow into being a transsexual. One grows into being other things, but not transsexual. The term is an objective one. Claiming to grow into it is a bit of a stretch. And thinking you can, is a recipe for disaster.

      *eyeroll*, it was sarcasm based the fact that people in this thread seem to know if I have a penis, and make a judgment on if I’m really a transsexual.

  22. “Nice try. Most transsexuals do have a time of not completely pass or at the very least fearing being read, especially in restrooms. But if you want to argue that into a corner, be my guest.”

    That is why it is called “transition.” We outgrow that sort of silliness and move on. We don’t cling to it as an excuse to not be women.

    “The definition of transgender INCLUDES transsexuals, so your comment doesn’t make sense. ”

    This is why some people are referred to as “gender fascists.” They insist on telling others how they can, and cannot identify. Transgender is an artificial political/social construct. It is not an objective reality, but is instead only a very subjective identity. If you wish to identify as transgender, that is your right. I don’t identify that way, and do not appreciate having someone try to force that term on me.

    ?Wait, maybe I don’t exist…. Or better yet, I wasn’t born transsexual, I grew into it! Not sure what to tell ya on that one. Apparently you know my situation better than I do.”

    Quite simply, one does not grow into being a transsexual. One grows into being other things, but not transsexual. The term is an objective one. Claiming to grow into it is a bit of a stretch. And thinking you can, is a recipe for disaster.

  23. Lori D says:

    Having recently transitioned and no longer biting into either term “transgender” or “transsexual,” I find it interesting that this discussion is devolving into “you transgender” and “us women.” First of all, “you transgender” is nearly as bad as referring to African-Americans as “YOU people.” At its core is a divisiveness that welcomes segregation, but maybe that’s exactly what everyone’s crying foul about.

    I don’t get it. I admit my knowledge is limited on this subject, but I’m merely one woman (born male-bodied, with a past, or whatever term I might settle on) who has transitioned and seeks GRS. Thankfully I am gendered female in most settings without the need for FFS and I’m truly thankful for that. I could likely go “stealth” if I really wanted to. But ultimately I choose to wrap my true identity around the complex pieces of who I am…a parent, a musician, a follower of Christ, and hopefully a philanthropist of sorts. I believe in reaching a hurting group of people and seeing them freed, one at a time, from the midnight of their gender dysphoria. What good is it going to do anyone when we marginalize and isolate anyone into “us and them.” The once marginalized should never then become the bullies.

    • Marti Abernathey says:

      But ultimately I choose to wrap my true identity around the complex pieces of who I am…a parent, a musician, a follower of Christ, and hopefully a philanthropist of sorts. I believe in reaching a hurting group of people and seeing them freed, one at a time, from the midnight of their gender dysphoria. What good is it going to do anyone when we marginalize and isolate anyone into “us and them.” The once marginalized should never then become the bullies.

      Amen to that! When I die, the last thing I ever want to be known for is being trans, be it transsexual or transgender. I’d much rather be known as a parent, politician, writer, or blogger than by my transness.

  24. Lori D says:

    Having recently transitioned and no longer biting into either term “transgender” or “transsexual,” I find it interesting that this discussion is devolving into “you transgender” and “us women.” First of all, “you transgender” is nearly as bad as referring to African-Americans as “YOU people.” At its core is a divisiveness that welcomes segregation, but maybe that’s exactly what everyone’s crying foul about.

    I don’t get it. I admit my knowledge is limited on this subject, but I’m merely one woman (born male-bodied, with a past, or whatever term I might settle on) who has transitioned and seeks GRS. Thankfully I am gendered female in most settings without the need for FFS and I’m truly thankful for that. I could likely go “stealth” if I really wanted to. But ultimately I choose to wrap my true identity around the complex pieces of who I am…a parent, a musician, a follower of Christ, and hopefully a philanthropist of sorts. I believe in reaching a hurting group of people and seeing them freed, one at a time, from the midnight of their gender dysphoria. What good is it going to do anyone when we marginalize and isolate anyone into “us and them.” The once marginalized should never then become the bullies.

  25. Lori D says:

    Having recently transitioned and no longer biting into either term “transgender” or “transsexual,” I find it interesting that this discussion is devolving into “you transgender” and “us women.” First of all, “you transgender” is nearly as bad as referring to African-Americans as “YOU people.” At its core is a divisiveness that welcomes segregation, but maybe that’s exactly what everyone’s crying foul about.

    I don’t get it. I admit my knowledge is limited on this subject, but I’m merely one woman (born male-bodied, with a past, or whatever term I might settle on) who has transitioned and seeks GRS. Thankfully I am gendered female in most settings without the need for FFS and I’m truly thankful for that. I could likely go “stealth” if I really wanted to. But ultimately I choose to wrap my true identity around the complex pieces of who I am…a parent, a musician, a follower of Christ, and hopefully a philanthropist of sorts. I believe in reaching a hurting group of people and seeing them freed, one at a time, from the midnight of their gender dysphoria. What good is it going to do anyone when we marginalize and isolate anyone into “us and them.” The once marginalized should never then become the bullies.

  26. Lori D says:

    Having recently transitioned and no longer biting into either term “transgender” or “transsexual,” I find it interesting that this discussion is devolving into “you transgender” and “us women.” First of all, “you transgender” is nearly as bad as referring to African-Americans as “YOU people.” At its core is a divisiveness that welcomes segregation, but maybe that’s exactly what everyone’s crying foul about.

    I don’t get it. I admit my knowledge is limited on this subject, but I’m merely one woman (born male-bodied, with a past, or whatever term I might settle on) who has transitioned and seeks GRS. Thankfully I am gendered female in most settings without the need for FFS and I’m truly thankful for that. I could likely go “stealth” if I really wanted to. But ultimately I choose to wrap my true identity around the complex pieces of who I am…a parent, a musician, a follower of Christ, and hopefully a philanthropist of sorts. I believe in reaching a hurting group of people and seeing them freed, one at a time, from the midnight of their gender dysphoria. What good is it going to do anyone when we marginalize and isolate anyone into “us and them.” The once marginalized should never then become the bullies.

    • Marti Abernathey says:

      But ultimately I choose to wrap my true identity around the complex pieces of who I am…a parent, a musician, a follower of Christ, and hopefully a philanthropist of sorts. I believe in reaching a hurting group of people and seeing them freed, one at a time, from the midnight of their gender dysphoria. What good is it going to do anyone when we marginalize and isolate anyone into “us and them.” The once marginalized should never then become the bullies.

      Amen to that! When I die, the last thing I ever want to be known for is being trans, be it transsexual or transgender. I’d much rather be known as a parent, politician, writer, or blogger than by my transness.

  27. Ariablue says:

    That’s funny Susan! How do you think all the current TG advocates are going to like the competition?

  28. Ariablue says:

    That’s funny Susan! How do you think all the current TG advocates are going to like the competition?

  29. Ariablue says:

    Your definition of “transgender” may include all sorts of things, but that doesn’t mean everyone else shares it. That is one of the things that most of the radical transgender don’t grasp; their thoughts are not the final word, nor do they define reality.

    My point about bathrooms, the favorite topic of certain transgender types who don’t know what it’s like to be a woman, still stands. If you think real transsexual people spend the rest of their lives in fear of the restroom it shows a peculiar detachment from reality. Seriously, how do you come to that conclusion? Maybe you are mistaking full-time crossdressers for “transsexuals”?

    The fact is that transsexual is NOT part of transgender, and never was. Society gets it despite your years of propaganda. Everyone knows a man or a woman when they see one, despite any physical issues. The TG proselytizers have preyed on the fears of transsexual women for years, using the obstacles in our path to scare us into their clutches. Well, no more.

    We are men and women, and we are taking this back from you transgender politicians. Your party is over.

  30. Ariablue says:

    Your definition of “transgender” may include all sorts of things, but that doesn’t mean everyone else shares it. That is one of the things that most of the radical transgender don’t grasp; their thoughts are not the final word, nor do they define reality.

    My point about bathrooms, the favorite topic of certain transgender types who don’t know what it’s like to be a woman, still stands. If you think real transsexual people spend the rest of their lives in fear of the restroom it shows a peculiar detachment from reality. Seriously, how do you come to that conclusion? Maybe you are mistaking full-time crossdressers for “transsexuals”?

    The fact is that transsexual is NOT part of transgender, and never was. Society gets it despite your years of propaganda. Everyone knows a man or a woman when they see one, despite any physical issues. The TG proselytizers have preyed on the fears of transsexual women for years, using the obstacles in our path to scare us into their clutches. Well, no more.

    We are men and women, and we are taking this back from you transgender politicians. Your party is over.

  31. Susan says:

    Well, for your enlightenment, Suzan Cooke’s site is quite firmly in the transgender camp, Marti. She’s readily and regularly apologizing for her past transgressions toward the transgender, evidently tearing up her “divorce” papers, as well as stating she plans to attend Creating Change – Dallas. Yep, Suzan Cooke has become a real live transgender advocate.

    And, in typical transgender form, you continue to refer to my site and, by implication, me as “HBS folks” in spite of the extreme criticism myself and other’s have expressed in that regard. Suzan Cooke has recently said she thinks it’s bullsh**. You transgender just can’t seem to argue with any reason, only throw BS down and expecting it to stick.

  32. Susan says:

    Well, for your enlightenment, Suzan Cooke’s site is quite firmly in the transgender camp, Marti. She’s readily and regularly apologizing for her past transgressions toward the transgender, evidently tearing up her “divorce” papers, as well as stating she plans to attend Creating Change – Dallas. Yep, Suzan Cooke has become a real live transgender advocate.

    And, in typical transgender form, you continue to refer to my site and, by implication, me as “HBS folks” in spite of the extreme criticism myself and other’s have expressed in that regard. Suzan Cooke has recently said she thinks it’s bullsh**. You transgender just can’t seem to argue with any reason, only throw BS down and expecting it to stick.

  33. Leigh says:

    Why has stealth become a bad word amongst the transgender?

    Could it be jealousy ?

    Should’nt it be something to aspire to ?

    I find it interesting that those who speak against it, point to moments in their life when they felt complimented by it

    Dyssonance often refers to it, sort of as a validation, then speaks against it as being dishonest, and not furthering the goals to be out and proud, for community sake, the good of others and all that.

    Marti refers to it above, on the one hand quite chuffed that women around her point to he menstruation pains, then in the same breath admonish those of us that keep quiet as being deceitful, delusional, unethical, saying she would come out if only … well yes but then all those complimentary things the girls say to you .. well that would dissapear, or become a rib tickler, a nudge nudge, know what I mean?

    Kara… “it never occurs to me to say I am a transsexual”… totally loathes those that are deep stealth, claiming that they are everything thats wrong with transsexuals today. She admits that she has told a select few of her transsexual status, but then when someone comes along and says they have not told anyone, have no intention of doing so, and are just another woman among women, cries fowl and finds such acts despicable.

    Seems to me that the real truth is that we all tell or not tell based on how well we can bring it off.

    For those that can’t be a woman amongst women, well we cry bloody murder don’t we. We stamp our feet and blame everyone else for our shortcomings. We call for laws to protect us, and we tell our stories and hope for understanding and acceptance.

    For those of us that pass most of the time, well we feel for those who cant because there for the grace of god go I, and most of us have friends less fortunate and dont want to appear insensitive to their plight. So we tell those that are most likely to know anyway, and we relish those few offhand comments that appear to help us feel “passable” and we speak out against oppression from those of us that mangage deep stealth as if it was their fault. We claim they are looking down on us, putting themselves above us, using their “passing privledge” to denigrate us, call them transphobic and privledged when we say something that hurts their feelings or makes them feel bad.

    Yes, its all about personal really. Thats why Marti there is strict to tell me that I may not engage in personal attacks. In fact, because of my “passing privledge” and my “white privledge” and my “financial privledge”, anthing I have to say obout anyone in particular is deemed an attack, yet anyone that attacks me or those that hold my opinions are fair game for attack …

    as Carlin also said .. “its all B…S… and it’s all bad for you.

    • Dyssonance says:

      A more accurate summation of my personal stance is that it is great for the individual, rather shitty overall for the whole of the community.

      As someone who knows very well how to achieve stealth *in the current milieu*, I can say that the price for it is high, and it is very difficult to achieve today — as well as being actively argued against by the professionals involved in treatment.

      In a few years, the question of it will be moot, and the only one’s affected will be those for whom stealth is lost due to the vagaries of the society in which we live.

  34. Leigh says:

    Why has stealth become a bad word amongst the transgender?

    Could it be jealousy ?

    Should’nt it be something to aspire to ?

    I find it interesting that those who speak against it, point to moments in their life when they felt complimented by it

    Dyssonance often refers to it, sort of as a validation, then speaks against it as being dishonest, and not furthering the goals to be out and proud, for community sake, the good of others and all that.

    Marti refers to it above, on the one hand quite chuffed that women around her point to he menstruation pains, then in the same breath admonish those of us that keep quiet as being deceitful, delusional, unethical, saying she would come out if only … well yes but then all those complimentary things the girls say to you .. well that would dissapear, or become a rib tickler, a nudge nudge, know what I mean?

    Kara… “it never occurs to me to say I am a transsexual”… totally loathes those that are deep stealth, claiming that they are everything thats wrong with transsexuals today. She admits that she has told a select few of her transsexual status, but then when someone comes along and says they have not told anyone, have no intention of doing so, and are just another woman among women, cries fowl and finds such acts despicable.

    Seems to me that the real truth is that we all tell or not tell based on how well we can bring it off.

    For those that can’t be a woman amongst women, well we cry bloody murder don’t we. We stamp our feet and blame everyone else for our shortcomings. We call for laws to protect us, and we tell our stories and hope for understanding and acceptance.

    For those of us that pass most of the time, well we feel for those who cant because there for the grace of god go I, and most of us have friends less fortunate and dont want to appear insensitive to their plight. So we tell those that are most likely to know anyway, and we relish those few offhand comments that appear to help us feel “passable” and we speak out against oppression from those of us that mangage deep stealth as if it was their fault. We claim they are looking down on us, putting themselves above us, using their “passing privledge” to denigrate us, call them transphobic and privledged when we say something that hurts their feelings or makes them feel bad.

    Yes, its all about personal really. Thats why Marti there is strict to tell me that I may not engage in personal attacks. In fact, because of my “passing privledge” and my “white privledge” and my “financial privledge”, anthing I have to say obout anyone in particular is deemed an attack, yet anyone that attacks me or those that hold my opinions are fair game for attack …

    as Carlin also said .. “its all B…S… and it’s all bad for you.

    • Dyssonance says:

      A more accurate summation of my personal stance is that it is great for the individual, rather shitty overall for the whole of the community.

      As someone who knows very well how to achieve stealth *in the current milieu*, I can say that the price for it is high, and it is very difficult to achieve today — as well as being actively argued against by the professionals involved in treatment.

      In a few years, the question of it will be moot, and the only one’s affected will be those for whom stealth is lost due to the vagaries of the society in which we live.

    • Dyssonance says:

      A more accurate summation of my personal stance is that it is great for the individual, rather shitty overall for the whole of the community.

      As someone who knows very well how to achieve stealth *in the current milieu*, I can say that the price for it is high, and it is very difficult to achieve today — as well as being actively argued against by the professionals involved in treatment.

      In a few years, the question of it will be moot, and the only one’s affected will be those for whom stealth is lost due to the vagaries of the society in which we live.

    • Dyssonance says:

      A more accurate summation of my personal stance is that it is great for the individual, rather shitty overall for the whole of the community.

      As someone who knows very well how to achieve stealth *in the current milieu*, I can say that the price for it is high, and it is very difficult to achieve today — as well as being actively argued against by the professionals involved in treatment.

      In a few years, the question of it will be moot, and the only one’s affected will be those for whom stealth is lost due to the vagaries of the society in which we live.

  35. Evangelina says:

    Read my essay ‘Keeping Your Mouth Shut” http://cassandraspeaks.wordpress.com/2009/08/05/keeping-your-mouth-shut/
    that is what I think about stealth.

    • Dyssonance says:

      Ok, I read it.

      You totally fucked up the moment you said: It seems more likely to me that if you want to look for definitive female experience it is more likely to be found in those heterosexual areas of female human experience.

      That is an aspect of heterosexual privilege, and is fundamentally wrong on multiple levels. As it forms the basis of your post, its errors are merely compounded on and eventually you arrive at the end with a strong and lasting distaste for the prejudice and aversion it possesses.

      Without logic and fact as your foundation, you failed.

  36. Evangelina says:

    Read my essay ‘Keeping Your Mouth Shut” http://cassandraspeaks.wordpress.com/2009/08/05/keeping-your-mouth-shut/
    that is what I think about stealth.

    • Dyssonance says:

      Ok, I read it.

      You totally fucked up the moment you said: It seems more likely to me that if you want to look for definitive female experience it is more likely to be found in those heterosexual areas of female human experience.

      That is an aspect of heterosexual privilege, and is fundamentally wrong on multiple levels. As it forms the basis of your post, its errors are merely compounded on and eventually you arrive at the end with a strong and lasting distaste for the prejudice and aversion it possesses.

      Without logic and fact as your foundation, you failed.

  37. Jenna says:

    A slight tangent here…. but relevant: At what point do we say someone has tunnel vision? Usually when we’ve become exhausted at our attempts to change that person’s mind.

    From one perspective, we say that one person “wins a race” because they are stronger or faster. From another perspective, it could just be that the loser simply gave up (if we consider all “men” to be created equal in the strictest of senses). We’ll never 100% know for certain which it was, honestly.

    Perspectives are something we all have, they are unique to us and are protected as sure as we would our own blood. This makes me happy for only one reason… I too am able to have my own perspective and share it here, effectively burning a few more moments of time in an attempt to find others that share my perspective.

    As to the question of role models… success in life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness was always the definition for me. However, one thing I did not learn by observing my role models is that my path to those qualities may or may not be the same path my role models took.

    Marti, whether I agree or disagree with your path is irrelevant since it can only be viewed through the experience of my own. I can, at least, see that you are a happy person, committed to what you love doing and that, in and of itself, should be role model enough for anyone (from my perspective).

    As to the others who have posted I would say this: Be wary of painting with such a broad brush. It’s great for painting a wall or a fence… not so much for creating a mural, though. You are, of course, welcome to follow your dream of blending into a society that separates, segregates, defines, divides and conquers based on physical traits… and in doing so, it’s obvious that your mandate requires that you attempt to pull others in-line with the status quo.

    I, on the other hand, and quite happy being something that even the Borg would think twice about assimilating for fear that I might “bring the collective down.”

    So stealth or not, gendered, non, bi, trans, queer, etc. etc. These are but labels we use to pigeon-hole people… souls trapped in fleshy, sensitive containers that all agree on the same thing but disagree on the way to get there.

    I understand that this has become somewhat of a “standards” and “definitions” debate and that my comments are completely destructive as their intentions are to dismantle the debate. For anyone who is put-out by my efforts, please do find it in your heart to eventually forgive me. It’s just such a nice day today and I’d be remiss (from my own perspective) if I didn’t attempt to derail you long enough to smell a flower or two.

    Peace,
    Jenna

  38. Jenna says:

    A slight tangent here…. but relevant: At what point do we say someone has tunnel vision? Usually when we’ve become exhausted at our attempts to change that person’s mind.

    From one perspective, we say that one person “wins a race” because they are stronger or faster. From another perspective, it could just be that the loser simply gave up (if we consider all “men” to be created equal in the strictest of senses). We’ll never 100% know for certain which it was, honestly.

    Perspectives are something we all have, they are unique to us and are protected as sure as we would our own blood. This makes me happy for only one reason… I too am able to have my own perspective and share it here, effectively burning a few more moments of time in an attempt to find others that share my perspective.

    As to the question of role models… success in life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness was always the definition for me. However, one thing I did not learn by observing my role models is that my path to those qualities may or may not be the same path my role models took.

    Marti, whether I agree or disagree with your path is irrelevant since it can only be viewed through the experience of my own. I can, at least, see that you are a happy person, committed to what you love doing and that, in and of itself, should be role model enough for anyone (from my perspective).

    As to the others who have posted I would say this: Be wary of painting with such a broad brush. It’s great for painting a wall or a fence… not so much for creating a mural, though. You are, of course, welcome to follow your dream of blending into a society that separates, segregates, defines, divides and conquers based on physical traits… and in doing so, it’s obvious that your mandate requires that you attempt to pull others in-line with the status quo.

    I, on the other hand, and quite happy being something that even the Borg would think twice about assimilating for fear that I might “bring the collective down.”

    So stealth or not, gendered, non, bi, trans, queer, etc. etc. These are but labels we use to pigeon-hole people… souls trapped in fleshy, sensitive containers that all agree on the same thing but disagree on the way to get there.

    I understand that this has become somewhat of a “standards” and “definitions” debate and that my comments are completely destructive as their intentions are to dismantle the debate. For anyone who is put-out by my efforts, please do find it in your heart to eventually forgive me. It’s just such a nice day today and I’d be remiss (from my own perspective) if I didn’t attempt to derail you long enough to smell a flower or two.

    Peace,
    Jenna

  39. Dyssonance says:

    Strictly speaking (and even MW conforms to this standard), the second definition is not the widest possible use, and therefore an alternative used only when context is of value.

    That noted, I did actually touch on the subject of gender and sex and the flaws inherent in the general dogma posited here if sex and gender are technically the same, even if the general populations perceptions are such in my most recent post.

    Just saying.

  40. Dyssonance says:

    Strictly speaking (and even MW conforms to this standard), the second definition is not the widest possible use, and therefore an alternative used only when context is of value.

    That noted, I did actually touch on the subject of gender and sex and the flaws inherent in the general dogma posited here if sex and gender are technically the same, even if the general populations perceptions are such in my most recent post.

    Just saying.

  41. Ariablue says:

    “There are some things that trans-women share that are experiences only they will have. A good example is restrooms. A natal women don’t fear being outed because of their birth sex…”

    Not all “transsexual women” share this with you, though I suspect all transgender people do.

    Moreover, if you are going to focus on what amount to relatively minor differences in life you might as well not try to transition. That’s just a hang up some people have when they start transition, If you can’t get past square one then that’s obviously where you’ll stay.

    Then again, most transgender people were not born transsexual. So it’s only natural that they don’t get it.

    • Marti Abernathey says:

      Not all “transsexual women” share this with you, though I suspect all transgender people do.

      Nice try. Most transsexuals do have a time of not completely pass or at the very least fearing being read, especially in restrooms. But if you want to argue that into a corner, be my guest.

      Then again, most transgender people were not born transsexual. So it’s only natural that they don’t get it.

      The definition of transgender INCLUDES transsexuals, so your comment doesn’t make sense.

      Wait, maybe I don’t exist…. Or better yet, I wasn’t born transsexual, I grew into it! Not sure what to tell ya on that one. Apparently you know my situation better than I do.

  42. Ariablue says:

    “There are some things that trans-women share that are experiences only they will have. A good example is restrooms. A natal women don’t fear being outed because of their birth sex…”

    Not all “transsexual women” share this with you, though I suspect all transgender people do.

    Moreover, if you are going to focus on what amount to relatively minor differences in life you might as well not try to transition. That’s just a hang up some people have when they start transition, If you can’t get past square one then that’s obviously where you’ll stay.

    Then again, most transgender people were not born transsexual. So it’s only natural that they don’t get it.

    • Marti Abernathey says:

      Not all “transsexual women” share this with you, though I suspect all transgender people do.

      Nice try. Most transsexuals do have a time of not completely pass or at the very least fearing being read, especially in restrooms. But if you want to argue that into a corner, be my guest.

      Then again, most transgender people were not born transsexual. So it’s only natural that they don’t get it.

      The definition of transgender INCLUDES transsexuals, so your comment doesn’t make sense.

      Wait, maybe I don’t exist…. Or better yet, I wasn’t born transsexual, I grew into it! Not sure what to tell ya on that one. Apparently you know my situation better than I do.

  43. Ariablue says:

    “There are some things that trans-women share that are experiences only they will have. A good example is restrooms. A natal women don’t fear being outed because of their birth sex…”

    Not all “transsexual women” share this with you, though I suspect all transgender people do.

    Moreover, if you are going to focus on what amount to relatively minor differences in life you might as well not try to transition. That’s just a hang up some people have when they start transition, If you can’t get past square one then that’s obviously where you’ll stay.

    Then again, most transgender people were not born transsexual. So it’s only natural that they don’t get it.

  44. Susan says:

    Actually, Marti, gender, from Merriem – Webster:

    2 a : sex b : the behavioral, cultural, or psychological traits typically associated with one sex.

    ummm…you left out part of your definition.

    From Dictionary.com:

    2. sex: the feminine gender.,/I>

    Except to some of the transgender and a very few of the GLB, sex and gender are synonymous…as anyone who is not transgender what their sex is, and then what their gender is, they will tell you the same thing.

    “Where did I say anything about a penis?”

    You didn’t…where did I say you did?

    • Marti Abernathey says:

      Yes, because Dictionary.com is the standard for all dictionaries. Next up, Wikipedia? M-W is in the context of the entire definition. As Carlin said, context is everything.

  45. Susan says:

    Actually, Marti, gender, from Merriem – Webster:

    2 a : sex b : the behavioral, cultural, or psychological traits typically associated with one sex.

    ummm…you left out part of your definition.

    From Dictionary.com:

    2. sex: the feminine gender.,/I>

    Except to some of the transgender and a very few of the GLB, sex and gender are synonymous…as anyone who is not transgender what their sex is, and then what their gender is, they will tell you the same thing.

    “Where did I say anything about a penis?”

    You didn’t…where did I say you did?

    • Marti Abernathey says:

      Yes, because Dictionary.com is the standard for all dictionaries. Next up, Wikipedia? M-W is in the context of the entire definition. As Carlin said, context is everything.

  46. Evangelina says:

    I’ve heard this kind of purile garbage that many times and the whole issue strikes me as one of the politics of envy.
    so much depends on the reason and the motivation too transition or to “correct” in the first place. Uncomfortable it may be but in the eyes of the vast majority the second that medical history is out and it cannoty be put back EVER you become “other” in people’s eyes.
    As for owing the community something or having a responibility to young transitioners. Personally I owe them less than nothing. The community as you call it constantly tear each others throats out. What kind of role model is that? Young transitioners have millions of role models all around them THAT is where they need to look for guidance.
    You don’t hate “stealth” you envy those who can.

    • Marti Abernathey says:

      Evangelina, are you speaking to me, or to Kara? If you’re speaking to me, I’m not sure what I’d envy. One of my coworkers asked me if I was pregnant. Another coworker blamed my stomach cramps on my period. I don’t think they suspect. 😉 I’ve worked in both arenas (both stealth and out) and you’re right, it’s a constant torch to bear and one you can never put back in. Hell a friend was a lesbian 15 years ago (she’s married, straight, and got five kids now) and people still talk about it to this day.

      That being said, if I were in a more secure working environment, I’d come out. But the bottom line in all this is my survival. I’ve made judgments about if it’s safe or even relevant to do so right now.

      The community as you call it constantly tear each others throats out. What kind of role model is that?

      If the HBS crowd thinks it’s immune from the throat tearing, they might want to tell the folks over at TGNonsense and WomanBornTranssexual. It’s the nature of community, to a certain extent. Even the civil rights movement of the sixties had it. If you know the history, you’ll know of the tensions between Malcolm X and MLK, or the vitriol and backstabbing between Ray Wilkins and Bayard Rustin.

      There’s a life outside of the interwebs, and I’ve seen the compassionate side of the trans-community. There’s two sides to every community. I’ve seen the outpouring of love and support of the community every year around TDOR time. I’ve seen it in people like Earline Budd, who helps run Transgender Health Empowerment, to better the lives of those in Washington DC that are the most in need of services.

  47. Evangelina says:

    I’ve heard this kind of purile garbage that many times and the whole issue strikes me as one of the politics of envy.
    so much depends on the reason and the motivation too transition or to “correct” in the first place. Uncomfortable it may be but in the eyes of the vast majority the second that medical history is out and it cannoty be put back EVER you become “other” in people’s eyes.
    As for owing the community something or having a responibility to young transitioners. Personally I owe them less than nothing. The community as you call it constantly tear each others throats out. What kind of role model is that? Young transitioners have millions of role models all around them THAT is where they need to look for guidance.
    You don’t hate “stealth” you envy those who can.

    • Marti Abernathey says:

      Evangelina, are you speaking to me, or to Kara? If you’re speaking to me, I’m not sure what I’d envy. One of my coworkers asked me if I was pregnant. Another coworker blamed my stomach cramps on my period. I don’t think they suspect. 😉 I’ve worked in both arenas (both stealth and out) and you’re right, it’s a constant torch to bear and one you can never put back in. Hell a friend was a lesbian 15 years ago (she’s married, straight, and got five kids now) and people still talk about it to this day.

      That being said, if I were in a more secure working environment, I’d come out. But the bottom line in all this is my survival. I’ve made judgments about if it’s safe or even relevant to do so right now.

      The community as you call it constantly tear each others throats out. What kind of role model is that?

      If the HBS crowd thinks it’s immune from the throat tearing, they might want to tell the folks over at TGNonsense and WomanBornTranssexual. It’s the nature of community, to a certain extent. Even the civil rights movement of the sixties had it. If you know the history, you’ll know of the tensions between Malcolm X and MLK, or the vitriol and backstabbing between Ray Wilkins and Bayard Rustin.

      There’s a life outside of the interwebs, and I’ve seen the compassionate side of the trans-community. There’s two sides to every community. I’ve seen the outpouring of love and support of the community every year around TDOR time. I’ve seen it in people like Earline Budd, who helps run Transgender Health Empowerment, to better the lives of those in Washington DC that are the most in need of services.

  48. Leigh says:

    that’s not a personal attack .. its a comment pure and simple. It merely affirms what kara said with

    “plus I am guessing most of my coworkers at least suspect ”

    If your going to ban me for that then you are just looking for an excuse to do so.

    • Marti Abernathey says:

      Leigh, I wouldn’t ban you, I won’t ban anyone. I would put you on comment moderation and babysit your comments. I don’t want to do that, but yes it was snarky and personal. Unless you have some personal knowledge of Kara (you work with), then I’m not sure how it could be anything BUT personal.

  49. Leigh says:

    that’s not a personal attack .. its a comment pure and simple. It merely affirms what kara said with

    “plus I am guessing most of my coworkers at least suspect ”

    If your going to ban me for that then you are just looking for an excuse to do so.

    • Marti Abernathey says:

      Leigh, I wouldn’t ban you, I won’t ban anyone. I would put you on comment moderation and babysit your comments. I don’t want to do that, but yes it was snarky and personal. Unless you have some personal knowledge of Kara (you work with), then I’m not sure how it could be anything BUT personal.

  50. Leigh says:

    “as they never know when someone will need a role model to transition”

    If someone needs a rolemodel to transition they need look no further than a real natal woman, unless of course they are transitioning to be an other.

    “The person took their own support from the community at one time so it seems they should do the same for others”

    really? perhaps in the transgender world.

    “I have told HR and a few others, plus I am guessing most of my coworkers at least suspect ”

    ya think ?

    “The ones I reserve loathing for are the ones who do ‘deep stealth’.”

    you mean those that actually transitioned to be just another female and don’t feel the need to wear trans-gayness as a badge of honor ?

    “The ones who consider stealth/out a hierarchy”

    and that right there is why some of us get married, move on and live normal lives in our target gender, while others never move out of the trans ghetto, become trans lesbians or end up in relations with other trans and gay people.

    You keep on wearing that badge girl, it makes it easier for the rest of us !

    • Marti Abernathey says:

      “I have told HR and a few others, plus I am guessing most of my coworkers at least suspect ”

      ya think ?

      This is your one warning. You can post opinion here, I welcome debate. But personal attacks will NOT be tolerated.

      If someone needs a rolemodel to transition they need look no further than a real natal woman, unless of course they are transitioning to be an other.

      Lots of people are othered. People of color, people with disabilities, and certain religions are all othered. Your point is? Natal women have experiences we don’t and vice versa. There are some things that trans-women share that are experiences only they will have. A good example is restrooms. A natal women don’t fear being outed because of their birth sex, regardless of the present state of their genitals. Natal women have never been in male spaces and felt the uncomfortableness, the knowing you don’t belong there, but not understanding why. There are a ton of experiences we have that natal women don’t have. Just as natal white women don’t know what it’s like to be discriminated because of race, it’s a different experience. It’s good to be around other women that understand your experience.

      BTW, what is trans-gayness?

  51. Leigh says:

    “as they never know when someone will need a role model to transition”

    If someone needs a rolemodel to transition they need look no further than a real natal woman, unless of course they are transitioning to be an other.

    “The person took their own support from the community at one time so it seems they should do the same for others”

    really? perhaps in the transgender world.

    “I have told HR and a few others, plus I am guessing most of my coworkers at least suspect ”

    ya think ?

    “The ones I reserve loathing for are the ones who do ‘deep stealth’.”

    you mean those that actually transitioned to be just another female and don’t feel the need to wear trans-gayness as a badge of honor ?

    “The ones who consider stealth/out a hierarchy”

    and that right there is why some of us get married, move on and live normal lives in our target gender, while others never move out of the trans ghetto, become trans lesbians or end up in relations with other trans and gay people.

    You keep on wearing that badge girl, it makes it easier for the rest of us !

    • Marti Abernathey says:

      “I have told HR and a few others, plus I am guessing most of my coworkers at least suspect ”

      ya think ?

      This is your one warning. You can post opinion here, I welcome debate. But personal attacks will NOT be tolerated.

      If someone needs a rolemodel to transition they need look no further than a real natal woman, unless of course they are transitioning to be an other.

      Lots of people are othered. People of color, people with disabilities, and certain religions are all othered. Your point is? Natal women have experiences we don’t and vice versa. There are some things that trans-women share that are experiences only they will have. A good example is restrooms. A natal women don’t fear being outed because of their birth sex, regardless of the present state of their genitals. Natal women have never been in male spaces and felt the uncomfortableness, the knowing you don’t belong there, but not understanding why. There are a ton of experiences we have that natal women don’t have. Just as natal white women don’t know what it’s like to be discriminated because of race, it’s a different experience. It’s good to be around other women that understand your experience.

      BTW, what is trans-gayness?

  52. Susan says:

    One can intellectualize until the sun doesn’t rise anymore, but to everyone but the transgender gender and sex are synonymous…and the neither the T nor the GLB is going to change their mind. Only the transgender will claim that a woman/female can have a penis.

    • Marti Abernathey says:

      genderthe behavioral, cultural, or psychological traits typically associated with one sex.

      sex – 1 : either of the two major forms of individuals that occur in many species and that are distinguished respectively as female or male especially on the basis of their reproductive organs and structures.

      2 : the sum of the structural, functional, and behavioral characteristics of organisms that are involved in reproduction marked by the union of gametes and that distinguish males and females.

      Is it intellectualizing to know the difference between sex and gender? It’s pretty basic stuff… ya know… defining stuff by what they actually mean? Even people over at Ihazcheeseburgers.com do that.

      And where did I say anything about having a penis?

  53. Susan says:

    One can intellectualize until the sun doesn’t rise anymore, but to everyone but the transgender gender and sex are synonymous…and the neither the T nor the GLB is going to change their mind. Only the transgender will claim that a woman/female can have a penis.

    • Marti Abernathey says:

      genderthe behavioral, cultural, or psychological traits typically associated with one sex.

      sex – 1 : either of the two major forms of individuals that occur in many species and that are distinguished respectively as female or male especially on the basis of their reproductive organs and structures.

      2 : the sum of the structural, functional, and behavioral characteristics of organisms that are involved in reproduction marked by the union of gametes and that distinguish males and females.

      Is it intellectualizing to know the difference between sex and gender? It’s pretty basic stuff… ya know… defining stuff by what they actually mean? Even people over at Ihazcheeseburgers.com do that.

      And where did I say anything about having a penis?

  54. Kara Harkins says:

    I am not too harsh on people who chose to stealth or not. I would prefer them not to though as they never know when someone will need a role model to transition. The person took their own support from the community at one time so it seems they should do the same for others.

    Not that I am the best one to talk. I am an activist in my life outside of work, but at work it just never occurs to me to say ‘I am the transsexual’ every time I walk into meetings. I have told HR and a few others, plus I am guessing most of my coworkers at least suspect (deep voice, tall, took a month off for medical leave at a place called Trinidad) and I would not lie about it if directly asked.

    The ones I reserve loathing for are the ones who do ‘deep stealth’. Not hiding out of fear of being outed or because they do not think to mention it. The ones who consider stealth/out a hierarchy, will deliberately hide it from any lovers (how do you build a real relationship without complete honesty?) or haughtily say they are “more transsexual” than the people out there fighting for their rights.

  55. Kara Harkins says:

    I am not too harsh on people who chose to stealth or not. I would prefer them not to though as they never know when someone will need a role model to transition. The person took their own support from the community at one time so it seems they should do the same for others.

    Not that I am the best one to talk. I am an activist in my life outside of work, but at work it just never occurs to me to say ‘I am the transsexual’ every time I walk into meetings. I have told HR and a few others, plus I am guessing most of my coworkers at least suspect (deep voice, tall, took a month off for medical leave at a place called Trinidad) and I would not lie about it if directly asked.

    The ones I reserve loathing for are the ones who do ‘deep stealth’. Not hiding out of fear of being outed or because they do not think to mention it. The ones who consider stealth/out a hierarchy, will deliberately hide it from any lovers (how do you build a real relationship without complete honesty?) or haughtily say they are “more transsexual” than the people out there fighting for their rights.