LGBTAitP #28: Come Taste the Rainbow!

[Tychris1]

I am happy that there are actually so many Trans characters in mainstream media (I do not watch any of the shows mentioned, so I missed them.^_^'), but it is really sad that the basic portrayal is stereotypical and cruel. ;_;

It really feels like the mainstream media has not moved anywhere towards being open and friendly since the thirties. I am being hyperbolic, am I not? ._.

Agreed, having a wide variety of characters is always a good thing for shows (Which is why i'm a bit surprised more shows don't pull out the cards of "Irregular" behaviors for their characters more often. It can generally act as a saving grace) to utilise for shaking things up a bit.

And yes, I do believe that's a bit too hyperbolic. We may not have expanded in all directions as much, but media has definetely become more open then it was in the thirties. To state otherwise would be a rather blunt insult to humanity to think we can't adapt to something given 80 years to work on it. Heck, back then the topic of Trans~ wasn't even a topic, you were either a soldier fighting in europe or you were a standard dream citizen who worked hard to support the soldier fighting in europe, there was no room for "deviancy" (I'm just looking at it from an American perspective, so it might be different depending on what country we're talking about).

[Asta Kask]

I think transsexuality's listing as a mental disorder is flawed because it has more to do with a history of the psychopathologizing of GSRM people than with any ontological reality. The brain of transsexual people isn't even the problem as is.

We don't know that. For all we know, it may be two separate parts of the brain that are at odds, and the at-odds-ness produces gender dysphoria. We have nowhere near the knowledge required to back up that statement. We have hypotheses about transmen and transwomen. So far, Ramachandran's hypothesis (that transmen have a masculine neurological body map* and vice versa for trans women) does not seem to pan out. He also has a hypothesis about genderfluid people. I don't think anyone has a clue what's going on with the genderqueer.

Anyway, DSM and ICD are not built up around etiology. They are built around symptoms. As long as the symptoms are mainly mental it is a psychiatric disorder, regardless of where the problem comes from. And as I understand it, Gender Dysphoria fits the anxiety group of psychiatry rather well.

Also, ontological reality is a tautology.

*That would probably be the bilateral secondary somatosensory cortex.

[Kindablue]

Agreed, having a wide variety of characters is always a good thing for shows (Which is why i'm a bit surprised more shows don't pull out the cards of "Irregular" behaviors for their characters more often. It can generally act as a saving grace) to utilise for shaking things up a bit.

And yes, I do believe that's a bit too hyperbolic. We may not have expanded in all directions as much, but media has definetely become more open then it was in the thirties. To state otherwise would be a rather blunt insult to humanity to think we can't adapt to something given 80 years to work on it. Heck, back then the topic of Trans~ wasn't even a topic, you were either a soldier fighting in europe or you were a standard dream citizen who worked hard to support the soldier fighting in europe, there was no room for "deviancy" (I'm just looking at it from an American perspective, so it might be different depending on what country we're talking about).

I disagree. You could have been three things in wartime America; it's just that to be the third you couldn't have been from wartime America.

[Faulty]

We don't know that. For all we know, it may be two separate parts of the brain that are at odds, and the at-odds-ness produces gender dysphoria. We have nowhere near the knowledge required to back up that statement. We have hypotheses about transmen and transwomen. So far, Ramachandran's hypothesis (that transmen have a masculine neurological body map* and vice versa for trans women) does not seem to pan out. He also has a hypothesis about genderfluid people. I don't think anyone has a clue what's going on with the genderqueer.

Anyway, DSM and ICD are not built up around etiology. They are built around symptoms. As long as the symptoms are mainly mental it is a psychiatric disorder, regardless of where the problem comes from. And as I understand it, Gender Dysphoria fits the anxiety group of psychiatry rather well.

Also, ontological reality is a tautology.

*That would probably be the bilateral secondary somatosensory cortex.

I think we can all agree that people have sex inclinations that for some don't match their birth morphology, hence the need to transition. The thing is, the problem in those situations is physical, i.e. the cause of anxiety is the body. It'd be like saying a paraplegic is mentally disabled because her physical condition causes her distress and anxiety. The reason, I think, that GD is a "thing" is not just because of the whole historical pathologization of difference, but also because of the cissexist positing of being cisgender/cissexual as "normal" in an evaluative sense, rather than simply being a statistically less common difference. I think the pathologization of trans identities is both harmful and incorrect. It'd be better to depsychiatrize it and rather shift the medical attention of it to one where people are given the help they need to manage their gender in whatever personal way they see necessary.

Also by "ontological reality" I meant "onotological truth".

[golentan]

I think we can all agree that people have sex inclinations that for some don't match their birth morphology, hence the need to transition. The thing is, the problem in those situations is physical, i.e. the cause of anxiety is the body. It'd be like saying a paraplegic is mentally disabled because her physical condition causes her distress and anxiety. The reason, I think, that GD is a "thing" is not just because of the whole historical pathologization of difference, but also because of the cissexist positing of being cisgender/cissexual as "normal" in an evaluative sense, rather than simply being a statistically less common difference. I think the pathologization of trans identities is both harmful and incorrect. It'd be better to depsychiatrize it and rather shift the medical attention of it to one where people are given the help they need to manage their gender in whatever personal way they see necessary.

Also by "ontological reality" I meant "onotological truth".

The thing is that typically there's nothing physically wrong with the body except the way the mind rejects it. It's not a physical condition because there is no physical symptom you can point to and say "That, that right there is the reason this person is trans." A paraplegic you can compare to other people and go "yep, sure aren't the same number of limbs" and often as not point to an incident where the limbs were lost or some other physical illness caused them not to develop. Trans-ness has a physical treatment, to be sure, but so do plenty of other mental conditions. Diet, exercise, physical therapies, and even the occasional surgery have played their role in many people's lives.

What it seems to me is that this boils down to trans people "not wanting to be lumped in with the crazies." And that offends me on several levels. There is nothing wrong with having your condition be a mental one. It doesn't make it any less real, any less serious, or any less deserving of respect. It denigrates non-neurotypical folks (including myself) to say otherwise. And it seems to be fighting a battle against every study, analysis, and medical opinion I've heard to date which all seem to indicate a neurological origin of the condition, on the grounds that such a thing sounds scary or impolitic. That's not how it works. I have real problems with people trying to legislate reality, so I have to ask you: do you really want people to say the pretty words that don't sound as scary, or do you want doctors to work with the classifications and scientific tools at their disposal to better understand the root condition so that it can be handled better for future generations of trans people? /rant

[Asta Kask]

I think we can all agree that people have sex inclinations that for some don't match their birth morphology, hence the need to transition. The thing is, the problem in those situations is physical, i.e. the cause of anxiety is the body.

If you have empirical evidence of this, please submit them to the proper journals. Anyway, I don't care and the DSM and ICD systems don't care. How do the symptoms manifest. You can spend your energy on making the APA and the WHO change their entire system of classification, work within the system, or develop an entirely new system based on etiology.

It'd be like saying a paraplegic is mentally disabled because her physical condition causes her distress and anxiety.

Yes. That is the case. If the doctor thinks her symptoms become a maladaptive stress response. Who do you think treats the distress and anxiety? Psychiatrists and psychologists, or orthopedicians?

The reason, I think, that GD is a "thing" is not just because of the whole historical pathologization of difference, but also because of the cissexist positing of being cisgender/cissexual as "normal" in an evaluative sense, rather than simply being a statistically less common difference. I think the pathologization of trans identities is both harmful and incorrect.

And that is why I don't want to pathologize trans identities. I want to make sure they get treatment for their gender dysphoria. This is best done by a psychiatrist and/or a psychologist - not an endocrinologist, not a surgeon specialized in uro-genital surgery or mastectomies or tracheal shaving, not a plastic surgeon, not anyone else of the people involved in transitioning. Someone who knows how to deal with the psyche.

Also, I'm not sure what you're saying here. One of the thread's members had gender dysphoria to the extent that she wanted to mutilate her genitalia. Are you really saying that that strong an anxiety/revulsion wouldn't be a problem in a non-cis-sexist society? Or are you saying gender dysphoria wouldn't exist? And what's your basis for that?

It'd be better to depsychiatrize it and rather shift the medical attention of it to one where people are given the help they need to manage their gender in whatever personal way they see necessary.

No. Not a good idea. There's a reason 'doctor' is a specialized profession (and that it's divided into specialties and sub-specialties). I don't know what your chosen speciality is, but unless it's biochemistry and pharmaceuticals (or possibly philosophy) I can guarantee that you know more about it than I, and that I would do well to come to you with my problems in the field. That's the situation with the medical field and the general populace.

Why should the doctor ultimately decide? Because ze has spent up to fifteen years of hir life studying and working to become a specialist. Now, good doctors (and most are good) spend time listening to the patient and examining hir, making hir decisions on the basis of the patient's individual symptoms and signs. But the final decision on treatment must be the doctor's (although the patient may of course refuse treatment or seek a second opinion).

[Astrella]

Why should the doctor ultimately decide? Because ze has spent up to fifteen years of hir life studying and working to become a specialist. Now, good doctors (and most are good) spend time listening to the patient and examining hir, making hir decisions on the basis of the patient's individual symptoms and signs. But the final decision on treatment must be the doctor's (although the patient may of course refuse treatment or seek a second opinion).

Eh, no. Bodily autonomy is a thing; which is why I'm a fan of the informed consent model that's being practiced in the US. The medical sector is so ridiculously cissexist that it does ridiculous amounts of damage to trans* people.

My own therapist says it himself that he is just a guide giving advice and providing a second opinion, but the decision is mine to make, as it should be.

-----

And I disagree with it not being a physical condition; it's a physical condition on the merit that physical treatment is the only thing that helps. Reparative treatment has proved unsuccessful for decades. To call it a mental condition is saying that when your computer isn't powerful enough to run a certain program that the problem is with the software.

And no, I want the medical sector to be aware of the huge amounts of damage and influence their decisions and classifications can have, those classifications play a huge role.

And no, it's not about not being "wanted to be lumped with the crazies", it's about accuracy. Not to mention that the current classification opens up for reparative therapy to happen. "Gender Identity Disorder" very strongly carries the notion with it that the gender identity is being disordered and makes cis identities out to be the correct ones. And that's without mentioning the huge pressures coming from the medical sectors for trans* people to get SRS even if they don't desire it and just the huge amount of binarism and refusal to actually listen to trans* people.

Here's more information about the changes.

-----

Edit; Faulty was talking about GID; not gender dysphoria.

-----

Also, check out the link about trans* healthcare I linked a few posts back. If the medical sector has the best interests of trans* people at hand it should give us reasons to trust them.

-----

Edit2: And no, a psychiatrist isn't the best way to help trans* people. You know what helps trans* people? Being able to transition. A psychiatrist should mainly be a guide who helps them achieve that. (Widest definition of transitioning here.)

Edit3: Not too mention that the majority of the medical sector is completely uneducated on trans* issues, and that includes the majority of psychiatrists. It's hard to find one who actually specializes in trans* issues and is up to date.

Edit4: The fact that you're using the term 'crazies' itself tells how stigmatized anyone who doesn't fit the neurotypical mold is. I don't care whether I'm neurotypical or not; I do care about the huge amount of discrimination and hurt coming from the way society treats everyone it deems 'not normal'.

[Absol197]

Also, I'm not sure what you're saying here. One of the thread's members had gender dysphoria to the extent that she wanted to mutilate her genitalia. Are you really saying that that strong an anxiety/revulsion wouldn't be a problem in a non-cis-sexist society? Or are you saying gender dysphoria wouldn't exist? And what's your basis for that?

It was very, very briefly. I just felt I should clarify that. And I talked myself out of it in seconds. I'm am not hurt, or a danger to myself. Seriously.

As far as the topic at hand, I have to agree with Asta and Golly. As far as I can see, while GID/gender dysphoria (I, like many others here, believe it should be the latter, but that's not the case yet) have physical treatments, it's largely a mental condition. In fact, for those who don't want surgery or HRT, but simply recognition of their gender (I think SiuiS leans this direction; please correct me if I'm wrong, honey!), the treatment is entirely social. If those around them treat them differently, their "condition," the thing causing them distress, is entirely cured.

Until our understanding of the brain advances well beyond what it is today, even the most comprehensive medical examination, including brain scans, could not identify a trans person from the average cis person of the same sex. That means that if the condition is physical, it's the brain which needs to be treated to help the patient. However, if the condition is mental, there are a wide variety of treatments, mental, social, and physical, that can be used.

It's very unfortunate that society has such a negative preconception of anyone with a "mental disorder," no matter what it might be, but there's nothing inherently wrong with that. We, as trans people, will get the best help possible with what distresses us if we're in that group, and as shown by several of the wonderful people here in this thread (Golly, noparlpf, and Keveak to name a few, although I'm sure there's more), it doesn't make you a bad or wrong person to have a disorder of some sort.

I must say that all the preceeding is my own personal opinion, of course. If I'm incorrect on anything, I conceed any point to those with more experience in the appropriate fields, most likely Asta .


~Phoenix~

[WarKitty]

http://clydesbetterhalf.tumblr.com/p...-chest-binders

Thought I'd post this here.

[KenderWizard]

I'd personally put more emphasis on a better understanding of the diversity of trans* people. Everyone has different needs and it's important that that is understood. More general education for medical personnel about trans issues would also be really good, considering this.

Thank you for this link and for the link about media portrayals. I love infographics, but I think this one would to better if it compared with non-trans~ stats more. Saying 6% of trans~ people have faced physical assault from the police is more meaningful if you know what percentage of cis people have. Maybe the police in the US are just total *****, I don't know that without being told. (It's completely sickening and shocking, btw.)

ION news I might understand by now why women wear heels even if they hurt. I bought a few very cool looking bordeax red laquered shoes and by now I feel as if my heelf are ready (and halfway done) to be chopped off... hurts like hell (to the point where walking or wearing them is agony. I guess I just need to persevere. tomorrow different shoes and the weekend will probably hold comfortshoes for me (like runningshoes or something).

for those who want more detail (spoilered for gruesome details):

Spoiler

Show

After blisters the size of the bottom of a coffeecup came off my heels, now the flesh underneath it is developing new blisters or tearing up alltogether

Bad thing! Do not want! Look after your feet!

I'm kind of curious about that joke now...
Seriously now, for me, I do pretty well interacting with people, but as a lot of it is learned behaviour, I get rusty without practice. So it's never going to be even "effectively cured", more just patched. Though in my case it's called a "syndrome", whatever the difference there is, because it's still in a book of "disorders".

That's like my fatigue. When I'm well, I'm "normal", but it could come back at any time, especially if I don't look after myself, or if I'm unlucky enough to catch an infection that triggers it. But it's still a thing I have, even when it's not actively interfering with me. Like my asthma is still _there_ even if right now I can breathe just fine.

Huh. Well, I hear you military is actually ether than mine in that regard – if you joined the US military as a woman, you'd he the combat training but you'd almos never be allowed to use it.

That's what I think the biggest problem with transsexual enlisted personnel is. Where do they put you? If you're a trans woman, that means your body can hold up to male-level physicality. If they put you with women it's a waste of a soldier, because you're capable and basically getting a pass. If they put you with the men, it's going to be a problem with your unit, since the reason you were put Ito combat readiness would be known. And as an institution, th military isn't required to care about your gender beyond "do you have enough testosterone to have been slowly building up size an mass for the last 8+ years?", so it's not even really as insulting to be filed under birth sex. Well, I mean I'm okay with it, but I'm biased.

I object to this. Not because that theoretical trans~ person shouldn't be kept out of combat, but because the cis women she's being put with _also_ shouldn't be kept out of combat arbitrarily, provided they meet x, y, z requirements. Just 'cause most men are stronger than most women doesn't mean all cis women are inherently less capable for combat than any cis man. But that's a side issue.

In personal news, I had a really great time on Wednesday. I've been feeling like I've been spinning my wheels and getting nowhere recently, so my therapist and I went shopping together! I hadn't had anyone to go with (and am too nervous to go by myself), and I had a lot of fun! I tried on a lot of stuff, and apparently I've got a great figure (especially in back)! Who knew!

Now, I've finally got something to wear when just wandering about at home. My friends and I are meeting tonight for a game night, so I'm going to wear my new skinny jeans out and about for the first time .


~Phoenix~

*I propose, for the sake of those who dislike un-noted asterisks, that we move to using a squiggle (~) for "trans~". Who's with me?

Congrats! That sounds great! Also, I approve of using tilda for the placeholder in trans~.

I also have had a bit of a makeover, kind of by accident. While cosplaying, I found nice earrings (my winged Thor earrings) and it was 3 for 2, and I was buying a pair for my friend, so now I have two pairs of earrings, and my friend gave me make-up for my birthday, cause I loved doing the eye art for cosplay, and I found this fitted bright pink leather jacket I got when I was like 12 or something and it still fits so I've been wearing it, and also I cut all my hair off (myself!), so I've suddenly turned into a pink-leather-jacket-wearing short-haired sophisticated-looking twenty-something who wears make-up and dangly earrings, when I'm pretty sure last week I was a nerdy-looking girl with hastily-tied-back long hair and a baggy rugged outdoorsy raincoat. The make-up won't last, though. It's my birthday tomorrow, so I'll wear make-up for that, and then not again until Christmas, I imagine. I only wear it for special occasions like parties and cosplay, but I wanted to try my new eyeshadows!

[Asta Kask]

Eh, no. Bodily autonomy is a thing; which is why I'm a fan of the informed consent model that's being practiced in the US. The medical sector is so ridiculously cissexist that it does ridiculous amounts of damage to trans* people.

My own therapist says it himself that he is just a guide giving advice and providing a second opinion, but the decision is mine to make, as it should be.

My point was that you shouldn't be able to walk into the doctor's office and say "I want X", and the doctor is just a person who stamps a paper. I said, you have the right to refuse . That was important.

And I disagree with it not being a physical condition; it's a physical condition on the merit that physical treatment is the only thing that helps. Reparative treatment has proved unsuccessful for decades. To call it a mental condition is saying that when your computer isn't powerful enough to run a certain program that the problem is with the software.

Tough. First, all interventions are ultimately physical, unless you are a dualist. HRT is no more physical than SSRI. Second, delusions stemming from a tumor are still delusions, and you still want them treated by a psychiatrist, until the brain surgeon has done his job (if he can - not all tumors are operable). Third, we classify conditions based on their symptoms, not their etiology (oncology is an exception to this) or their treatment. We have nowhere near the knowledge required to talk about the etiology. And we can't classify them based on treatment because we select treatment based on diagnosis.

And no, I want the medical sector to be aware of the huge amounts of damage and influence their decisions and classifications can have, those classifications play a huge role.

Some of them are, some of them aren't. But every word you have to read about that is one word less you can read about new medical techniques. So if you want your psychiatrist to read more about trans* questions you have to tell hir what to read less about. And you should remember

And no, it's not about not being "wanted to be lumped with the crazies", it's about accuracy.

When people say it's about the social stigma of psychiatric disorder then it is about not being "wanted to be lumped with the crazies". There's no other way you can spin that. And as I said, according to the principles used by the APA and the WHO, gender dysphoria belongs in psychiatry.

And then there's accuracy. We can know about the patients' symptoms and signs. We can not know (immediately) about the symptoms' and signs' etiology. We can not know (immediately) about how to treat the symptoms and signs. Therefore we classify by symptoms and signs, and not by any other means. There are exceptions, but this is the general rule.

We have tried to de-patologize mental illnesses. We tried that in Sweden in the 70's. And it would behove those who talk about the harm done by psychiatry to look at what harm an absence of the same does. It leads to patients leading miserable lives. It leads to patients committing suicide. It leads to patients sitting still and quiet in their apartment until they keel over from lack of water.

Without a psychiatric diagnosis, there is no access to psycho-therapy. There is little or no access to anti-depressive and anti-anxiety care. You cannot get in without walking through the right door. Are you absolutely sure this is what you want?

Finally, if you don't trust the medical professions - don't deal with them! There are magic rings on e-bay that will change your gender if you believe in them hard enough. I apologize for this statement.

[Astrella]

Finally, if you don't trust the medical professions - don't deal with them! There are magic rings on e-bay that will change your gender if you believe in them hard enough.

...
Did you really just say that? Sorry that I'm allowed not allowed to criticize the medical profession anymore. But no matter how much you dislike it, cissexism and transphobia is a huge problem within there.

Like, seriously? There's a big issue with trans* people facing discrimination and harassment from the medical sector and your answer is that they should just suck it up? Aren't you supposed to be a trans* ally?

I'm incredibly upset right now that I had to hear something like that in this thread out of all places.

[Arachu]

Why would someone request physically changing their body if they weren't certain they wanted to? I don't see your point.


Besides, if an institution isn't trustworthy then it's their reponsibility to change. Otherwise, why are they there?


~Bianca

[Zorg]

Finally, if you don't trust the medical professions - don't deal with them! There are magic rings on e-bay that will change your gender if you believe in them hard enough.

That was needlessly spiteful Asta.

The Trans community's issue with the medical community has been a long one of attempts made to "cure" us of wanting to change gender for a long time, and is still thought to be the correct course of action in some places nowadays.

GID as it was often used was taken to mean that a person wanting to change their gender was disordered, and that this disorder should be removed by getting rid of their desire to change. That's the problem with calling it a disorder - it's not how it's a mental condition or whatever - it's that the very nature of wanting to transition has been treated as wrong for a very long time (and still is).
Remember how a few months ago a German girl was almost placed into foster care/institutionalised because she was Trans? We're wary of the medical profession because of **** like that happening all the time.

And I'm bi-polar schizophrenic, so I know the difference in how those are treated to how Trans is treated - or at least the difficulty in finding someone who knows what they're talking about.


I do think some form of pshyciatric evaluation should be made and guidance given during any transition. There are cases after all of people thinking they're Trans (or rather wishing to change gender) due to other issues and reasons. I think a more holistic approach is necessary, personally, as it is a wide variety of factors and varies between individuals greatly in what proportion they fall.

[Mina Kobold]

I(Golly, noparlpf, and Keveak to name a few, although I'm sure there's more), it doesn't make you a bad or wrong person to have a disorder of some sort.

~Phoenix~

I technically have a syndrome, as I mentioned (Asperger's Syndrome). A syndrome being a collection of traits and common trends, but fairly neutral in implication (being a bit similar to the word narrative in its lay usage).

Not that I mind at all to be included, but I found it a good segue. ^_^

I personally think a lot more things should be considered syndromes, even things that are very common and considered part of the average. The current system (or at least its common application), though great and helpful when dealing with many actual problems, seems to be based very much in the assumption that there is one singular norm for all to strive for. Something is only labelled if it varies from this norm, and is thus seen as a problem that hinders the person from achieving the "good" norm. ADD-peeps must be medicated to be passive, Aspies must become social and trans~ peeps must be "helped" to accept their bodies and be cis~. ;_;

That mindset is fading, but (subjective experience warning) it is all too often replaced with the idea that the solution is to make people "pass" as neurotypical. Aspies must mimic social people and trans people must either hide in the closet or aspire to be as cis-like as cis-possible. We are seen as unfortunate and artificial, having to strive to at least mimic real people, even if we cannot ever be ones. This is mostly in the lay interpretation of the sciences, but it occasionally crops up in the professional field as well. A sort of unintentional air of "You should be cis/have innate social skills, but we do not have brain-alteration down yet, so just get on pretending you are like everybody else."

Not that I think anyone, particularly not Asta or others in this thread, are trying to sound like that. I quite agree that it can be seen as a mental thing, but the general look of the system and the way some have used it can make even the friendly people sound like they think being trans~ is a tragedy that needs to be removed, rather than just a different syndrome from the Cisgender syndrome. Sure, it means there is a journey to go through to attain a part of yourself, but so does being born without being talented at something you love. Some lament it, but some would not trade the journey for anything.

In short, labelling it as a mental disorder does not equate it to madness, but it does equate it to the other disorders, that are often treated by suppressing the abnormality by way of medicine or therapy. Most trans~ people do not want to get medicine or treatment aimed at making their identity cis, so this classification is worrying.

PS: I am by far an amateur and barely get good grades in Psychology, so feel free to correct my assumptions or point out if I misunderstand the general system. This is barely more than anecdotal, so I am most certainly a bit off, but I hope to be close enough to shed light on something. ^_^

[Asta Kask]

Zorg, Astrella, and anyone I might have missed: You are right, that was going too far and I apologize.

I find it frustrating to deal with people who argue, passionately and earnestly, against what I think is clearly their best interests. I will say no more now, lest I say too much.

[Astrella]

So I had an interesting conversation with my filly today. It basically mirrored the thread, to a degree, with realizing that saying something is wrong with a person needs to be qualified as a non-moral judgement. And I got an interesting bit of information; she views me in the same light as a friend of hers, ecause neither of us are working toward anything and "expect surgery or a life change or something to solve our problems". I didn't bring up that I am familiar with becoming being an end unto itself, not that gear of reprisal don her was basically what's kept me in stasis.

So I basically have the go ahead to start planning my life without holding my breath ^_^! Very exciting~

I'm not completely sure if I get what you mean, but yay?

In personal news, I had a really great time on Wednesday. I've been feeling like I've been spinning my wheels and getting nowhere recently, so my therapist and I went shopping together! I hadn't had anyone to go with (and am too nervous to go by myself), and I had a lot of fun! I tried on a lot of stuff, and apparently I've got a great figure (especially in back)! Who knew!

Now, I've finally got something to wear when just wandering about at home. My friends and I are meeting tonight for a game night, so I'm going to wear my new skinny jeans out and about for the first time .


~Phoenix~

Haha, awesome!

http://clydesbetterhalf.tumblr.com/p...-chest-binders

Thought I'd post this here.

Cool, I don't really need them but I hope they can help out someone here.

I object to this. Not because that theoretical trans~ person shouldn't be kept out of combat, but because the cis women she's being put with _also_ shouldn't be kept out of combat arbitrarily, provided they meet x, y, z requirements. Just 'cause most men are stronger than most women doesn't mean all cis women are inherently less capable for combat than any cis man. But that's a side issue.

Also the fact that a trans woman / trans man on HRT for a decent duration will be comparable in physical strength with a cis person of the same gender. Look at say the Olympic rules with regards to trans* people.

I also have had a bit of a makeover, kind of by accident. While cosplaying, I found nice earrings (my winged Thor earrings) and it was 3 for 2, and I was buying a pair for my friend, so now I have two pairs of earrings, and my friend gave me make-up for my birthday, cause I loved doing the eye art for cosplay, and I found this fitted bright pink leather jacket I got when I was like 12 or something and it still fits so I've been wearing it, and also I cut all my hair off (myself!), so I've suddenly turned into a pink-leather-jacket-wearing short-haired sophisticated-looking twenty-something who wears make-up and dangly earrings, when I'm pretty sure last week I was a nerdy-looking girl with hastily-tied-back long hair and a baggy rugged outdoorsy raincoat. The make-up won't last, though. It's my birthday tomorrow, so I'll wear make-up for that, and then not again until Christmas, I imagine. I only wear it for special occasions like parties and cosplay, but I wanted to try my new eyeshadows!

Awesome! I'm wanting to get earrings myself, I should get my ears pierced but the problem is sorta that I'd have to keep the piercing in for a long time initially which could pose problems with the parents. Maybe clip ons.

I do think some form of pshyciatric evaluation should be made and guidance given during any transition. There are cases after all of people thinking they're Trans (or rather wishing to change gender) due to other issues and reasons. I think a more holistic approach is necessary, personally, as it is a wide variety of factors and varies between individuals greatly in what proportion they fall.

Hmhm. I think a psychiatrist should be there, but they should be a guide and offer advice on options and be someone you can be confidential with. I really like my therapist for those reasons. (My case is a bit unusual in that my psychiastrist mostly there for the strictly medical stuff and because it's required, my therapist does most of the 'work'.) But yeah, it's has to be an equal relationship, so that everyone gets the specific help they need.

-----

Edit; Keveak basically expressed my feelings on the classification way better than I did. Thank you for that.

[Faulty]

Zorg, Astrella, and anyone I might have missed: You are right, that was going too far and I apologize.

I find it frustrating to deal with people who argue, passionately and earnestly, against what I think is clearly their best interests. I will say no more now, lest I say too much.

When you're trans* as well, you can tell me what my "best interests" are. Until then, maybe people outside of the community shouldn't be so passionately attempting to regulate the behaviours, identity and ideology of the community.

If anyone is interested in my expanding my views on the psychopathologization of trans* identities, I'd be happy to share.

Also, as a mentally disabled person who makes use of medication and psychotherapy, I find that people claiming I'm trying to avoid being clumped in "with the crazies" to be a bit off target.

[KenderWizard]

I think, for any medical/mental/syndrome/illness/disability thing, regardless of type, duration, stigma, etc, the ideal would be that the person and their doctor would discuss the options and come to a decision, together, that best suits and satisfies the person.

Now, in our imperfect world, doctors have all sorts of biases, both as a person and as a cog in the medical establishment machine. Trans~ people are pressured to perform the gender society wants them to be, women die from heart attacks because heart attacks were studied on men alone and exhibit differently, people who aren't white have the same problem (medicinal practices only tested on white people), etc etc.

Doctors are imperfect. They're still necessary, and the best option, and often very good, but there's more to do.

Awesome! I'm wanting to get earrings myself, I should get my ears pierced but the problem is sorta that I'd have to keep the piercing in for a long time initially which could pose problems with the parents. Maybe clip ons.

I'm generally against body-mod, including piercings, including ears. (Piercings, waist-training, extensive tattoos, those earrings that stretch your ears, etc.) I don't object strongly to it, I think it can look good and even gorgeous, and I wouldn't stop anyone from doing it, except my own children until they proved that they were mature enough to make their own decisions -- I'm getting totally sidetracked here. The point is! I don't have my ears pierced! I use clip-ons and magnetics, and they're great. I buy them in Claires and they have almost the same selection in clips as in "real" ones, plus plenty of cute magnetics. I like them, because when you want not to wear earrings, you don't have little holes in your ears.

[Heliomance]

Can we please stop the increasingly heated argument before the thread gets locked again?

[Serpentine]

Agree or disagree, Golentan said what I was trying to but better.

[SiuiS]

I do not know if it explains it, but pilots are certainly allowed to be of any gender in the US forces. At least, they were when Jen Peeples served, so that would place women in combat without actually fighting. I hope that is a sign that the people in the forces know how silly the rules are, and not just a sign that they think women can only be useful as something to protect.

Well, yes. It was sloppy writing, but by combat I meant given a gun an told To go shoot people or wait for people to shoot at them.

Seaman is apparently a low-rank title, below petty officer, so they do whatever their job is, I presume. Infantrymen are the people who are sent in to fight on foot, specifically. I am no expert, but I believe a lot of marines actually have non-combat jobs (like technicians or ship crew). The rifleman training seems to be a safeguard in case things turn very sour, such that there are no unarmed civilians in the battlefield. But that is just a guess.

Mm. I'm not up on all branches, but to my knowledge seaman and infantryman are both generic terms for the low ranks (private may have been more appropriate than infantryman, and the term "grunt" would suffice but seemed derogatory).

Sounds great, though I am not sure what "not that gear of reprisal don her" means, sorries. >_<

It means I wasn't as up on spell check as I thought. Rasaunfrassun.

Part of my not really doing anything about it or saying anything here except for the occasional hoof in mouth has been that I am not in a position to rock the boat. Now that it's not an issue, I can take action instead of sit and whine complain.

I'm pretty sure it's SiuiS's phone acting badly again. *What I think she meant was, "not that fear of reprisal from her."

Yep!

In personal news, I had a really great time on Wednesday. *I've been feeling like I've been spinning my wheels and getting nowhere recently, so my therapist and I went shopping together! *I hadn't had anyone to go with (and am too nervous to go by myself), and I had a lot of fun! *I tried on a lot of stuff, and apparently I've got a great figure (especially in back)! *Who knew! *

Now, I've finally got something to wear when just wandering about at home. *My friends and I are meeting tonight for a game night, so I'm going to wear my new skinny jeans out and about for the first time .


~Phoenix~

Oh cool! That's actually really slick. I'm glad Things worked out for you, *I was pretty irate that your folks were monopolizing your healthcare professional.

And I'm glad to hear about your figure, too! Careful now. You'll be getting wolf whistles soon.

*I propose, for the sake of those who dislike un-noted asterisks, that we move to using a squiggle (~) for "trans~". *Who's with me?

Personally, I think it's unnecessary either way. It exists to prevent confusion and exclusion, right? Except it causes confusion and exclusion has never been a problem here. I've never said trans or trans individual or trans folk and had someone ask if I meant gender or sexuality or both. So I just use trans as a word.

We don't know that. For all we know, it may be two separate parts of the brain that are at odds, and the at-odds-ness produces gender dysphoria. We have nowhere near the knowledge required to back up that statement.

We also have nowhere near the knowledge to deny that statement. That's the problem; all models are sort of in the hypothetical right now.

Anyway, DSM and ICD are not built up around etiology. They are built around symptoms. As long as the symptoms are mainly mental it is a psychiatric disorder, regardless of where the problem comes from.

We are all agreeing about the issue and then attacking each others motives. I started this, so let me clarify. I do not want transsexuality treated (as in medical treatment) as a mental disorder. Mental*Disorder treatments do not work for transsexuality and yet mental disorder treatments are given to transsexual individuals because 'it is a mental disorder'.

Paranoia is treated by making the paranoia go away.
Depression is treated by making the depression go away.
Hallucinations are treated by making the hallucinations go away.
Transsexuality is treated by trying to making the transsexuality go away. That's bad. And that is caused because of the classification of gender identity disorder itself as a mental disorder. I don't give a flying feather about stigma — I care about how the label causes reactions. Reactions like insufficient and ultimately harmful medical treatment from doctors who believe that my gender difference is just a hallucination to make go away.

You agree with this. You agree that the best course is to change the definition to require easing of symptoms instead of suppression. If the only way to do this is to classify it as a different kind of disorder, even a different kind of mental, I'm on board.

Because that's the problem; you do treat non-neurotypicality by making them conform to neurotypical standards. That's how all mental disorders are handled. If cure for metal disorder is suppression, and cure for transsexuality is not suppression, then you're creating cognitive dissonance which gets lost in bureaucracy by saying "technically, it's a mental disorder anyway". If drawing a line between psychiatric and mental will help, do it. Because psychiatric treatment can help, but it won't really cure anything. It's a staying measure, to keep symptoms manageable until actual fixes can be Put in place. Any system which sets it up so "Actually, psychiatric treatment is working so we will stick with that and push back your requests for endocrinological measures" is a valid response is bad.

You may still disagree, I just felt that I was unclear in the beginning.

Also, ontological reality is a tautology.

How do you mean? Note that I've never actually had an understanding of what a tautology is; all explanations have fallen short.

It's not a physical condition because there is no physical symptom you can point to and say "That, that right there is the reason this person is trans." A paraplegic you can compare to other people and go "yep, sure aren't the same number of limbs" and often as not point to an incident where the limbs were lost or some other physical illness caused them not to develop.

On the contrary, I can point out specifics which cause me problems. Just because there's a lot of them doesn't mean we can generalize it to "the whole body" and then compare that to the mind and declare body correct, mind incorrect.

And you can be paraplegic with your limbs intact but non functional, I thought?

I have real problems with people trying to legislate reality, so I have to ask you: do you really want people to say the pretty words that don't sound as scary, or do you want doctors to work with the classifications and scientific tools at their disposal to better understand the root condition so that it can be handled better for future generations of trans people? /rant

I want doctors to use the tools at their disposal. Calling transsexuality a mental disorder does not achieve that. I want doctors to treat people, not just lists of symptoms by rote out of a book.

It was very, very briefly. *I just felt I should clarify that. *And I talked myself out of it in seconds. *I'm am not hurt, or a danger to myself. *Seriously.

Yeah, isn't that normal to a degree when distressed? I've had elaborate fantasies of extricating an infected tooth down to measuring anesthetic and which chisel to use for the roots. When I broke my hand I wanted to kick open an ER door, smash it on a wall, and tell them to fix it. It's just demonization of a problem, and unless it becomes a trend or pattern of actual behavior it's venting steam and little more.

(I think SiuiS leans this direction; please correct me if I'm wrong, honey!).

I was able to ride myself over with such, but no I'm looking into further treatment. Which means my student loans aren't going to be the end of my "where did my money go?" problems -_-

If those around them treat them differently, their "condition," the thing causing them distress, is entirely cured.

Until our understanding of the brain advances well beyond what it is today, even the most comprehensive medical examination, including brain scans, could not identify a trans person from the average cis person of the same sex.

But doesn't that mean its possible it doesn't have a neurological basis?

Thank you for this link and for the link about media portrayals. I love infographics, but I think this one would to better if it compared with non-trans~ stats more. Saying 6% of trans~ people have faced physical assault from the police is more meaningful if you know what percentage of cis people have. Maybe the police in the US are just total *****, I don't know that without being told. (It's completely sickening and shocking, btw.)

Police are trained to maintain authority despite the situation. This sometimes manifests as dehumanizing others and relinquishing rationality. I've had a rather fresh officer )in the sense of new to the force) ask me a question, and when I said I wasn't sure what does he suggest he responded with telling me to calm down, not get smart, and do what he says.

Yeah.

I don't think it's an American police force thing so much as some percentage of every population will be like that, though.

I object to this. Not because that theoretical trans~ person shouldn't be kept out of combat, but because the cis women she's being put with _also_ shouldn't be kept out of combat arbitrarily, provided they meet x, y, z requirements. Just 'cause most men are stronger than most women doesn't mean all cis women are inherently less capable for combat than any cis man. But that's a side issue.

I do too.

I also have had a bit of a makeover, kind of by accident. While cosplaying, I found nice earrings (my winged Thor earrings) and it was 3 for 2, and I was buying a pair for my friend, so now I have two pairs of earrings, and my friend gave me make-up for my birthday, cause I loved doing the eye art for cosplay, and I found this fitted bright pink leather jacket I got when I was like 12 or something and it still fits so I've been wearing it, and also I cut all my hair off (myself!), so I've suddenly turned into a pink-leather-jacket-wearing short-haired sophisticated-looking twenty-something who wears make-up and dangly earrings, when I'm pretty sure last week I was a nerdy-looking girl with hastily-tied-back long hair and a baggy rugged outdoorsy raincoat. The make-up won't last, though. It's my birthday tomorrow, so I'll wear make-up for that, and then not again until Christmas, I imagine. I only wear it for special occasions like parties and cosplay, but I wanted to try my new eyeshadows!

Pics! We needs them!

I'm not completely sure if I get what you mean, but yay?

I was scolded for not even bothering to look into things. Some chagrin was had but mostly now I don't need to justify all the weird google searches that will come up for voice therapy and such~!

Also the fact that a trans woman / trans man on HRT for a decent duration will be comparable in physical strength with a cis person of the same gender. Look at say the Olympic rules with regards to trans* people.

Doubly neat, in that I didn't know the Olympics had such rules, or that this was necessarily the case. I know that 90% of the discrepancy is life style, but that still puts most female-bodied folks (in America at least) far behind, since their frames have stopped growing by adulthood, which puts a limit on their max potential.

Awesome! I'm wanting to get earrings myself, I should get my ears pierced but the problem is sorta that I'd have to keep the piercing in for a long time initially which could pose problems with the parents. Maybe clip ons.

Magnets are good.

. I think a psychiatrist should be there, but they should be a guide and offer advice on options and be someone you can be confidential with. I really like my therapist for those reasons. (My case is a bit unusual in that my psychiastrist mostly there for the strictly medical stuff and because it's required, my therapist does most of the 'work'.) But yeah, it's has to be an equal relationship, so that everyone gets the specific help they need.

I prefer the ounce of prevention to the pound of cure, and I also still stand by my last statement on the subject (how many threads ago?), that some therapy is like a tune up. It's not "oh you're wrong in the head lets fix it" it's a standard check up. Psychiatric help before you develop a problem is probably the best psychiatric help you can get.

I'm generally against body-mod, including piercings, including ears. (Piercings, waist-training, extensive tattoos, those earrings that stretch your ears, etc.) I don't object strongly to it, I think it can look good and even gorgeous, and I wouldn't stop anyone from doing it, except my own children until they proved that they were mature enough to make their own decisions -- I'm getting totally sidetracked here. The point is! I don't have my ears pierced! I use clip-ons and magnetics, and they're great. I buy them in Claires and they have almost the same selection in clips as in "real" ones, plus plenty of cute magnetics. I like them, because when you want not to wear earrings, you don't have little holes in your ears.

Hmm. Interesting. I can't really understand the "against body modification" stance without having to plug in my own "against severe modification for the heck of it" or "against utter lack and stigmatization of modification". Funny how it works out that way.

Plan on getting a tattoo or three eventually, but as I'm slight, and vain, I need to plan the use of canvas very carefully. Probably getting a cutie mark and a heartbeat and that's it.

[Socratov]

I've always liked How I Met Your Mother, but these, especially the second one, would be pretty hurtful. I might expect that sort of thing from Barney, but...

well, there is a clue in that...Ted is really insecure

Hurray for SiuiS! I'm glad she's being so supportive!



This is what we need. People who can be gay, or trans~* or what have you (definitely not restricted to LGBTA, but I'm tired right now and not able to think clearly) who just are, and don't have that as the defining part of their character. I vote that Keveak should have a say in the character development process of all major TV shows from here on out!



I'm pretty sure it's SiuiS's phone acting badly again. What I think she meant was, "not that fear of reprisal from her."

In personal news, I had a really great time on Wednesday. I've been feeling like I've been spinning my wheels and getting nowhere recently, so my therapist and I went shopping together! I hadn't had anyone to go with (and am too nervous to go by myself), and I had a lot of fun! I tried on a lot of stuff, and apparently I've got a great figure (especially in back)! Who knew!

Now, I've finally got something to wear when just wandering about at home. My friends and I are meeting tonight for a game night, so I'm going to wear my new skinny jeans out and about for the first time .


~Phoenix~

*I propose, for the sake of those who dislike un-noted asterisks, that we move to using a squiggle (~) for "trans~". Who's with me?

Hurrhurr, looks like a... NO! NO! BAD BRAIN *looks stern into mirror*

[KenderWizard]

How do you mean? Note that I've never actually had an understanding of what a tautology is; all explanations have fallen short.

A tautology is expressing the same information twice (or more often). It's a type of redundancy. Like saying "I got a free gift!" The information that you didn't have to pay is included in the word "gift", so saying "free gift" is tautological. (That's not to say you're a bad person, or even that's a bad sentence. A tautology can be used to add emphasis.) "In close proximity nearby". "New innovation". "Joint collaboration together as a group". (That's got four!)

Police are trained to maintain authority despite the situation. This sometimes manifests as dehumanizing others and relinquishing rationality. I've had a rather fresh officer )in the sense of new to the force) ask me a question, and when I said I wasn't sure what does he suggest he responded with telling me to calm down, not get smart, and do what he says.

Yeah.

I don't think it's an American police force thing so much as some percentage of every population will be like that, though.

I think American police are scarier than other police. People seem intimidated by American police. Irish guards are generally nice people, you go to them if you're lost or drunk or whatever.

Pics! We needs them!

If I get some, I'll post.

Hmm. Interesting. I can't really understand the "against body modification" stance without having to plug in my own "against severe modification for the heck of it" or "against utter lack and stigmatization of modification". Funny how it works out that way.

Plan on getting a tattoo or three eventually, but as I'm slight, and vain, I need to plan the use of canvas very carefully. Probably getting a cutie mark and a heartbeat and that's it.

I think we more or less agree, then.

[Lord Raziere]

I think American police are scarier than other police. People seem intimidated by American police. Irish guards are generally nice people, you go to them if you're lost or drunk or whatever.

Well some of that is certainly cultural, America probably has the most adversarial relationship between authority and its people ever. but I also think its because the larger a country gets, the more impersonal its institutions become as they need to become more efficient to deal with the larger workload. those guards are probably more friendly cause they can afford to be, their country is smaller, not as many cities, better shared culture and community.
that and America has only like what 200 years or so of history? not a lot of time to form such a shared history and culture relatively speaking, especially when you keep mixing that up with new people coming in, constantly destroying the old structures to make new ones that will hopefully work better and so on and so forth...

[SiuiS]

A tautology is expressing the same information twice (or more often). It's a type of redundancy. Like saying "I got a free gift!" The information that you didn't have to pay is included in the word "gift", so saying "free gift" is tautological. (That's not to say you're a bad person, or even that's a bad sentence. A tautology can be used to add emphasis.) "In close proximity nearby". "New innovation". "Joint collaboration together as a group". (That's got four!)

That makes a lot of sense. Now I just have to figure out why it took four or five years to get that definition XD

I think American police are scarier than other police. People seem intimidated by American police. Irish guards are generally nice people, you go to them if you're lost or drunk or whatever.

Possibly. We've slid in just the last 25 years I've been sentient for from doing things ourselves to standing back and letting The Authorities solve things, which has kinda distanced police work into another social class altogether seemingly. Not sure if it is relevant but it feels like it is.

If I get some, I'll post.

Score!

I think we more or less agree, then.

Aye. I just thought there would be some conversational/friendship value in sharing my foibles~

[Lentrax]

Well some of that is certainly cultural, America probably has the most adversarial relationship between authority and its people ever. but I also think its because the larger a country gets, the more impersonal its institutions become as they need to become more efficient to deal with the larger workload. those guards are probably more friendly cause they can afford to be, their country is smaller, not as many cities, better shared culture and community.
that and America has only like what 200 years or so of history? not a lot of time to form such a shared history and culture relatively speaking, especially when you keep mixing that up with new people coming in, constantly destroying the old structures to make new ones that will hopefully work better and so on and so forth...

Well that and the fact that the country was effectively based on people telling authority to effectively 'shove it'

[noparlpf]

I don't know about adolescents in Europe, but my peers have no respect for authority. They flaunt their disrespect, some of them. And it's backed up by grade schools caving to angry parents, and no real punishments for anything. The kids who smoke on the fire escape outside my window are breaking three school rules and a law, and they just go right back outside after the cops finish writing them up and leave, and nothing's ever actually done about it. So why bother respecting authority? Nobody's ever taught that the authorities are deserving of respect.

[gunnar11]

It's very unfortunate that society has such a negative preconception of anyone with a "mental disorder," no matter what it might be, but there's nothing inherently wrong with that. We, as trans people, will get the best help possible with what distresses us if we're in that group, and as shown by several of the wonderful people here in this thread (Golly, noparlpf, and Keveak to name a few, although I'm sure there's more), it doesn't make you a bad or wrong person to have a disorder of some sort.

I must say that all the preceeding is my own personal opinion, of course. If I'm incorrect on anything, I conceed any point to those with more experience in the appropriate fields, most likely Asta .


~Phoenix~

I technically have a syndrome

SNIP


PS: I am by far an amateur and barely get good grades in Psychology, so feel free to correct my assumptions or point out if I misunderstand the general system. This is barely more than anecdotal, so I am most certainly a bit off, but I hope to be close enough to shed light on something. ^_^

I mostly agree with this.
Even the part that disorders are looked upon as something bad.
Though people here don't mind ADD, and certainly don't need them to be passive. I myself have ADD, and I take medication not to feel passive, but because it actually helps me to study, focus, etc (and the fact that alcohol works twice as much with Ritalin+I don't feel hunger anymore+ don't need to sleep for another 4 hours)

Some disorders, though, are really accepted (and sometimes abused) by people. The first time I told anyone I had Obsessive Truth Disorder (OTD), they were interrogating me like police on CSI. Most people find it a good quality, though.

Can we please stop the increasingly heated argument before the thread gets locked again?

I was just about to say that.

A tautology is expressing the same information twice (or more often). It's a type of redundancy. Like saying "I got a free gift!" The information that you didn't have to pay is included in the word "gift", so saying "free gift" is tautological. (That's not to say you're a bad person, or even that's a bad sentence. A tautology can be used to add emphasis.) "In close proximity nearby". "New innovation". "Joint collaboration together as a group". (That's got four!)

I don't want to sound condescending, but you're actually wrong on this one.
A tautology are two words that mean exactly the same: over and again, big and huge.
What you're saying is a pleonasm. A pleonasm is when you say one thing already includes a property, and that property (english is not my native language): white snow (snow is always white), green grass(grass is always green), wet rain (rain is ALWAYS wet).

I don't know about adolescents in Europe, but my peers have no respect for authority. They flaunt their disrespect, some of them. And it's backed up by grade schools caving to angry parents, and no real punishments for anything. The kids who smoke on the fire escape outside my window are breaking three school rules and a law, and they just go right back outside after the cops finish writing them up and leave, and nothing's ever actually done about it. So why bother respecting authority? Nobody's ever taught that the authorities are deserving of respect.

I think the main difference is the training the police receives. Here, in The Netherlands, police is trained real hard to avoid any type of conflict, and to systematically handle every problem.
In the USA, I believe (from what I've seen/heard), police is trained to give as many bills as possible, and as little arrests as necessary.


On a completely different note:
I went bad yesterday, in twofold:
I drank too much, went bad (first time experience!)
I broke a relationship (now I feel bad :smallsad:)

[Faulty]

I don't know about adolescents in Europe, but my peers have no respect for authority. They flaunt their disrespect, some of them. And it's backed up by grade schools caving to angry parents, and no real punishments for anything. The kids who smoke on the fire escape outside my window are breaking three school rules and a law, and they just go right back outside after the cops finish writing them up and leave, and nothing's ever actually done about it. So why bother respecting authority? Nobody's ever taught that the authorities are deserving of respect.

So are you assuming that authority deserves respect automatically by virtue of it being authority?