Transgender Q & A

[Psykoma]

I have a question that's been on my mind for a while now, and this seems like a good place to get an answer for it.
There are some qualities that are generally seen as gender specific, such as; only men can like and do good at sports, only women should be tending a garden, et cetera. They may also be known as gender stereotypes.

Now from what I know about the trans community, which I admit is not much, trans is when someone feels that they are not the gender that they were born with - man stuck in a women's body, and so on. My question is, how else, if not through the aforementioned gender stereotypes does someone come to the conclusion that they were born the wrong gender? And my second question is, if certain qualities were not perceived as gender specific, if it were 'acceptable' for both genders to do the same thing, would the amount of people who identify as trans go down?

If there were no gender stereotypes with regards to clothing, then the concepts of "crossdresser" and (arguably) "drag queen/king" wouldn't exist, they'd just be ordinary people.
So because some people (whom I disagree with) think that crossdressers and drag queens are transgender, and if there were no gender stereotypes, those two categories wouldn't exist anymore, so there would be less transgender people, but that's more becase you'd get rid of the group rather than anyone changing how they currently act.

I don't think getting rid of gender stereotypes would do anything to decrease the amount of transsexual people.

One more thing, and this is mainly a Canadian thing, I think. The current DSM, which from what I understand is a list of mental disorders, includes trans (or as they call it 'Gender Identity Disorder') among their books. Now, what really shocked me is that people in the trans community are actually split on this issue. Some, logically, want it removed due them not being mentally ill, and the fact that listing it as a mental illness creates a negative image for trans people. But some don't want it removed just because, as long as it's in the DSM, OHIP helps pay for the gender reassignment surgery. I guess this is less of a question, and more just me asking for your opinion on the matter.

And thank you in advance for a response, if it should come.

The most recent DSM got rid of the term Gender Identity Disorder, instead renaming it "Gender Dysphoria", basically it's still in there but it's no longer a disorder.

I think the argument 'if it's not in the DSM, there won't be any coverage!' is somewhat false, because there are plenty of conditions (basically - physical conditions) that aren't in the DSM which are covered by medicare. A broken leg isn't in the DSM (at least I don't think so 0.o), but we have coverage to fix that.

I think Gender Dysphoria could be removed from the DSM and classified as a physical condition (which if you think about it, is kind of already how it's being treated).

But that's how it would work ideally, in reality I think it's possible that some insurance and some medicare really don't want to be covering the transitions, and would leap at any chance they think they have to remove coverage.

So basically I think that in perfect world, it wouldn't need to be in there, in reality ehhhhhhhh it just might :/

 

[Milanezi]

Do you think it is reasonable for a non-transgendered person to have someone being transgendered as a deal breaker as far as dating goes, even if they are otherwise completely accepting of trans-people?

I ask because while I do my best to not be discriminatory or prejudiced, I don't think I could date a transperson (I could be friends with one).

I think it's reasonable. The technology behind the transition is not perfect yet, nor will it be for a while. As long as you accept us for what we are and help us not get screwed over by society (your vote does matter!), you're good in my book.

As a matter of fact, in Brazil, if a man/woman marries a person who went through transgender surgery without prior knowledge to it, they CAN nullify the wedding and every single (legal) act that has come from it. Just to get things clear, it is not a crime, and if the guy/girl is actually ok with it then there's no legal power that will dissolve the wedding either, it's a voluntary thing.

On the subject: I can totally understand the whole transgender business, it's something sad and complicated, and in some countries I believe it might be downright torture to the the person.
What I CAN'T understand, are transvestites, by that understand those men who change their bodies to somewhat look like a woman, and keep their penis and go to the corner of the street to "offer themselves in the market". They clearly aren't satisfied with being a guy, but nor are they satisfied with being a girl, and the people who hire them, what do they want? I don't think they're gay at all, I think they're interested in weird stuff.
I mean, transgender have the whole "biological" thing, which is very very serious, the gay and bisexual, mostly, maybe it's just a choice, but you know, it's a choice of men loving men, women loving women, it's somehow normal, there's a level of seriousness to the subject here. Sorry if i sound like a fascist, but when it comes to TRANSVESTITES and the people who look for them, it seems "cheap", like bad taste entertainment, and flesh on the market.

 

[RhombusHatesYou]

I don't want to start a flame war here, but the examples of a "chemical wash" that you gave have really only been proven as it relates to the differentiation of external genitalia. Any assertions as to the effects on the brain are, at best, strictly theoretical, and at worst, grasping conjecture to fill the knowledge hole. Because of our poor understanding of neurophysiology and neurological biochemistry, nevermind the actual physiological nature of complex abstract constructs like gender, there's really no way to demonstrate this phenomenon at this point, even in animal models. Even if there was a viable animal model, international laws on human experimentation would likely prevent it from being extended to a human model.

... and that would be the crux of the matter. Any animal with a sufficiently complex neural system to support abstract concepts in a way we could test would come under similar ethical constraints, especially if the phenomena you wish to study is untestable in other animals, thereby making preliminary study series (how you get to work up to testing on progressively more complex/useful test subjects, for them what don't know) problematic at best.

Not to mention that the ethics guidelines for psychology research, which would cover a part of such a study (you try keeping psych researchers out anthing like this), are just as rigid. In fact several of the most famous/important studies on human behaviour (Milgram, Zimbardo, etc) would have been rejected at the proposal stage today.

So... we don't have an idea. Some people just have just put forth a plausible hypothesis. An unproven, possibly untestable hypothesis.

That's not to say you're wrong. We don't know. It's just that there's absolutely no evidence to support it.

To support "Chem Wash Theory" for gender? No but it's important for people to remember that regardless of the current lack of a testable hypothesis the phenomenon still exists.

 

[Relish in Chaos]

What I CAN'T understand, are transvestites, by that understand those men who change their bodies to somewhat look like a woman, and keep their penis and go to the corner of the street to "offer themselves in the market". They clearly aren't satisfied with being a guy, but nor are they satisfied with being a girl, and the people who hire them, what do they want? I don't think they're gay at all, I think they're interested in weird stuff.
I mean, transgender have the whole "biological" thing, which is very very serious, the gay and bisexual, mostly, maybe it's just a choice, but you know, it's a choice of men loving men, women loving women, it's somehow normal, there's a level of seriousness to the subject here. Sorry if i sound like a fascist, but when it comes to TRANSVESTITES and the people who look for them, it seems "cheap", like bad taste entertainment, and flesh on the market.

I'm not sure I understand what you're getting at. Not all transvestites want to change their bodies to somewhat look like a woman, and/or become prostitutes. All "transvestite" means is a man who likes to dress up as a woman now and then. It doesn't mean that they're not satisfied with being a man (at least, not all the time); it may just mean it's a sexual kink, they just like female clothing, or it's part of a drag queen performance.

I mean, transvestite prostitutes do exist, and some do try to change their bodies to look like women without going the whole hog, but they might just be gender-confused. Essentially, not transvestites are transgender, not all transgendered people are transvestites, not all transvestites are gender-confused, and not all trans people (whether that be "transvestite", "transgender" or "transsexual") are prostitutes.

 

[Milanezi]

What I CAN'T understand, are transvestites, by that understand those men who change their bodies to somewhat look like a woman, and keep their penis and go to the corner of the street to "offer themselves in the market". They clearly aren't satisfied with being a guy, but nor are they satisfied with being a girl, and the people who hire them, what do they want? I don't think they're gay at all, I think they're interested in weird stuff.
I mean, transgender have the whole "biological" thing, which is very very serious, the gay and bisexual, mostly, maybe it's just a choice, but you know, it's a choice of men loving men, women loving women, it's somehow normal, there's a level of seriousness to the subject here. Sorry if i sound like a fascist, but when it comes to TRANSVESTITES and the people who look for them, it seems "cheap", like bad taste entertainment, and flesh on the market.

I'm not sure I understand what you're getting at. Not all transvestites want to change their bodies to somewhat look like a woman, and/or become prostitutes. All "transvestite" means is a man who likes to dress up as a woman now and then. It doesn't mean that they're not satisfied with being a man (at least, not all the time); it may just mean it's a sexual kink, they just like female clothing, or it's part of a drag queen performance.

I mean, transvestite prostitutes do exist, and some do try to change their bodies to look like women without going the whole hog, but they might just be gender-confused. Essentially, not transvestites are transgender, not all transgendered people are transvestites, not all transvestites are gender-confused, and not all trans people (whether that be "transvestite", "transgender" or "transsexual") are prostitutes.

Yeah, i might be somewhat lost in translation here, and even in ignorance using the wrong term. I believe a transvestite is a WHOLE different deal from the transgendered, and both are a whole other deal from the dude who just dresses like a woman, that is, the cross-dresser. As a matter of fact, transvestite might not be the word, and I do believe I misspoke now that I see you used the word I was looking for (I guess) transsexual, or "tranny".

 

[an annoyed writer]

Yeah, i might be somewhat lost in translation here, and even in ignorance using the wrong term. I believe a transvestite is a WHOLE different deal from the transgendered, and both are a whole other deal from the dude who just dresses like a woman, that is, the cross-dresser. As a matter of fact, transvestite might not be the word, and I do believe I misspoke now that I see you used the word I was looking for (I guess) transsexual, or "tranny".

I know that the language around this is a bit convoluted and really tricky to remember, but I do believe you're referring to a certain type of transgender person referred to as a "transvestis", who doesn't go for all of the operations for whatever reason. I'm pretty sure that the popular definitions are as follows:

-Transgender: Usually used as an umbrella term, covers almost everything related

-Transsexual: Transgender person who takes up various surgeries and therapies to transition to become a member of the other sex

-Transvestis: A transgender person who is pre-op or non-op that keeps their original equipment by choice, for whatever reason

-Transvestite: Someone who cross-dresses, usually for sexual pleasure, usually non-transgender

Now I don't really know why someone would stop halfway through. maybe it's because of the crudeness of some of the older operations that leave some anxiety, sometimes it's just what you said: a strange and unique sexual pleasure. I think it's different with each person.

 

[Psykoma]

Yeah, i might be somewhat lost in translation here, and even in ignorance using the wrong term. I believe a transvestite is a WHOLE different deal from the transgendered, and both are a whole other deal from the dude who just dresses like a woman, that is, the cross-dresser. As a matter of fact, transvestite might not be the word, and I do believe I misspoke now that I see you used the word I was looking for (I guess) transsexual, or "tranny".

'transsexual' isn't what you were describing either. Also, transsexual really isn't interchangeable with tranny.

There is no specific category for what you described.
Some transvestites may do what you described.
Some transsexuals may do it.
Some drag queens may do it.
Some crossdressers may do it.
But by no means do all of them.

 

[Psykoma]

I know that the language around this is a bit convoluted and really tricky to remember, but I do believe you're referring to a certain type of transgender person referred to as a "transvestis", who doesn't go for all of the operations for whatever reason. I'm pretty sure that the popular definitions are as follows:

-Transgender: Usually used as an umbrella term, covers almost everything related

-Transsexual: Transgender person who takes up various surgeries and therapies to transition to become a member of the other sex

-Transvestis: A transgender person who is pre-op or non-op that keeps their original equipment by choice, for whatever reason

-Transvestite: Someone who cross-dresses, usually for sexual pleasure, usually non-transgender

Now I don't really know why someone would stop halfway through. maybe it's because of the crudeness of some of the older operations that leave some anxiety, sometimes it's just what you said: a strange and unique sexual pleasure. I think it's different with each person.

The definitions are really annoying
Almost everyone I've talked to from a different region has heard different definitions.

The ones I had been told by my therapists:
- Transgender: Umbrella term for Crossdresser, Drag Queen, Transvestite and Transsexual.
- Crossdresser: A cisgender person who dressed in clothes that are generally considered to 'belong' to the opposite sex for everyday wear, no particular purpose.
- Drag queen: A cisgender person who dressed in clothes that are generally considered to 'belong' to the opposite sex for purpose of entertainment or performance.
- Transvestite - A cisgender person who dressed in clothes that are generally considered to 'belong' to the opposite sex for sexual purposes.
- Transsexual - The only people in the "Transgender" umbrella to have a gender identity which did not match their physical sex. The subcategories in Transsexual were Pre-op, Non-op and Post op.

I had never even heard of "transvestis" before.

Then there are other people who differentiate between "Harry Benjamin Transsexuals" and "WPATH Transsexuals". >.>

It's all so ugh.

 

[an annoyed writer]

The definitions are really annoying
Almost everyone I've talked to from a different region has heard different definitions.

The ones I had been told by my therapists:
- Transgender: Umbrella term for Crossdresser, Drag Queen, Transvestite and Transsexual.
- Crossdresser: A cisgender person who dressed in clothes that are generally considered to 'belong' to the opposite sex for everyday wear, no particular purpose.
- Drag queen: A cisgender person who dressed in clothes that are generally considered to 'belong' to the opposite sex for purpose of entertainment or performance.
- Transvestite - A cisgender person who dressed in clothes that are generally considered to 'belong' to the opposite sex for sexual purposes.
- Transsexual - The only people in the "Transgender" umbrella to have a gender identity which did not match their physical sex. The subcategories in Transsexual were Pre-op, Non-op and Post op.

I had never even heard of "transvestis" before.

Then there are other people who differentiate between "Harry Benjamin Transsexuals" and "WPATH Transsexuals". >.>

It's all so ugh.

Ugh indeed. I can't help but find it very confusing and annoying. There's a ton of different words and people can't seem to agree with one-another on the definitions. How the fuck are people supposed to understand with this clusterfuck of an etymological system?

 

[Eggsnham]

I do have a question, and I apologize in advance if I offend you or anybody else, but:

If there were a medical procedure or a form of psychological therapy which made your mind feel in tune with your body without major surgery or long term hormone treatment, would you go through with it?

 

[Psykoma]

I do have a question, and I apologize in advance if I offend you or anybody else, but:

If there were a medical procedure or a form of psychological therapy which made your mind feel in tune with your body without major surgery or long term hormone treatment, would you go through with it?

Yes.
Or at least, I would have.

 

[hooglese]

This is one I'm not going to go sifting through the 11 pages of questions to find, but: What gender do you choose (if possible) in video games?

 

[Beautiful Tragedy]

If there were a medical procedure or a form of psychological therapy which made your mind feel in tune with your body without major surgery or long term hormone treatment, would you go through with it?

Nope..I know what I was meant to be... and I must be that.

This is one I'm not going to go sifting through the 11 pages of questions to find, but: What gender do you choose (if possible) in video games?

Female, always female

 

[an annoyed writer]

This is one I'm not going to go sifting through the 11 pages of questions to find, but: What gender do you choose (if possible) in video games?

If there's a choice, Female. I relate better that way.

 

[Superlative]

I have a question if someone would be kind enough to answer: If a person is unable to determine the gender of someone else based on physical appearance, is it rude to flat out ask which pronoun should be used?

 

[an annoyed writer]

I do have a question, and I apologize in advance if I offend you or anybody else, but:

If there were a medical procedure or a form of psychological therapy which made your mind feel in tune with your body without major surgery or long term hormone treatment, would you go through with it?

I'm of two minds on the issue. On one hand, being able to feel at home in the original body would be nice, since there's no risk of surgical fuck-ups and the like. On the other hand, you're literally talking about altering the brain chemistry and how one thinks, and the question "Is that really me?" comes into play. I know it would make my thought processes function completely differently, and I've really got to inquire if it was really worth it. Yeah, there would be feeling at home, but at what cost? What traits would I lose? What would I gain? There's much more at stake in changing the mind than the body. I've thought of this before, and will do so some more. Back to the Chamber of Understanding!

 

[an annoyed writer]

I have a question if someone would be kind enough to answer: If a person is unable to determine the gender of someone else based on physical appearance, is it rude to flat out ask which pronoun should be used?

Not at all. It's much more rude just to assume and get it wrong, since then we might assume hostile intent.

 

[PhiMed]

I don't want to start a flame war here, but the examples of a "chemical wash" that you gave have really only been proven as it relates to the differentiation of external genitalia. Any assertions as to the effects on the brain are, at best, strictly theoretical, and at worst, grasping conjecture to fill the knowledge hole. Because of our poor understanding of neurophysiology and neurological biochemistry, nevermind the actual physiological nature of complex abstract constructs like gender, there's really no way to demonstrate this phenomenon at this point, even in animal models. Even if there was a viable animal model, international laws on human experimentation would likely prevent it from being extended to a human model.

... and that would be the crux of the matter. Any animal with a sufficiently complex neural system to support abstract concepts in a way we could test would come under similar ethical constraints, especially if the phenomena you wish to study is untestable in other animals, thereby making preliminary study series (how you get to work up to testing on progressively more complex/useful test subjects, for them what don't know) problematic at best.

Not to mention that the ethics guidelines for psychology research, which would cover a part of such a study (you try keeping psych researchers out anthing like this), are just as rigid. In fact several of the most famous/important studies on human behaviour (Milgram, Zimbardo, etc) would have been rejected at the proposal stage today.

So... we don't have an idea. Some people just have just put forth a plausible hypothesis. An unproven, possibly untestable hypothesis.

That's not to say you're wrong. We don't know. It's just that there's absolutely no evidence to support it.

To support "Chem Wash Theory" for gender? No but it's important for people to remember that regardless of the current lack of a testable hypothesis the phenomenon still exists.

Um. So, you admit that there's no proof that this phenomenon exists, but we need to remember that it does? I don't think that's reasonable.

I think it's perfectly reasonable to say that you think that's what happens, but we don't know. If someone contradicts your assertion (again... I'm not. I'm only saying that it's unsupported), the only appropriate response is, "Well, we don't know whether it's true or not, but a lot of smart people think this is the best explanation."

 

[piinyouri]

I have a question if someone would be kind enough to answer: If a person is unable to determine the gender of someone else based on physical appearance, is it rude to flat out ask which pronoun should be used?

Not at all. It's much more rude just to assume and get it wrong, since then we might assume hostile intent.

I agree there.
I don't want people to be afraid to talk to me, so please, ask.
So long as you are polite, I will respond favorably.

 

[RhombusHatesYou]

Um. So, you admit that there's no proof that this phenomenon exists, but we need to remember that it does? I don't think that's reasonable.

I think it's perfectly reasonable to say that you think that's what happens, but we don't know. If someone contradicts your assertion (again... I'm not. I'm only saying that it's unsupported), the only appropriate response is, "Well, we don't know whether it's true or not, but a lot of smart people think this is the best explanation."

I don't think I explained myself clearly. Trying again for clarity...

The phenomenon of the neural image mapping for transpeople aligning with the neural maps typical of the sex they identify as rather than those of their birth sex (or is that gender? *shrugs*) exists.

The Chem Wash hypothesis as a cause for such phenomenon is what is unsupported and possibly untestable.

The thing some people need to keep in mind is that even though the mechanism(s) and cause(s) for the map alignments are unknown doesn't mean the map alignments don't exist.


There, now at least if you want to disagree at least we'll be on the same page.