Friday, August 14, 2009

Lies, Damn Lies, and Statistics

The concept of Harry Benjamin Syndrome seems to set off a lot of transgender people. They will go out of their way to try to dismiss it. One of the most common tactics is to suggest that HBS is just some sort of identity.

One of the latest such efforts comes on A Gender Variance Who's Who which used to be Gender Variant Biography:

Previously I had commented that it was particularly rude of HBS persons to pretend that non-HBS transsexuals do not exist when non-HBS are over 99% of transsexuals. I received a couple of replies that my figures were way off, but now I see that Charlotte Goiar agrees with me. She has revamped her web site and now says that HBS is “an extremely rare condition [1:100,000]”. (She previously used the now discredited 1:30,000.)

Let us spell this out.

I am assuming that transsexuals are 1:500, a cautious ratio from the Conway-Olyslager study.

A transsexual is someone who has sexual affirmation surgery and does not regret it afterwards.

1:100,000 is 10 in a million.

1:500 is 2000 in a million.

Thus there are 200 transsexuals for every HBS if Goiar is right (although she gives no rational for her number). HBS are only a fraction of 1% of transsexuals.


Now, there is so much wrong here, it is hard to decide exactly where to begin. First off, I should point out that Charlotte Goiar does not speak for the entirety of the HBS community. Goiar is a very controversial figure from Spain who insists on the incorrect form "Harry Benjamin's Syndrome." In naming a syndrome, it is considered improper to use a possessive. Harry Benjamin neither had the condition, nor did he own it.

Now, it should be noted that the entire concept behind HBS is simply to suggest this as a new label for what is otherwise known as "true transsexualism" or "classic transsexualism." In another words, it would be applied to those who have had a lifelong knowledge that their internal sense of what their sex should be did not match their body, and a desire to correct it as much as possible.

Now, the way the author of A Gender Variance Who's Who defines transsexualism is a less common one. It is also not the definition that Conway uses. Conway herself that only counting those who have actually had surgery will result in a lower number.

Now, I have not idea where Goiar gets her number from. A figure of 1:100,000 is pretty silly. I also think that 1:500 is too far in the opposite direction.

No, the bottom line is, HBS is synonymous with true or classic transsexualism. Yes, there are people who have sex affirmation surgery who are not HBS, but they are also not really transsexual. For example, there are autogynephiles. There are also those who make mistakes, but who refuse to openly admit this.

The article on A Gender Variance Who's Who is just another attempt, and not the first by that author, to discredit the idea of HBS. For something they want to claim is rather rare, they seem to fear it a lot.

102 comments:

Ariablue said...

That person is unbelievable. But like I said on my blog, those types are dinosaurs that refuse to see how the landscape is changing. This thing the transgender have done for the last 15 years rings so hollow, it has run its course. Who does Zagria think is being fooled by this nonsense about 99% of "transsexuals" not wanting surgery. Is that person really that deluded, or are they lying through their teeth?

Just Jennifer said...

You raise a good question. I often find myself wondering if some of the transgender activists are really delusional or lying. I rather suspect that Zagria is trying to find something to use. This is not the first time that HBS has been attacked on that blog, but it is a ridiculous attempt. I suspect that Zagria just doesn't understand enough to see the very real flaws in the logic presented.

Kara said...

No, the bottom line is, HBS is synonymous with true or classic transsexualism. Yes, there are people who have sex affirmation surgery who are not HBS, but they are also not really transsexual.

I get it, this is a joke, right?

I had SRS years ago and I am the furthest you can get from the HBS types. Now you are saying I am not a transsexual?

I think the surgeon, therapists, gyno, and all of my friends/relatives would slightly disagree about whether or not I am a transsexual!

Look at it in the opposite way too. What if someone of your HBS clan were unable to get surgery (finances, medical condition, anything not under their control). Are they booted out of your club? What if they voluntarily choose not to get surgery?

Just Jennifer said...

No, it is not a joke. Now, I don't know what you mean by "I am the furthest you can get from the HBS types," but if that is literally true, then I would really have to wonder... Why did you have surgery? Are you an autogynephile? If so, then no, I would say you are not transsexual.

HBS is not a club. It is an objective diagnosis. If someone does not want surgery, then no, they are not HBS. As to affording surgery, that is a smoke screen. Few can truly afford surgery, but if you really need it, you will get it. Health reasons is also a bogus argument. It is ridiculously rare for someone to truly be bared permanently from surgery for health reasons. That used to be true, but is no longer the case.

Ariablue said...

Again with the "surgery creates a transsexual" bullshit. How many times do they have to hear it? Ok here goes.

You are either born transsexual, or you are not. No crossdresser ever turned himself into a "transsexual" by getting surgery. This sort of idiocy arose from the post-modern idea that all you have to do to be something is to say it.

Transsexual is not a performance. It is not an identity. It is a state of being that exists at birth. It occurs when the neurology of the person is at odds (according to social definitions) with other parts of the body. You can either fix it, or try to ignore it. But just talking about it and playing dress up doesn't make it go away. (the transgender method)

HBS is another name for transsexualism. But because too many transgender types seem to get confused about biology and science in general, I think we're going to just have to take transsexual back from them and let the medical researchers sort them out.

Kara said...

HBS is not a club. It is an objective diagnosis.

Funny, I never have seen HBS in the DSM, can you quote me the code so I can look it up? Transsexualism is in there though.

Health reasons is also a bogus argument.

Wrongo. If a potential patient is a higher risk case than the norm hospitals routinely veto the surgery being allowed at their facility. Because of my medical history, it added years, self-research, and multiple doctors to even get a conservative estrogen prescription.

Kara said...

HBS is another name for transsexualism.

To you maybe. I am a transsexual and reject your attempts to relabel me to suit your agenda.

Ariablue said...

Do you even listen to yourself? You think this is some kind of contest between tg factions or something, don't you?

Here it is as simply as I can put it. Transsexual women are taking back the word transsexual from the crossdressers. You know, those fake "transsexuals" with the big mouths that run around speaking for us? Yeah, those guys.

I guess we'll just have to drop the HBS brand name so those who are a bit thick can find something else to focus on. It doesn't matter about labels, how someone wants to "identify" or whatever bullshit thing of the day is popular in tg-gayland:

You are either born transsexual or you aren't. The "club" isn't taking any applicants.

Just Jennifer said...

Funny, I never have seen HBS in the DSM, can you quote me the code so I can look it up? Transsexualism is in there though.


You might try reading the HBS information site before making silly statements:

www.harrybenjaminsyndrome.org

And no, transsexualism is not in the DSM-IV. It was replaced with gender idenity disorder.

Wrongo. If a potential patient is a higher risk case than the norm hospitals routinely veto the surgery being allowed at their facility. Because of my medical history, it added years, self-research, and multiple doctors to even get a conservative estrogen prescription.

Wrongo? ROTFL! And yet, according to you, you have had surgery. Again, if you do the research, you will find that in 99.9% of the cases where health issues are claimed as an excuae for not having surgery, it is not really the issue.

And I have known people who lied about their health to get the surgery, figuring it would be better to die in the process than to go on living as they are.

Just Jennifer said...

To you maybe. I am a transsexual and reject your attempts to relabel me to suit your agenda.

No one is relabeling you. We are simply looking at what you yourself have said here, and on your blog. Unfortunately, there are far too many doctors who have very low standards for approving people for surgery. I saw one like that for a while. I dropped her and found one that was qualified. I have met far too many who were able to get surgery for reasons other than a real need, present since childhood. I really feel sorry for them down the road. I have already seen some who have done real harm.

Just Jennifer said...

Aria, you make some very good points. No, this is not a debate between TG faction, no this is not about identities, and no, you cannot advance to being a transsexual.

As I have said, there is nothing sacred about the term HBS. It was chosen to honor the man who pioneered helping us. The term transsexual has taken on negative connotations, including becoming a label for "she-male" porn. Of course, the ironic thing is, the people appearing such porn are clearly not transsexuals. They would never expose themselves in that way. But I do wonder if that sort of thing leads some to think they are transsexuals? A scary thought.

Kara said...

@ariablue

Here it is as simply as I can put it. Transsexual women are taking back the word transsexual from the crossdressers. You know, those fake "transsexuals" with the big mouths that run around speaking for us?

Call yourself kjdsfkhdfkjshf for all I care. As soon as you try to appropriate a term I and others use (and say that term no longer applies to us) it is not solely about you anymore. You want to redefine me, sorry, you do not get that right.

Kara said...

@justjennifer

And yet, according to you, you have had surgery.
According to me, my surgeon, gyno, various other doctors, the letter I have that says so, a judicial order saying so, dilating. Oh, and anyone who has had reason to see me naked post-op.

if you do the research, you will find that in 99.9% of the cases where health issues are claimed as an excuae for not having surgery, it is not really the issue.
So why are cases of people going from doctor to doctor, cash in hand and begging to be treated, so common? Open your eyes.

No one is relabeling you.
Umm, yes, you are. If you say you want to take back a term (and decry people currently using it) you are relabelling anyone not in your club.

The term transsexual has taken on negative connotations, including becoming a label for "she-male" porn. Of course, the ironic thing is, the people appearing such porn are clearly not transsexuals. They would never expose themselves in that way.

But earlier you said:
And I have known people who lied about their health to get the surgery, figuring it would be better to die in the process than to go on living as they are.

Also more extreme examples of 'do anything to get surgery'. So, which is it? Are there limits on what people can/will do to get surgery or not? If they are getting surgery no matter what, then how do you know the person in the porno is not a transsexual?

and no, you cannot advance to being a transsexual.
Most people I know that ID as transsexual identified as being something else earlier. Like how a lot of FTMs often earlier thought they were butch lesbians.

Just Jennifer said...

Call yourself kjdsfkhdfkjshf for all I care. As soon as you try to appropriate a term I and others use (and say that term no longer applies to us) it is not solely about you anymore. You want to redefine me, sorry, you do not get that right.

So you admit to having been a crossdresser? As I suspected, the proper classification in your case would be autogynephile, which is not really a form of transsexualism, or even gender identity disorder.

Just Jennifer said...

I will get back to this discussion this evening. I don't really have the time this morning as I have a photo shoot about three hours north of here and I don't have the time to do the next comment justice. Stayed tuned...

Kara said...

So you admit to having been a crossdresser?

I said nada about my past.

As I asked elsewhere though, please define what is the criteria for being HBS. What about transsexual?

Or can nobody here answer either question?

Kathryn said...

I am a true transsexual, I have had a female gender identity for as long as I can remember, and fit pretty much every other point that you all label as HBS, and yet I totally reject the HBS "diagnosis" and the assertion that true transsexuals fit into this very specific set of guidelines. If true transsexualism were so absolute, than this would be the only medical condition with no variation in the severity of symptoms. Every medical condition has variation in severity, and people cope in different ways with their condition. The coping mechanism is one of the most wonderful aspects of humans, we are able to adapt mentally to our circumstances. What does this mean for those who are transsexual? Well it means that some people are able to mentally adapt to the difference between their gender identity and their physical bodies. Some are able to resign themselves to the fact that they have a penis attached to their bodies, and develop coping mechanisms to deal with this. Others are unable to do so, and, for them, there is no other option than surgery. I am one of those people. I do however, understand that all conditions vary in their severity, and the ways in which people adapt to those conditions vary as well. To say that all transsexual will seek surgery is a fallacy. Some of us are able to mentally adapt to the disconnect between mind and body. To dismiss those people as not being "true transsexuals" is no different that cisgender people denying you your being transsexual. We need to stop these classist differentiations between people and how they deal with their condition.
To say that anyone who is different is not a true transsexual is to deny the variation that exists in nature. All conditions vary in their severity, and the way that people deal with those conditions vary as well. IF you continue to deny this, then you assert an impossibility that this condition is the only known condition in nature that has zero variation. We do not exist in a vacuum, we exist in nature, and nature has infinite variation. It is this infinite variation that is responsible for our existence. Quit denying those who do not fit into your tiny box.

Kathryn said...

"Funny, I never have seen HBS in the DSM, can you quote me the code so I can look it up? Transsexualism is in there though.


You might try reading the HBS information site before making silly statements:

www.harrybenjaminsyndrome.org"

By the way, creating your own site does not make the term and genuine condition. Where has HBS been references in medical literature or journals?

Ariablue said...

See, they can't stop talking about the HBS thing because they won't address the real issue. This isn't about "gender identity", which I feel to be just another red herring on a long list of distractions.

It isn't about male or female, it isn't about clothes. You are either born with this condition, or you never had it. Nobody is defining the crossdressers. They are the ones who have misappropriated the term transsexual to suit themselves, in typical male privileged fashion I might add.

It doesn't matter how they "identify", it's all bullshit. I'm tired of the lies and subterfuge and the nonsense of turning the argument around like they are doing here. It's the same tired old tactics they've used for years to hide the truth.

Crossdressers are men. Always have been, always will be. Hence the "cross" part of crossdressing. See how that works? Crossdressers have nothing to say on women's issues, and they need to butt out of "transsexual" business. That's what this is about. No Kara, and whoever else is confused about this, you don't get to redefine transsexual to your own needs.

This isn't identity politics, this is reality. This is a medical condition that exists at birth. And with that, there can be no argument.

Kara said...

@ariablue

Am I looking at the wrong page? It seems the acronym "HBS" was even referenced in the original blog. You and Jennifer have been talking about it as much as anyone, Jennifer using it in her first comment and even linking to a site with that name. If anyone will not leave the discussion of that term alone ...

Meanwhile, my question stands. Define what makes a person "qualify" for the term. Or is it undefinable, in which case no respectable scientific paper would use the term.

Ariablue said...

Why don't you define "transsexual" instead.

Kara said...

Why don't you define "transsexual" instead.

Someone who is in the process of (or has so in the past) changing gender roles in society. Often (but not always) such a social transition involves hormone therapy and surgery. The term transsexual is a subcategory of the umbrella term transgendered.

Kathryn said...

@ariablue

transsexual has been defined in citable scientific and medical works, whereas HBS has not. So, the burden is actually on you to define a medical condition that does not exits, whereas, those of us who are transsexual have out medical condition defined by reputable medical professionals. Any why, my dear, do HBS people always bring things back to crossdressers? I was never a crossdresser. I don't know a single crossdresser who uses the term transsexual, in fact, they distance themselves from that term because they know they are not. The only time I hear crossdresser and transsexual being merged is when an HBS girl questions is someone really is a transsexual. They always resort to calling those who do not fit into their box crossdressers and men. HBS people are the ones who do that, not the crossdressers. Those who fight to distance themselves from those who are different are usually the ones with the most questions left unanswered. Please seek out the answers to your own questions before trying to define others. I am a proud transsexual woman, and I recognize the validity of all gender identities even though there is no "spectrum" when it comes to mine. Their identities do not threaten my own. Ask yourself why their identities threaten yours. I do not run from my past because it is part of who I am, GRS will not eliminate my past and my history. I do not identify with my male past, but I do not run from it.

Oh yeah, by the way, when I first began transition, I was rejected by HBS "types" because I did not do any crossdressing prior to transition. Why were HBS folks rejecting me for not crossdressing. It is not about the clothes, it is about that fact that I am a woman who was born with a male body. I always knew that, I didn't need to crossdress to figure that out.

Ariablue said...

So the transgender theorists don't believe that "transsexual" is a birth condition. That explains a lot. What else are you going to deny? Maybe the sky isn't blue, eh?

All I hear is more of the same nonsense they always spout; apologizing for crossdressers who keep trying to attach themselves to other people's birth conditions. Why don't you go pick on the intersex activists with this tripe? How much luck will you have there?

I'm getting a little tired of this fixation they have on labels like "HBS" here. Intellectually bankrupt, anyone? This thickheaded refusal to deal with the truth proves the point that real transsexual women have been making. Transgender is a lie.

It is pointless to deal with people who are so far removed from reality they won't acknowledge basic facts.

If all we are going to hear is more about how your label is better than someone else's, I think we are done. The people pushing their transgender poison onto others here have conceded the point. Glad to have such a good example though, it really illustrated what we've been talking about.

Kara said...

I'm getting a little tired of this fixation they have on labels like "HBS" here.

Again, please read my comment. The term HBS was used all over the original blog and Jennifer was the first person to reference it as far as the comments are concerned.

If all we are going to hear is more about how your label is better than someone else's
Nobody said their label is better than anyone else's. Just that others have no right to relabel (ie 'take a word back') other people.

The people pushing their transgender poison onto others here have conceded the point.
When did we do that?

Kathryn said...

http://dharmashanti.blogspot.com/2009/08/who-am-i-who-decides.html

Read this before you continue thrusting labels on everyone, or dismising their labels. It's not about how you want others to self identify, it about your own identity and their own identity. The identity of others neither threatens nor invalidates your own identity.

Ariablue said...

Ok so we women aren't allowed to take a word back from men, because somehow that is relabeling them? That's quite a twist.

They were the ones who stuck themselves on to the transsexual brand name in the first place, so I think you have it backwards. Why isn't transgender good enough for them, why must transsexual be at their beck and call? It's very difficult to follow all that mixed-up thinking.

But I will say this about "HBS": it has nothing to do with how you transition. I don't really care how someone deals with their birth condition; the condition exists whether or not you treat it. There is no crossdressing requirement, no one true path. It is not the article of faith that people in so-called support groups seem to think.

There is no standard narrative, that is fiction created by crossdressers talking with therapists and later reified by transsexuals who found themselves trapped in a psych system that has no conception of physical differences in people's brains.

If someone wants to label themselves that's fine. If they want to attach "transsexual" to transgender and claim it is one and the same, that is not ok. Why? Because in doing so you redefine every person born with this condition without consulting them. Trangender is a purely political identity, and declaring transsexual women and men to be transgender de facto is an act of political violence.

The redefinition of all people born transsexual into an invented social category called "transgender" is not acceptable. This should not be controversial to anyone who claims to be for self-definition.

Just so we have it straight here:

If there are transsexual women falling for the siren's call to transgenderism, that is a problem for them to work out in their transitions, individually. Working out your personal issues in the public sphere by creating a faux philosophy and pushing into law is not an answer. Attaching yourself to a phony political movement cooked up by crossdressers is not an answer. If you fell for that, you have been duped. Your so-called non-op transsexual friends will ride your support for all its worth, then when they get the laws that allow men into women's space they will throw you away like yesterday's garbage and silence you.

You don't need transgender, they need you. The sooner you sort through your issues, the sooner you can move on to being women- without qualifier.

It is possible.

Kara said...

The identity of others neither threatens nor invalidates your own identity.

I am not thrusting labels on others and it is you two who are invalidating the identities of others. Please reread what you and Jennifer have said in the comments:

If so, then no, I would say you are not transsexual.

You are either born transsexual, or you are not.

Transsexual women are taking back the word transsexual from the crossdressers.

Notice the prevalence of "you" not "I"? Also "taking back" means removing a label others are currently using. Yes, those statements ARE trying to redefine someone else rather than yourself. Please go look up what "I" statements are, maybe in feminism 101.

Kara said...

Ok so we women aren't allowed to take a word back from men, because somehow that is relabeling them?

Again with relabeling others. Please point me to where I labeled myself as male. Also "taking" MEANS someone loses what is being taken. If you want to use "transsexual" as well as me, you have every right to do so, but not INSTEAD of me. See the difference?

Why isn't transgender good enough for them
Umm, hello? Why is it not good enough for you? If it is not, then you have no place telling others to do it.

If someone wants to label themselves that's fine. If they want to attach "transsexual" to transgender and claim it is one and the same, that is not ok. Why? Because in doing so you redefine every person born with this condition without consulting them.

LOL!!!! Where to even begin?

First you say people can use any label they want, ok we agree. Then you go and say then can NOT use any label they want. Which is it? The identity of others does absolutely NOTHING to invalidate yours.

The sooner you sort through your issues, the sooner you can move on to being women- without qualifier.

Go back a few years (probably now, I am not up on their current policy) and try to attend the Michigan Women's Music Festival. Not as stealth, be upfront about telling them you had surgery (add in any identity qualifiers from before that if you want).

They will tell you the following 3 things:
1) You can not get in.
2) You are men. Always were, always will be.
3) They have a "womyn born womyn" policy that states you had to have been born physically a woman. If the doctor did not say "it's a girl!" when you were born, you are out of luck.

What is changing their attitude? It is a little thing known as "Camp Trans" working with third wave feminists.

A good friend of mine (well-known & people would laugh if you said she was not TS) has a phrase to describe your attitude: "testosterone poisoning". She explains that it is what happens when you mix male socialisation with a new drug (estrogen).

Lisalee said...

@Kara

Going to MWMF is not a "could we" but a "should we". I personally wouldn't want to spend 3 days with lesbians/feminists. It's not my thing. And only a man would worry about "stealth", that's the last thing on my mind.

Oh btw, "Camp Trans" is about useless...more men trying to invade women's spaces.

Kara Spengler said...

@lisalee

I used MWMF as an example. In their eyes everyone who is trans is their birth gender. Period. The same thing applies at many places that look to them to get policy guidance: women's shelters for example.

Also, Camp Trans is not useless. It is about trying to open up spaces that are closed for a reason that does not pass the logic test.

Let me state a hypothetical example:

You wind up homeless. There is a taxpayer funded women's shelter with extra beds. Great, right? Well, how would you feel if they refused you access because of the state of your genitalia at birth and said you were a man?

Lisalee said...

@Kara

I'm going to work through this backwards. It'll be easier that way.

Here's your "hypothetical" example: I see three solutions (though there could be more).

1: You're a crossdresser (i.e. a man). You don't belong there regardless of tax status or the number of empty beds.
3: You're post-op. This is now a non-issue because you live as a woman.
2: This is the tough one...you're pre-op and still have the birth gender marker. Even with a "carry letter" there's a strong chance of being turned away.

Now for the reality: I was "do or die" when I started transition. There was *no* going back and failure was *not* an option. I made sure that I dotted all my 'i's and crossed my 't's. There was no victim mentality in my mind then or now.

Again, Camp Trans is useless. Who cares about the logic. MWMF is like this and other blogs, a club. If you don't like the rules, go elsewhere.

Or make your own club.

Kara Spengler said...

As I stated, the direct problem is not MWMF (although for ppl that want to attend it it is). The problem is the fact that a lot of places that provide services to all women base their definition of that from MWMF's policy.

No, it is not a non-issue if you are a post-op. They do not care about that. All they care about is what genitalia you were born with.

Lisalee said...

They're not going to know what your genitalia are unless you explicitly tell them. And if you have to worry about (or even think about) "panty checks", that's not some place I would associate with.

Again, only men would worry about this.

Kara Spengler said...

Do you even know the history of the camp trans/MWMF debate?

It all started when a postoperative woman was attending MWMF (no policy was written down anywhere at the time) and she told someone about her past. There are also communal showers there.

Lisalee said...

Yes, that's when Riki Wilchins got involved. She created Camp Trans.

Loose lips sink ships...

Kara Spengler said...

No, Riki did not start it. The first year it was just the woman who was ejected.

Lisalee said...

...for opening her mouth a little to much. The festival always had a WBW attitude and she knew this. You're really nitpicking, Kara. It still doesn't matter. I can think of many other places to spend my time where I don't have to join a club such as, the Grand Canyon. Ya dig?

anoldfriend said...

""Do you even know the history of the camp trans/MWMF debate?

It all started when a postoperative woman was attending MWMF (no policy was written down anywhere at the time) and she told someone about her past. There are also communal showers there.""

That is the definition of stupidity. Anybody who shoots their mouth off about her past is ether stupid beyond belief or is an attention whore who can't live without the drama.

Ariablue said...

Give it a rest Kara, nobody is buying the "poor, poor crossdresser" argument. Why are you so interested in their rights anyway?

Yes, you you you. I suppose rhetorical phrasing is going over your head. You seem to be trying to read psychology into simple general statements. I'll thank you not to psychoanalyze me.

What I see here are a few representitive examples of the types of people who are against the idea of transsexual women being women. This is typical of a self-hating person in transition who hasn't figured things out yet.

They constantly find reasons why we shouldn't have our own identity (as women), and make excuses as to why being a sort of non-man is just as good. They don't mind surrendering their identity to men who crossdress. They constantly kiss the ass of the people who use and abuse them. That is, if they are really transsexual women.

Either way, these un-transitioned people are the LAST ones anybody should be listening to for advice on this subject. Not only will they give up their own rights, they DEMAND that the rest of us do as well. They make trite arguments like the ones you see here twisting the facts into a bizarre milieu in order to prop up an obviously ridiculous idea.

The only other people who talk like this are the crossdresser identity thieves themselves. Nobody else has such an investment in the transgender lie.

So which is it? Are these transgenderists confused women, or are they abusive men who want to police our lives and claim them for their own?

Kara said...

Anybody who shoots their mouth off about her past is ether stupid beyond belief or is an attention whore who can't live without the drama.

So when other women are talking about their childhoods we have the choices of either shutting up or lying?

Kara said...

Nobody else has such an investment in the transgender lie.
Remember that when something like ENDA comes along. In order to not be a hypocrite you would need to eschew any and all use of gender identity/expression clauses, right? After all, if you are not transgendered why should you say so when it benefits you?

Just Jennifer said...

So why are cases of people going from doctor to doctor, cash in hand and begging to be treated, so common? Open your eyes.


That is not common at all. What is common is being claiming that they would have surgery, but that they can't because they have some imaginary health issue that prevents if. If you push them on it, in almost every case they will admit that they have not actually been denied surgery, but that they "don't want to bother trying."

Just Jennifer said...

Most people I know that ID as transsexual identified as being something else earlier. Like how a lot of FTMs often earlier thought they were butch lesbians.

A person might be mistaken, or not understand terminology, but they will quickly realize that they are not the same as others like their mistaken identity. Those who dwell for a long time as a crossdresser and then think of themselves as developing into a transsexual are sadly mistaken. The term for this sort of behavior is autogynephilia. It has nothing to do with the silliness suggested by Blanchard, such as age and sexual orientation, and everything to do with how one comes to the point of having surgery and why.

Just Jennifer said...

I said nada about my past.

As I asked elsewhere though, please define what is the criteria for being HBS. What about transsexual?

Or can nobody here answer either question?


Actually, you said in response to someone talking of taking the term back from the crossdressers "As soon as you try to appropriate a term I and others use (and say that term no longer applies to us) it is not solely about you anymore. You want to redefine me, sorry, you do not get that right."

Given the context, you effectively admit to having been a crossdresser, and you also have said as much on your own blog.

It is very clear what you were, and what you are. Please don't think you can fool anyone here. We are a lot more knowledgeable than you realize.

Just Jennifer said...

Some are able to resign themselves to the fact that they have a penis attached to their bodies, and develop coping mechanisms to deal with this.

Such people are not transsexuals or HBS. They are simply men who want to play dress up. Harsh? Perhaps, but it is also the truth. Spend any time dealing with such people, while having the chance to compare them to transsexuals and you can see the difference. Insist on some bizarre notion of political correctness, and yes, you can blind yourself to the facts.

Just Jennifer said...

Umm, hello? Why is it not good enough for you? If it is not, then you have no place telling others to do it.

Why is it not an appropriate term for us? Because we having nothing in common with crossdressers, drag queens, and transgenderists. We were never such, and we do not claim to have become transsexuals later in life. You, on the other hand, are not really a transsexual in the classic sense, and would have, at one time, been properly denied SRS. You would have probably either lost interest, or would have learned to live as you were. You admit you were amibiguous about surgery, so it was not a life or death matter for you. As Kathryn suggests, you could have learned to cope.

Now, do you see the difference?

Kara said...

Given the context, you effectively admit to having been a crossdresser, and you also have said as much on your own blog.

Survey says! Nope!

1) I do not identify as a crossdresser.

2) The context was the TERM, not the group you see as being the sole users of it.

Or if a group you so despise are the sole users of the word "transsexual" why do you want it so much?

Kara said...

You, on the other hand, are not really a transsexual in the classic sense

Yet another example of not using "I" statements. One more time: you can *ONLY* speak for yourself, not me. I absolutely do not give up the right to label myself.

Just Jennifer said...

Remember that when something like ENDA comes along. In order to not be a hypocrite you would need to eschew any and all use of gender identity/expression clauses, right? After all, if you are not transgendered why should you say so when it benefits you?

Unlike you, I, and others here, have left of pasts behind. We live as simply women. Transgender does not apply to us, and we do not identify that way. It is extremely unlikely that we would ever be denied anything based on our "gender identity," as we do not make it an issue, nor do others. We don't have the need to go through life waving the TG flag and making sure that people know we are "out, loud, and proud" about having been born male.

Just Jennifer said...

Survey says! Nope!

1) I do not identify as a crossdresser.

2) The context was the TERM, not the group you see as being the sole users of it.

Or if a group you so despise are the sole users of the word "transsexual" why do you want it so much?



No one says you identify as a crossdresser, so don't play semantic games. It is obvious that you once did.

No one has said that crossdressers are the sole users of transsexual, but it has been said that there are crossdressers who wish to misappropriate the term.

Kara said...

Transgender does not apply to us, and we do not identify that way.

It does not matter how you identify or whether or not you are an activist. If an employer finds out you transitioned and they do not agree with that, they can fire you.

Just Jennifer said...

Yet another example of not using "I" statements. One more time: you can *ONLY* speak for yourself, not me. I absolutely do not give up the right to label myself.

Let me make something very clear here. This is my blog. I am very gracious, and I rarely ever take anyone to take for what they post here. But, I want to make something very clear. You are a guest. You don't tell me, or anyone else how they can post. If I don't want to use "I" statements, I won't. Got that?

I, and a lot of other people are tired of having our lives co-opted by a bunch of people who have nothing in common. Sometimes this is done by those who insist, by the use of the term "transgender" on tying us to people we have nothing in common with. Others, such as yourself, have simply gone too far with your desire to play dress up, and decided to take it a step too far. As I have said, the term for that is autogynephile. We were born with a condition that we wish to see labeled HBS. Harry Benjamin called it "true transsexualism." He theorized that it was inherent, with a physical cause. Others have found evidence that he was right. You, on the other hand, learned to enjoy crossdressing, and later decided you were really turned on by the idea of having a vagina. It is obvious there is a difference. You may not like this, but that is too bad. We have asked nicely, and now we are taking a stronger stand. We are really tired of men trying to co-opt our space.

Kara said...

No one says you identify as a crossdresser

But earlier you said:

Given the context, you effectively admit to having been a crossdresser

Oh that was TOO easy, you did all the writing for me. :)

Just Jennifer said...

For the vast majority of HBS (i.e. true transsexuals) as opposed to pseudo-transsexual, who were born male, and who have completed transition, issues like women born women policies are rarely an issue. First off, they have no problem fitting in with such women, and secondly, like the vast majority of women, they really don't want to be around people who impose such policies. The only people who really care about such things are a) the ones making those policies, and b) the men who are actually blocked by them.

Kara said...

If I don't want to use "I" statements, I won't. Got that?

Makes sense. The ones who most use "I" statements are femisists, but I guess you must be a guy.

Yes, I know that must have hurt. It has not stopped you from slinging that same exact term at me though.

Just Jennifer said...

Makes sense. The ones who most use "I" statements are femisists, but I guess you must be a guy.

Yes, I know that must have hurt. It has not stopped you from slinging that same exact term at me though.


No, I haven't called you "a guy."

And this is your only warning. Do something like that, and I might make an exception and boot you. I have been very tolerant of your disagreements, but I don't cater to rudeness. You are free to disagree, but not to make personal attacks directly on anyone posting here.

Just Jennifer said...

Makes sense. The ones who most use "I" statements are femisists, but I guess you must be a guy.

Oh, and while I am a woman, I don't identify as "feminist" because of PC nonsene like what you have posted here. Being a woman does not mean one has to be a feminist. And being a feminist does not make one a woman.

Just Jennifer said...

Oh that was TOO easy, you did all the writing for me. :)

I honestly doubt you are as stupid as you as you appear, and I know you are not as clever as you think you are. Unless you really don't understand concepts like past and present tense (okay, I realize some people do have problems with basic grammar, but give me a break) you clearly think you are being very clever. You are not. Let me put this very simply. There is no question that you identified as a crossdresser in the past though you now claim to identify as a transsexual.

You are fooling no one with your silly word games, so please don't try to insult anyone's intelligence.

Just Jennifer said...

It does not matter how you identify or whether or not you are an activist. If an employer finds out you transitioned and they do not agree with that, they can fire you.

You really don't get it, do you? If one is capable of actually living as a woman, as virtually all true transsexuals are, the chances of someone actually finding out is extremely low. And if the person is doing a good job, the chances that a decent employer will fire them are very slim. I realize this is lost on most transgender types, who take great pride in being at odds with society and simply cannot deal with people not knowing their secret. After all, being a man who became a woman is what it is all about for them.

You see, we don't want to be accepted as men who became women. We simply are women. For us, that is what it is all about.

Contrary to what many wish to believe, it is not that easy to find out someone's past. Sure, if one has a reason to think someone is transgender, they can find out quickly. But if they don't have a reason to suspect, they are not going to go looking.

Just Jennifer said...

So when other women are talking about their childhoods we have the choices of either shutting up or lying?

ROTLF. Well, that depends. I suppose if your childhood consisted of being "all boy" you might have a hard time talking about your experiences without lying. I suppose if your experiences were doing things that only boys do, you might have to remain silent.

I talk about my childhood with women all the time, and I have never had a problem. I might not mention certain things, but my experiences were generally not typically male. But, as I said, there really are differences. We are not being cruel when we point this out. You simply do not share our experiences, which is why we are upset that you want to try to claim to be the same.

Kara said...

Contrary to what many wish to believe, it is not that easy to find out someone's past.

You do not actually believe that, do you? Yes, it was true years ago when you could use social engineering to find the cracks in the system and hide data. It is pretty much impossible now (or will be soon) to hide *anything* in your past though. Networked databases. Patriot act stuff. Retention of records in a usable format.

Your ability to do your job well means absolutely nothing if your boss objects to what you did (religious beliefs or just 'it is icky'). Or just the almighty dollar: I lost a job when someone was afraid the government may not award us a future contract solely due to my transition (forget that their being able to promise me as on staff WON them the previous one).

Kara said...

I might not mention certain things

A lie of omission is still a lie. If there is nothing anomalous about the events, why hide the facts from them?

Just Jennifer said...

A lie of omission is still a lie. If there is nothing anomalous about the events, why hide the facts from them?

So, every time you meet someone, you feel the need to tell them everything. Figures.

Not telling something that is not asked about is not a lie of ommission. Not mentioning certain things is not a lie of ommission. It is clear you are making excuses for forcing people to know you are transgender.

Just Jennifer said...

You do not actually believe that, do you? Yes, it was true years ago when you could use social engineering to find the cracks in the system and hide data. It is pretty much impossible now (or will be soon) to hide *anything* in your past though. Networked databases. Patriot act stuff. Retention of records in a usable format.

I know better. Agsin, you are simply making excuses for why everyone has to be "out, loud, and proud."

Your ability to do your job well means absolutely nothing if your boss objects to what you did (religious beliefs or just 'it is icky'). Or just the almighty dollar: I lost a job when someone was afraid the government may not award us a future contract solely due to my transition (forget that their being able to promise me as on staff WON them the previous one).

People make all sorts of excuses. When I transitioned, I waited until I was between jobs. I took a job that was about half what I had made before, and in a different field. I had to work my way back up, but I did it without compromising my privacy. Ironically. my new job was one that required I be a woman. My employer did not know I was transsexual, and they certainly did not know I was pre-op. No one ever suspected. I now make more than I did before transition, and my life is simply that of a normal woman.

Kathryn said...

I just stayed in my same job, got promoted three days after I transitioned, and no one really brings us that I transitioned. It's a non issue, we all moved forward. I find it rediculous to leave behind what I had before. Yes people at work know I transitioned, but so what. They accept me and treat me as a woman.

Aside from that little statement, how do I stop getting follow-up comments. You two have gotten rediculous. Just agree to disagree and move on. There is some validity to both of your initial points, but it has devolved into a stupid game of tit for tat and symantics. OMFG!!! I wish I never alowed follow up post e-mails, my blackberry didn't stop ringing with new e-mails all day long. No one is making any decent points any more. You are just going back and forth trying to use language and minutia against each other. It's very juvenile.

Just Jennifer said...

Also, Camp Trans is not useless. It is about trying to open up spaces that are closed for a reason that does not pass the logic test.

Let me state a hypothetical example:

You wind up homeless. There is a taxpayer funded women's shelter with extra beds. Great, right? Well, how would you feel if they refused you access because of the state of your genitalia at birth and said you were a man?


First off, Camp Trans has nothing to do with anything other than men wanting to force their way into a space where they are not wanted. The vast majority of women, especially atraight women, have absolutely no desire to visite MWMF. The ones who are mainly obsessed with it are transgender types who want to "deconstruct gender."

That said, most post-ops would have no problem going to a women's shelter. Pre-ops might face a problem. If one does face a problem, it is probably because of the fact that surgery alone does not make one a woman. That is a fact lost on most autogynephiles.

Just Jennifer said...

I just stayed in my same job, got promoted three days after I transitioned, and no one really brings us that I transitioned. It's a non issue, we all moved forward. I find it rediculous to leave behind what I had before. Yes people at work know I transitioned, but so what. They accept me and treat me as a woman.


Hmmm, no one "really" brings it up? That is an interesting way of putting it. Personally, while I considered such a move, I rejected it. If people know your past, then it is never really a non-issue. It can, and will, affect how people react to you. But, to each their own. I prefer my privacy.

And there should be a link in each message allowing you to unsubscribe, so there was really no need for your little nasty dig.

Just Jennifer said...

transsexual has been defined in citable scientific and medical works, whereas HBS has not. So, the burden is actually on you to define a medical condition that does not exits, whereas, those of us who are transsexual have out medical condition defined by reputable medical professionals.

It is always interesting when people have no idea what they are talking about, but try to appear to be oh so intellectual. As has been pointed out, HBS is a proposed term to replace "transsexual." I have discussed the reasons for this already. Ironically, this is no different from how we came to be saddled with the term "transgender."

Any why, my dear, do HBS people always bring things back to crossdressers? I was never a crossdresser. I don't know a single crossdresser who uses the term transsexual, in fact, they distance themselves from that term because they know they are not. The only time I hear crossdresser and transsexual being merged is when an HBS girl questions is someone really is a transsexual.

Well, to answer that question, let's look at how Kara defines "transsexual."

Someone who is in the process of (or has so in the past) changing gender roles in society. Often (but not always) such a social transition involves hormone therapy and surgery. The term transsexual is a subcategory of the umbrella term transgendered.

Well, first off, that is certainly not the scientific definition. Actually, this definition could describe many crossdressers. Now, why do we bring up crossdressers? Well, when we are improperly labeled as being under the "transgender umbrella," that lumps us in with crossdressers, and other groups we share nothing in common with. Also, in the past, things were very simple. There were crossdressers and transsexuals. Then some decided that they wanted to change their sex because the idea turned them on. They were not really transsexuals, but they decided to co-opt the term. Then others, who are properly classed as crossdressers, decided they wanted to live full time, but not have surgery. They originally adopted the term transgenderist, which led to transgender, but then they decided they wanted to be more "credible," so they decided they were "non-op transsexuals," which is an oxymoron.

So, to make it simple...transsexual is not a part or "transgender." Transsexual is am objective term, transgender is an identity. Autogynephile is also an objective term, but it is separate from transsexual.

Kara said...

First off, Camp Trans has nothing to do with anything other than men wanting to force their way into a space where they are not wanted.

1) Get your terms right, or do you think there are only female-to-males at Camp Trans?

2) As I have stated, it is not ABOUT getting in to a music festival out in the middle on nowhere. It is about the fact they are seen as a leader in setting what is to be the policy in things like women's shelters. It is also about exclusion based on an irrational policy.


As has been pointed out, HBS is a proposed term to replace "transsexual."

It may be proposed, but as was stated earlier the DSM does not even use the community accepted term of transsexual. So given that I assume you want to get the people you have p*ssed off to use your loaded term? Yeah, best of luck with that.

Well, when we are improperly labeled as being under the "transgender umbrella," that lumps us in with crossdressers, and other groups we share nothing in common with.

So you REALLY think that person out to harm someone who is trans gives a fig what you call yourself? To people like that, effeminate=crossdresser=transsexual=gender queer.

Just Jennifer said...

1) Get your terms right, or do you think there are only female-to-males at Camp Trans?

I said what I meant, and I meant what I said. Putting on a dress does not make one a woman. The types behind Camp Trans are, generally speaking, not women. They may claim to be, but they tend to vibe male.

2) As I have stated, it is not ABOUT getting in to a music festival out in the middle on nowhere. It is about the fact they are seen as a leader in setting what is to be the policy in things like women's shelters. It is also about exclusion based on an irrational policy.

No one remotely sees the MWMF as anything other than a group of radical separatist lesbians having a party in the woods. They have NO influence on things like women's shelters. I seriously doubt the vast majority of women even know that such a festival exists. And while their policy may, or may not, be irrational, they do have a right to choose who they wish to associate with. As I have said before, people do have that right. I believe i compared it to the Klan, and the silly ones trying to force their way in to some black person demanding to join them. Getting admission to the MWMF is going to change nothing.

It may be proposed, but as was stated earlier the DSM does not even use the community accepted term of transsexual. So given that I assume you want to get the people you have p*ssed off to use your loaded term? Yeah, best of luck with that.

You know, you would have a smidge more credibility if you remotely had some idea about what you are arguing against. You clearly have not read anything about HBS, otherwise you would know that it is not intended to replace what is in the DSM, or even be put into the DSM. Part of the concept behind HBS is that it is not a mental disorder. We want it defined as a neurologial form of intersex. As far as we are concerned, GID can remain in the DSM to cover those to whom it properly applies (i.e. men who suddenly decide later in life that dressing up is not enough, and that they want to go further). You see, there is nothing disordered about my gender identity. My brain is female, so it was proper for my sense of myself to be female. Interestingly enough, the doctor who approved me for my surgery recognized this, and did not record my diagnosis as GID. She simply certified that she felt that surgery was the right option for me. And that was before I had ever heard of HBS. The terminology may be proposed, but the ideas behind are increasingly accepted.

Quite frankly, I really don't care if ignorant folk use it or not. I am more interested in changing the minds of people who actually understand the issues. I realize there will always be those who have no interest in learnng.

So you REALLY think that person out to harm someone who is trans gives a fig what you call yourself? To people like that, effeminate=crossdresser=transsexual=gender queer.

ROTFL! My, but you have a very male attitude. Do you really think that anything will change with your attitude?

Crossdressers, and gender queers can fend for themselves. They are interested in going against society. And please don't tell me otherwise. We both know better. They want to be at odds. They are not expressing anything about who they really are, but are actually trying to be something they really are not.

I am interested in educating people about a medical issue, not some chosen "lifestyle." I did not wake up one day and decide I wanted to move up to being a transsexual. I suffered my entire life, feeling like I was a round peg being forced into a triangular hole. I was effectively abused by people who had no way of understanding what I was going through. Personally, I do not appreciate a bunch of people who having nothing in common with me trying to make people think they do so they can gain something they do not have a right to.

Ariablue said...

This is another one of those red herring arguments; because somebody, somewhere might not like the way you were born, you must align yourself with panty wankers. What??? lol

I don't care what bigots think. If you are overly obsessed with forcing them to change their minds, that says something about how you interact with the world around you. It is also the sort of behavior those "inclusionists" display towards real transsexual women; they want us to remain silent, so they can force us to comply with the the fantasy world in their head.

And really, we wouldn't have half the problem we do with bigots or society in general if it weren't for 20 years of fetishists telling the world we are the same as them. There was no discussion, no respect for us as women, no recognition that we exist at all. Anyone who says that our forced inclusion in the LGBT was consensual and beneficial is a damned liar.

When this lunacy began it was with the express purpose of keeping us silenced so they could pursue this idiotic agenda of getting even more male power over women's space. Transgender politics is a horribly misogynistic pursuit by its very nature. It says that social males have dominion over women and their personal sovereignty. There can be no cooperation with that. Either the transgender construct must be toppled.

Kara said...

They have NO influence on things like women's shelters.
Tell that to the women who can not use the women's pharmacy that will not allow transwomen. Also, that shelters follow their policies rather than write their own is well-known.

You clearly have not read anything about HBS, otherwise you would know that it is not intended to replace what is in the DSM, or even be put into the DSM.
Actually, I moderate a couple lists that have HBS types on them - I am pretty used to your arguments. You are not reading what I wrote: that you have 2 choices, to have it used academically or to have it used socially. The first would not get any traction at all. In order to do the second people would look to the people already IDing as transsexuals ... and HBS are a minority of that group. The upshot is that you need to convince the people you have annoyed the most to use your term.

I don't care what bigots think. If you are overly obsessed with forcing them to change their minds, that says something about how you interact with the world around you.
I was saying that a bigot could care less how you identify. Cross genders or sex in any way and they will view you the same as anyone else who does. The reason it is of concern is if they are out to attack a crossdresser some Saturday evening they are not going to stop the attack if the person shouts "but I am a TS".

Ariablue said...

That's exactly my point. I don't "identify" as anything. I simply AM. Other people's opinions do not define reality. Reality does.

That is the problem with process-driven "reality" substituting for actual reality. That is a central feature of trans-think: You only have to pretend something for it to be true.

If someone is having trouble accepting themselves, the answer is not to retreat into transgender philosophy. The answer is to step back and look at the larger picture, put aside your self-prejudice, and understand why you really are a woman.

The fact that so many transsexual women get caught up in the transgender construct is due to society's inherent misogyny. It is seen as an alternative to being a "biological male". People who can't get past this are laboring under false assumptions about biology, and are actually confronting their own essentialistic thinking by trying to be non-essentialistic. i.e. transgender.

Also notice that most transsexual men avoid this kind of lifelong self doubt that hovers like a dark cloud over the women. That should tell you something about the nature of the problem- it is a primate social issue, not a problem with god or nature.

Running from your personal demons will not solve it, only the truth will. It is every person's responsibility to find that truth for themselves, no one can do it for you. Some people start out knowing outright. Some people take more time to discover it within themselves. Even though it is in us and we are aware on some level, it can take some work to bring it to the light of day.

And when you see it, transgender escapism fades from your mind like a bad dream.

anoldfriend said...

Well Kara;
If you want to look like a fool go right ahead and tell them about what life was like growing up as a boy. You do have the choices laid right out for you. If you really are the woman you say you are the past you relate will reflect that.

""It does not matter how you identify or whether or not you are an activist. If an employer finds out you transitioned and they do not agree with that, they can fire you.""
You can bury your past if you plan far enough ahead. I know several who have successfully done it with careful planing 7-10 years in advance and with the aid of a lawyer. It the cost is reasonable.
You have to know what you are doing, and ideally have someone you trust to put a bank account in their name for you to handle your living expenses on for those times you cannot pay cash for things. Even in this day and age there are ways to hack the system and come up clean to all but a DIA, or FBI background check.
(they usually don't care how you sliced and diced your private parts)

Nobody cares unless YOU make an issue of it. You should have found someone who had transitioned before you who was actually a success and went to them for tutoring and advice on how to be a success yourself.


After finishing this thread I know who you are now.

Frown.......

Kara said...

Even in this day and age there are ways to hack the system and come up clean to all but a DIA, or FBI background check.
A few years ago, when many stealth people were probably doing so, it probably was. Now though it is not a sure thing, most people can be completely uncovered with a simple google search. MAYBE if your records intersected the time/space co-ordinates of a natural disaster or such that destroyed records, but barring that. Social engineering used to be a way to bypass regs and procedures, but the current climate of fear/realisation that data=power has made those days history. You list exceptions (BTW, I have been through an FBI clearance investigation), so even you admit uncovering data is possible.

After finishing this thread I know who you are now.
Gee, I am famous! :)

anoldfriend said...

Kara;
When you started transition you should have talked to a lawyer or spent a few months researching how to cover your tracks.

Like I said you should talk to someone who actually knows what She is doing as apposed to thinking you know it all which you don't

That is your whole problem, you know next to nothing about the process.

Kara said...

When you started transition you should have talked to a lawyer or spent a few months researching how to cover your tracks.

LOL! Good one!

Why would I waste my money doing that? Especially as I have never had any plan to go stealth.

Just Jennifer said...

Tell that to the women who can not use the women's pharmacy that will not allow transwomen. Also, that shelters follow their policies rather than write their own is well-known.

So, you think an isolated incident that is largely unknown outside of the online TG community, which is beside themselves over the very idea that they can't haul their penises into this pharmacy, has a major influence on shelter policies? You really need to get a clue.

Actually, I moderate a couple lists that have HBS types on them - I am pretty used to your arguments. You are not reading what I wrote: that you have 2 choices, to have it used academically or to have it used socially. The first would not get any traction at all. In order to do the second people would look to the people already IDing as transsexuals ... and HBS are a minority of that group. The upshot is that you need to convince the people you have annoyed the most to use your term.

You need to understand some things. First, I am quite familiar with what you have written. I am not impressed. You know far less than you think you do. Second, there are some who use the term HBS who have no real understanding. It is a relatively new term, and it there is more than one HBS group. There is one that is led by someone in Spain. This person, who used to be affiliated with the primary American group, has some very strange ideas. She is the one mentioned in the original article. She is no longer associated with the American group after attacking several members for not meeting her silly standards. If you encounter followers of hers, you will get a different version of HBS. The simple way of telling is whether or not the term is Harry Benjamin Syndrome (the proper way to name a condition) or Harry Benjamin's Syndrome (improper, and the one used by Goiar in Spain). So, telling me that you know more about HBS than I do does not impress me. It only makes you look very ignorant.

Now, there are private discussions going on with health care professionals. Papers have been presented at the last WPATH meeting. So, yes, we do have traction. And clearly, we are having an effect socially. Transgender types such as yourself are absolutely in a panic over the very idea.

I was saying that a bigot could care less how you identify. Cross genders or sex in any way and they will view you the same as anyone else who does. The reason it is of concern is if they are out to attack a crossdresser some Saturday evening they are not going to stop the attack if the person shouts "but I am a TS".

If people don't know one is HBS or TS then it is a non-issue. Something I realize you have no way of understanding.

Just Jennifer said...

A few years ago, when many stealth people were probably doing so, it probably was. Now though it is not a sure thing, most people can be completely uncovered with a simple google search. MAYBE if your records intersected the time/space co-ordinates of a natural disaster or such that destroyed records, but barring that. Social engineering used to be a way to bypass regs and procedures, but the current climate of fear/realisation that data=power has made those days history. You list exceptions (BTW, I have been through an FBI clearance investigation), so even you admit uncovering data is possible.

I realize you really want to believe this, and more to the point, you really want others to believe it so they will give in and join you in being "out, loud, and proud." People have tried to figure out who I am, and some think they know, but they actually know nothing.

Why would I waste my money doing that? Especially as I have never had any plan to go stealth.

As I said a while back, the differences between autogynephiles and transsexuals quickly become obvious. I transitioned so I could bring my body into alignment with my brain's sexual differentiation live as the woman I really am. You obviously transitioned so you could be a transsexual.

Kara said...

So, telling me that you know more about HBS than I do does not impress me. It only makes you look very ignorant.
Please stop putting words in my mouth. I was accused of knowing nothing about the topic and I countered that I did. I said nothing about my level of knowledge compared to someone else.

So, yes, we do have traction. And clearly, we are having an effect socially.
Yes, we all know your's are bigger than everyone else's. Now pull your pants back on.

Just Jennifer said...

Please stop putting words in my mouth. I was accused of knowing nothing about the topic and I countered that I did. I said nothing about my level of knowledge compared to someone else.


Actually, it would be highly accurate to say that you do know nothing about the subject. That is obvious.

Yes, we all know your's are bigger than everyone else's. Now pull your pants back on.

ROTFL! No, actually mine were rather small. And now, they are long gone and not missed at all. But, you are nothing but a rude little man who had his removed for no good reason. I realize you want to be booted so you can go off and tell everyone how the mean old HBS person mistreated you. But to be honest, I am enjoying watching you make an absolute fool of yourself.

Make no mistake. You are not now, nor will you ever be anything but a castrated man. That became obvious a long time ago. Up to this point, I have been relatively polite, but that is over. You sir, are a fraud. You are exactly the reason places like MWMF and that pharmacy in Canada have the policies that they do. I have moved on with my life. You will never be able to. But, like any man, you simply refuse to admit you made a mistake. Please, don't insult real transsexuals by claiming to be one.

Kara said...

Actually, it would be highly accurate to say that you do know nothing about the subject.

Actually, I wish I knew less about HBSites than I do.

Just Jennifer said...

Actually, I wish I knew less about HBSites than I do.

I don't think that would be possible. There is a term....invincibly ignorant. It clearly applies to you.

anoldfriend said...

""LOL! Good one!

Why would I waste my money doing that? Especially as I have never had any plan to go stealth.""

so you are not a woman your just a tranny as I suspected..
What a peace of work.

anoldfriend said...

""Please stop putting words in my mouth. I was accused of knowing nothing about the topic and I countered that I did. I said nothing about my level of knowledge compared to someone else.""

You might know a little about transitioning to a life in as a woman, you know nothing about how to transition your financial, educational or the other aspects of your life.

You would live with a new female identity if you could but you blew that chance, probably before you obtained a set of proper documents.

The "I never planned to live stealth" is a sad sign of someone who had no idea how to handle the other aspects of transition.

Socializing to be acceptable in the female half of society is only a small part of the process.

"Yes, we all know your's are bigger than everyone else's. Now pull your pants back on."

This is priceless.

"You are not now, nor will you ever be anything but a castrated man. That became obvious a long time ago."


She has you dead to rights on this one Kara. You need to learn a thing or two about holding your cool in a fight with women.


Kara;
Things are changing, your at a crossroads; you can be one of the one man freak shows like Sandeen Cooke or Helms, or you can get the chip off your shoulder and learn to be the woman you say you are. The way you are right now you are heading down the road to being a one man freak show, to be laughed at, pointed at and avoided in public places no matter where you go.

And if you don't get it together before you have GRS you will be just another man with a vagina.

Better take heed, or live in a gay ghetto for the rest of your life, and never know what our lives are like living and being accepted in female society as the females we are.

Kara said...

You need to learn a thing or two about holding your cool in a fight with women.

Like calling my opponent a cross-dresser (among other labels never claimed) when I run out of arguments?

Really, you should learn what 'keeping your cool' means before you say I am not doing it.

Just Jennifer said...

Like calling my opponent a cross-dresser (among other labels never claimed) when I run out of arguments?

Really, you should learn what 'keeping your cool' means before you say I am not doing it.


No sir, you need to avoid making statements implying that I am a man, which you did twice. It is obvious that you once identified as a crossdresser. You admit as much on your blog, and by statements you have made here. Now, I don't blame anyone for being ashamed of being, or supposedly having been, a crossdresser. It is a pretty silly thing to be. But, having SRS does not change anything. If one was truly a crossdresser, then that is what one continues to be. Now, the fact that a) you are incredibly sensitive about the suggestion that you are a crossdresser, and your silly attempts to make it appear that you never identified as a crossdresser, speak volumes. Well, that and the fact that you simply are clearly neither a woman or a transsexual. Quit lying to yourself and be proud of what you are. You will be a lot happier, and so will those who have to put up with your silliness.

Kara said...

No sir, you need to avoid making statements implying that I am a man, which you did twice. It is obvious that you once identified as a crossdresser. You admit as much on your blog, and by statements you have made here.

A search for the string 'crossdresser' both in my blog entries and how I identified here had no hits .... do you mind copy/pasting the relevant text? To be clear, I do NOT identify as a crossdresser, but have no problem with them.

You mention that I called you a man twice, fair enough, but I will note that you did it MUCH more often: the first time was only to show you how you liked it. I suppose I will have to be the adult here and propose we all only use the labels the person being addressed identifies as. To wit:

1) From profile pics and/or what was said everyone here (at least so far) is female.

2) Whether it was explicitly said or not, I think we can safely assume everyone who has posted so far is a transsexual.

3) Your side (just_jennifer, ariablue,lisalee, anoldfriend) represent the exclusivity side of the debate. Typically you use the term HBS, but if you want to use another I am fine with that.

4) My side (my two accounts and Kathryn) represent the inclusive side of that same debate. Typically we have no problem being under the transgender umbrella (although I can only speak for myself), but still insist on transsexual and woman.

[apologies if I left anyone out, it is a long thread]

Agreed?

anoldfriend said...

Kara;
""2) Whether it was explicitly said or not, I think we can safely assume everyone who has posted so far is a transsexual.""

Bad assumption on your part I don't identify as trans-anything.

I am female and did not use any social engineering tactics to get that way.

Once a birth defect is corrected you no longer have that birth defect.

If you continue to identify, label yourself or include that birth defect in a self description you ghettoize yourself.

There are only 2 types of people in the world
Men Males
Woman Females
Transsexuals, transgenders are less than the above.
Intersex people, the vast majority see themselves as ether male or female not intersex.

Kara said...

Okay, you do not ID as transsexual (although I would debate that it applies) and you do have the right to label yourself. I was referring to the clinical use of it, not your identity use: IE, someone who has transitioned and had surgery. But since you do not take that label you do not take that label, the point of my post was to say 'only use labels people own'.

Now that that point has been resolved, do you agree with the post I made before?

Kara said...

[BTW, my deleted post was because I had accidentally copy/pasted the wrong thing]

anoldfriend said...

Kara;
You make assumptions you have evidence to back up.

You do not know if I in fact transitioned, you know nothing of my history, childhood, upbringing, and life as an adult.

All you have to draw from is that I had a birth defect and had it corrected sometime after my birth.

You cannot draw any conclusions about my relationship with transition from what I have posted here on any of these blog entries.

Trannys have a bad habit of making ASSumptions which most of the time are wrong.

I won't accept any of your labels or any preconditions regarding my life, history or medical status.
I will not consent to any of it.

Kara said...

@anoldfriend ok, so you are not TS and never transitioned, right? You are still the same physical sex you were at birth? Do you mind though if I ask why you are here and acting like you went through transition then? What do you agree or disagree with in what I had said before?

But you are just distracting from the point, so no more talking to you until I get an answer on what I asked before from ariablue and just_jennifer. Does everyone active in this thread agree to what I posted this morning (about respecting labels)? If not, this thread is useless and just a name calling contest.

Just Jennifer said...

A search for the string 'crossdresser' both in my blog entries and how I identified here had no hits .... do you mind copy/pasting the relevant text? To be clear, I do NOT identify as a crossdresser, but have no problem with them.

Cut the crap, once and for all. As has been pointed out, no one has said that you currently identify as a crossdresser. It is quite obvious that you did identify as a crossdresser before deciding you wanted to become a transsexual. Interestingly enough, you have pretty much avoided this issue. You keep going back to saying you do not now identify as a crossdresser, which is not the issue.

You mention that I called you a man twice, fair enough, but I will note that you did it MUCH more often: the first time was only to show you how you liked it. I suppose I will have to be the adult here and propose we all only use the labels the person being addressed identifies as.

Up until you pushed too far, I was nice and did not call you a man. I will be blunt. I don't consider you to be a woman or a transsexual. You do not vibe as woman, and you are clearly not a transsexual. I'm not into the silliness of the transgender who want to say that one becomes a woman simply because one says they are. And no, surgery alone doesn't do it either. So, while I will expect you to respect others here, I am not going to be nice any longer. You lost that right. You want to post on my blog, you will play by my rules. I'll try not to call you a man directly, but no, I will not call you a woman either. Insist all you want, but it is not going to happen.

Just Jennifer said...

Do you mind though if I ask why you are here and acting like you went through transition then? What do you agree or disagree with in what I had said before?

I mind. You have no business questioning why anyone is here. Got that?

Does everyone active in this thread agree to what I posted this morning (about respecting labels)? If not, this thread is useless and just a name calling contest.

For the last time, you don't set the rules here, I do. Now, you want a good example of why you don't vibe as woman...this is it.

Kara said...

Thanks Jennifer, you provided the perfect example of HBS types. You are unable to respond to clear, direct attempts at peacemaking. Even when that attempt includes asking you how you want the rules written.

anoldfriend said...

""@anoldfriend ok, so you are not TS and never transitioned, right? You are still the same physical sex you were at birth? Do you mind though if I ask why you are here and acting like you went through transition then? What do you agree or disagree with in what I had said before?

But you are just distracting from the point, so no more talking to you until I get an answer on what I asked before from ariablue and just_jennifer. Does everyone active in this thread agree to what I posted this morning (about respecting labels)? If not, this thread is useless and just a name calling contest.""

This is evidence to the fact your reading comprehension is lousy and you don't respect anybody's labels but the ones you stick on people.

Try reading what I say and not flying off into fantasy land with it.

Ariablue said...

No I don't respect labels. I find them silly and useless. Having arguments about labels is silly and useless. It doesn't matter what label you use, reality is independent of the propaganda we use to dress it up.

The post-modern trend that produced transgender is coming to a close. The idea that you can change reality by changing perception was once celebrated in academia. It was also once vilified as a lie. These are societal trends, yet reality stands above and beyond them.

Post modernism, transgender in this case, does not respect reality. It uses words with real meaning, such as transsexual, in any way it sees feet. So no, I don't agree with the idea that everyone here is necessarily transsexual. You cannot create reality by changing the label you apply to yourself. You cannot change reality by consensus.

This is the central point that needs to be made to those who believe in transgenderism. Transsexual is a condition that exists at birth. It is a word that *describes* reality, it does not create it. You are either born with the condition, or you were not.

If you think it is a privilege to be transsexual (on that mythical Kinsey-like scale) and use that as a justification for your behavior, you are obviously not transsexual. Nobody born with a birth defect thinks it is a good thing.

I've had enough spin from the transgender in this thread. This isn't an argument of "sides". The purpose of those shoving transgender down our throats is to own our identity. Transsexual is a real birth condition, it can't be owned in that sense the transgender tend to think. They do, however, understand we can be used for their own ends if they can browbeat us into submission.

It is an act of coercive political violence for the transgenderists to dictate terms to us women. I don't like men pushing me around, and those who "identify" as transgender retain their male privilege, albeit in a reduced capacity with regard other men. They may say they don't have privilege, but everything they do gives the lie to that.

Men need to shut up and piss off when it comes to women's issues. I don't respect transgender opinions about things that concern women. Male aggression towards women has a distinct smell to society, and when the public sees the real transsexual women speaking out against the transgender lie, that will be the deathknell for that bit of post modernism.

Just Jennifer said...

Thanks Jennifer, you provided the perfect example of HBS types. You are unable to respond to clear, direct attempts at peacemaking. Even when that attempt includes asking you how you want the rules written.

Like most classic transsexuals, I am fed up with the whole of transgender silliness. That includes those, such as yourself, who decided that just dressing up was not enough. Quite frankly, all I want from the TG crowd is to be left alone. I want them to stop trying to tell me I a one of them, I want them to stop trying to impose themselves into my life, and I want them to respect my situation. HBS is not about identity. That alone separates it from "transgender" which is only about identity. Sorry, but peace is not an option.

Just Jennifer said...

Men need to shut up and piss off when it comes to women's issues. I don't respect transgender opinions about things that concern women. Male aggression towards women has a distinct smell to society, and when the public sees the real transsexual women speaking out against the transgender lie, that will be the deathknell for that bit of post modernism.


Aria, I haven't been commenting on your posts, or those of our friend, as I have agreed with them. But in this particular case, I want to say this was an excellent post. You make some very good points, especially that no one would see our birth defect as a good thing. I am happy to be a woman, but I would have prefered to have arrived here by a different route. Parts of my life have been quite horrible. I do find it odd that anyone would choose to follow this path, but clearly, some do make that choice, driven by their strange desires.

anoldfriend said...

Ariablue;
Well said, you put it so well.

Kara;
Find a 12 step group and sober up from the prolonged exposure to TG Kool-Aid.