That said, discovered this morning that Suzan Cooke, who has effectively abandoned transsexualism in favor of a more transgender viewpoint, now objects to the term "classic transsexual." This is not, of course, surprising for someone who has embraced the transgender view, but as is all too common, Cooke doesn't seem to understand the concept...or perhaps doesn't wish to, preferring instead to simply make straw arguments.
For example, Cooke makes this statement:
Now, this statement is a bit puzzling. I know of no one who uses the term "classic transsexual" who remotely embraces Bailey's ideas. Blanchard, who created the idea of their being only two kinds of transsexuals, homosexual transsexuals and autogynephiles, did so as an attempt to discredit the concept of classic or true transsexuals. Blanchard's model was designed to show that all transsexuals are actually men, either those who are "too gay to be men," or who are men with a fetishtic desire to be feminized.
Embracing “Classic Transsexual” is sort like embracing autogynephilia. Indeed Bailey uses it as a synonym for androphilic or homosexual transsexual. I was sort of amused to discover this one because the other couple of people I banned were self identified autogynephilics. Neither set particularly strike me as folks I would want to hang out with.
Now, there is really no question that autogynephiles exist. But, the concept as created by Blanchard is flawed. But this is not the subject we are dealing with today.
Cooke seems to wish to claim ignorance, even as she attacks the concept of classic transsexualism:
They also displayed a propensity for obfuscation when asked for a definition.That is an odd statement, given that Cooke has link to several blogs that support the concept on her own blog site. But, just so there is no mistake, the definition of "classic transsexual" is simple. It refers to someone who has had a lifelong knowledge that they were different. Someone who has show indications of having a brain that is sexually differentiated at odds with their body from a very early age. It precludes those who suddenly, at some point after puperty, discover that they enjoy crossdressing and who then "progress" to claiming to be a transsexual. Classic transsexuals will have serious problems coping with their situation prior to transition, but will show significant improvement afterwards.
Being a classic transsexual has nothing to do with sexual orientation, the age at which one transitions, or the age at which one has surgery. It only has to do with having a lifelong history of showing a brain that is sexually differentiated at odds with the body.
Further, those who are classically transsexual will, in the vast majority of cases, have a strong desire to simply get on with their life as who they really are. This is probably because their life prior to transition is nothing they wish to hold on to.
I have met young transitioners who were clearly not classic transsexuals, and those transitioning later in life who clearly were. Granted, both are relatively rare. I have met classic transsexuals who are gay, lesbian, or bisexual. I have even seen a few tragic cases where they wind up "drinking the transgender Kool-Aid." Transgender is an identity, not an objective state of being. Most who identify that way are not classic transsexuals. A few do. And when they do, they effectively give up what they have worked so hard to achieve, and often do a great deal of harm to other classic transsexuals.