Definitions outside our forum

[Sarah Doepner]

We have seen several threads recently attempting to unravel some of the tangled defiinitions we commonly use. Crossdresser vs. Transvestite vs. Transgender vs. Transexual etc. have been discussed with logic and emotion bringing in clinical definitions and personal expericence as well. I admire and respect this discussion as we attempt to find out where we fit in the world. It is important that we are able to define ourselves by what we are rather than by the process of elimination stating what we are not. I'm not pre-op TS, I'm not Gay and I'm not dressing en femme for physical pleasure, but the way the terms are being bantied about in the wider world, I don't have a definition I can comfortably hang my wig on.

Here is what I'm talking about. Outside our forum the world continues to do what it wants. It is Transgender Awareness Month and locally there have been a series of discussions sponsored by the local Pride Center and reported on by local media. Here is a link to the coverage of one of those events and the discussion that is taking place in the public forum.

http://www.sltrib.com/sltrib/news/52...-utah.html.csp

The issue I'm seeing seems to be the adoption of the term Transgender to mean nearly the same as Transsexual while at the same time making Transvestite and Crossdresser refer to more of a fetish behavior. We can do all we can to define these terms as they fit within our forum, but when we turn outside it seems they are doing what they will. As you read the story and comments, it turns out it isn't the media that is doing this, but it is the GLBTQ community. It seems that we need, one way or another, to enter that wider discussion and stake out some territory that will maintain a place from which we can spend time teaching something other than definitions.

[Rianna Humble]

I don't read the article the same way as you. To me, the paragraph which contains

Many think of gender in black and white terms, but there is a great deal of unacknowledged diversity, said Dayne Law, the Pride Center’s transgender program director. The conference supports those who don’t fit in strict male and female categories, as well as their loved ones and the professionals who help them.

appears to make it clear that they are not talking merely about transsexuals.

I agree that the specific examples in the article are of TS individuals, but are we now to be banished from being recognised as part of the TG community? If so, I commend you to the separatist group whose manifesto was publicised in the TS forum. Also, you say that this is part of a Transgender Awareness Month, could it be that there is still time in that month for a second article to appear? A single article for a whole month seems somewhat paltry to me.

[Cheryl T]

It is important that we are able to define ourselves by what we are rather than by the process of elimination stating what we are not.

Sorry to have to disagree.

It is important that we are able to define ourselves by WHO we are...NOT "What" we are. The most important thing is the character of the person not the label we or anyone else places on that person.

[Sarah Doepner]

Sorry to have to disagree.

It is important that we are able to define ourselves by WHO we are...NOT "What" we are. The most important thing is the character of the person not the label we or anyone else places on that person.

Cheryl, your point is well taken and the poor choice of wording was mine. You are correct it is Who we are and I didn't mean to objectify anyone.

[Sarah Doepner]

I don't read the article the same way as you. To me, the paragraph which contains appears to make it clear that they are not talking merely about transsexuals.

I agree that the specific examples in the article are of TS individuals, but are we now to be banished from being recognised as part of the TG community? If so, I commend you to the separatist group whose manifesto was publicised in the TS forum. Also, you say that this is part of a Transgender Awareness Month, could it be that there is still time in that month for a second article to appear? A single article for a whole month seems somewhat paltry to me.

There have been other presentations and articles, and will probably be more. It could be that I'm reading more into it than is actually there, but I don't see much in the media that represents me or most of the crossdressers I know when the topic is transgenderism. It could be a result of a couple of things. First is the success the GLBTQ community has had over the last many years in bringing public awareness of their issues and points of view. The second is the tendency of the media to focus on the extremes in society. In that media environment a crossdresser is not nearly as interesting as someone who has GRS.

While I doubt we are being isolated or intentionally banished from or by the TG community. However, I'd suggest as the media pairs TG and TS as synonyms and relegates Crossdressing to news of the weird stories about failed bank robberies, we are losing ground. Later in the month I may discover they have covered crossdressing with respect and accuracy and I'll very happily eat my words, but for now I'm not seeing that happening.

[sanderlay]

My thoughts from the article...
http://www.sltrib.com/sltrib/news/52...-utah.html.csp

I'm delighted that many in society are breaking down these old hurtful stereo types in favor of helping the person find themselves and how they wish to present to the world. That's un-conditional love and a great real life story. My congratulations go the the parents and care takers of these beautiful persons as they make their way in a challenging world. Thank you for sharing.

Definitions...
We need to help people on these different personal and unique journeys. The Standards of Care version 7, and beyond, helps in this process but it is not the last word. Education and tolerance should be a big part of education today. Terms and labels will change as time goes on and we need as a society need to keep ourselves up to date and remain flexible and tolerant of each other. What worked for you, and your journey, may not work for another as we are all individuals.

FYI... I wish to avoid hurtful discussions that only seem to entrench old wounds and alienate new ideas. If I come off as arrogant to you then tell me. I want to come across as friendly, flexible and a teachable heart. I'm open to new ideas and concepts.

[Frédérique]

The issue I'm seeing seems to be the adoption of the term Transgender to mean nearly the same as Transsexual while at the same time making Transvestite and Crossdresser refer to more of a fetish behavior. We can do all we can to define these terms as they fit within our forum, but when we turn outside it seems they are doing what they will. As you read the story and comments, it turns out it isn't the media that is doing this, but it is the GLBTQ community. It seems that we need, one way or another, to enter that wider discussion and stake out some territory that will maintain a place from which we can spend time teaching something other than definitions.

[SIZE="2"]In my mind a transgendered person is more like a transsexual than one who crossdresses for pleasure, but I’m basing that assessment on a definition I once read, stating that a transgendered person lives as the other gender, 24/7, but does not entertain the idea of SRS. If that is incorrect, I welcome any responses from TG or TS individuals, but that definition makes sense to me. With that in mind, a MtF crossdresser, who is largely concerned with one’s tactile or physical pleasure, is definitely NOT the same as a TG. In my case, I don’t live as a woman 24/7, and I cross over and cross back according to the whim of the moment, i.e. how I’m feeling. It would be an insult to all TG’s everywhere to proclaim “I am transgendered,” when, compared to what other TG’s do, I am not like them at all (except that I also wear women’s clothing)…


In this context, I would say the GLBTQ community you are referring to isn’t too far off base. It may be painting with a broad brush to call all CD’s purveyors of fetishism, but, if I may say so, the shoe fits. The more dedicated CD who is less fetishistic and is moving towards a TG lifestyle is the “betwixt and between” person here, but, for the sake of expediency, certain types of behavior may need to be clumped together with the idea of longed-for tolerance in mind. However, “staking out territory” sounds a lot like male behavior, and there is no wider discussion I wish to enter into at this time – I’m here, on this site, because MtF crossdressers understand other MtF crossdressers (by and large), and, since I‘m solitary, a group cannot or will not be able to speak for me under any circumstances. I’m on the queer periphery, and that’s where I wish to stay, away from the other “community” that is embarrassed by my existence… [/SIZE]

[Kaz]

Inside, from an early age, well puberty actually, I wished I would become female... I went to bed every night wishing I would wake up as a girl. It never happened. So I did what people did in those days and set out on my 'predestined' path... I was fortunate... 18 years old in the early 70s... I got to be a local guitar hero and wore stack heeled boots and satin and crushed velvet, grew my hair long. I bought high heeled boots from women's show shops, and more! All in the name of rock... It was great and my girl-friend encouraged me! Got to wear make-up on stage and life was good... BUT... end of University.. get a job... band carried on (different band by now) but then we were into the punk rock era...

Now... I wonder who the hell I am? A TG, a TS, a CD? I don't actually give a s**t. I don't want to be part of a prescribed category with tight definitions and rules.

These definitions are drawn up by activist and pressure groups to suit their causes (all with the best intentions)... the reality is that it ain't that simple.

So I will resist joining any subdivision as I haven't found one that I fit. So I guess I will always be an outsider... just Kaz... figuring it out... and doing what I do...

[Babette]

It is important that we are able to define ourselves by WHO we are...NOT "What" we are. The most important thing is the character of the person not the label we or anyone else places on that person.

Cheryl sums my feelings with her two sentences. Speaking only for myself, I am anoyed by terms like transsexual, transgendered, crossdresser, etc. Except for a few members on this forum that I have personally met, most of you know very little about me. So here is my bottom line. I am nothing more than a person and should we meet someday, my only wish is to leave you with the impression that I am a good person. If you think later of me as a TS, TG or CD, then I have failed to live up to my expectations. Does anyone else feel this way?

Babette

[Vickie_CDTV]

[SIZE="2"]In my mind a transgendered person is more like a transsexual than one who crossdresses for pleasure, but I’m basing that assessment on a definition I once read, stating that a transgendered person lives as the other gender, 24/7, but does not entertain the idea of SRS. If that is incorrect, I welcome any responses from TG or TS individuals, but that definition makes sense to me. [/SIZE]

You are thinking of "transgenderist", the term Virginia Prince coined to describe someone who is FT and transitioned but does not desire SRS, a term she also used to describe herself.

[sanderlay]

... It is important that we are able to define ourselves by WHO we are...NOT "What" we are. The most important thing is the character of the person not the label we or anyone else places on that person.

Exactly my feeling on the mater.

Cheryl sums my feelings with her two sentences. Speaking only for myself, I am anoyed by terms like transsexual, transgendered, crossdresser, etc. Except for a few members on this forum that I have personally met, most of you know very little about me. So here is my bottom line. I am nothing more than a person and should we meet someday, my only wish is to leave you with the impression that I am a good person. If you think later of me as a TS, TG or CD, then I have failed to live up to my expectations. Does anyone else feel this way?

Babette

Yes... I am a person... not a label.

... Now... I wonder who the hell I am? A TG, a TS, a CD? I don't actually give a s**t. I don't want to be part of a prescribed category with tight definitions and rules. ...

Yes... Get to know... ME... not some assigned term that rarely paints an accurate picture. I live 24/7 presenting mix clothing presentation to the world. I will not hide my feminine or my masculine self as both are part of who I am.

I’m here, on this site, because MtF crossdressers understand other MtF crossdressers (by and large), and, since I‘m solitary, a group cannot or will not be able to speak for me under any circumstances. I’m on the queer periphery, and that’s where I wish to stay, away from the other “community” that is embarrassed by my existence…

How can I be embarrassed by another persons journey? To do so would deny my own past and sent a hurtful message.

I fully believe everyone has the right to present their gender as who they wish and not be boxed into some set standard. They do however need to respect their own ID gender and use appropriate public facilities, as I do as a male. I never use a women's bathroom no mater how I'm dressed.

[Sophie86]

I posted this link in that other thread, but it makes a nice companion piece for Sarah's article. In neither one is there any mention of crossdressers. Transsexuals are used to represent the transgender community, and that "unacknowledged diversity" remained unacknowledged, and undefined.

[Aprilrain]

I posted this link in that other thread, but it makes a nice companion piece for Sarah's article. In neither one is there any mention of crossdressers. Transsexuals are used to represent the transgender community, and that "unacknowledged diversity" remained unacknowledged, and undefined.

Could this be that very few CDers are willing to throw a monkey wrench into their comfortable male lives in order to gain some acceptance as CDers? just a thought.

[Sophie86]

Could this be that very few CDers are willing to throw a monkey wrench into their comfortable male lives in order to gain some acceptance as CDers? just a thought.

No. Regardless of whether or not they could have been found, neither author had to have specific examples in order to mention the existence of crossdressers.

[KellyJameson]

Words make me apprehensive because the definitions build boxes that feel like coffins and than we become corpses
and they should come with a warning label like cigaretes "may help bring clarity but also may cause greater confusion"

For me I just do not want people to hurt me for being myself after that it is only a question of self discovery and self expression which I call life.

[docrobbysherry]

Sarah, I may be off base, but maybe it's NOT about definitions of CD/TG/TSs that is the issue. But, UNDERSTANDING that there is incredibly diverse community UNDER those/that label!?

I'm still coming to grips with it all after 4 years here. I'm sympathetic with the general public's and media's lack of understanding. Because unless you're VERY INTERESTED in the topic, you're likely to lose interest before you've barely scratched the surface of the subject!

It's much easier for them to pigeon hole us, like they can with gay or bi's. "Yeah, I know all about them. They sleep with members of their own sex."

[Jorja]

Sorry to have to disagree.

It is important that we are able to define ourselves by WHO we are...NOT "What" we are. The most important thing is the character of the person not the label we or anyone else places on that person.

Cheryl sums my feelings with her two sentences. Speaking only for myself, I am anoyed by terms like transsexual, transgendered, crossdresser, etc. Except for a few members on this forum that I have personally met, most of you know very little about me. So here is my bottom line. I am nothing more than a person and should we meet someday, my only wish is to leave you with the impression that I am a good person. If you think later of me as a TS, TG or CD, then I have failed to live up to my expectations. Does anyone else feel this way?

Babette

Personally I believe Cheryl and Babatte have hit the nail squarely on the head. There is way too much time and effort spent trying to define something which is undefinable. There are too many variations that someone would be left out or feel insulted because they were not included.

The only label I personally go by is my name. Jorja. What am I? I am a woman.

[NicoleScott]

The only label I personally go by is my name. Jorja. What am I? I am a woman.

Your post (#17) makes me think you don't like labels, then you label yourself as a woman. That, of course, depends on your definition of a woman. Most sources agree that a woman is an adult female, which you are not. But I guess that depends on the definition of a female. Most sources would refer to the genetic information and sex organs you were born with. The problem with labels continues, especially when we make up our own definitions.

[kimdl93]

Sarah, I may be off base, but maybe it's NOT about definitions of CD/TG/TSs that is the issue. But, UNDERSTANDING that there is incredibly diverse community UNDER those/that label!?...

."

I agree entirely. I also think there's an element of denial involved. I may not like the idea that my behavior would be defined in a certain way, so I might question the definition.

[Claire Cook]

Sorry to have to disagree.

It is important that we are able to define ourselves by WHO we are...NOT "What" we are. The most important thing is the character of the person not the label we or anyone else places on that person.

True, we are all individuals, but probably no two of us have the same view of where we are in what Joan Roughgarden calls "the rainbow". Others do think in terms of categories and definitions, and in this context I don't see a problem with this article. "Transgenderism" as I understand it embraces everything within that rainbow, from closeted panty wearers to post-op transexuals. When the question comes up, I tell people that I'm transgendered -- a happily married crossdresser.

[Jorja]

Your post (#17) makes me think you don't like labels, then you label yourself as a woman. That, of course, depends on your definition of a woman. Most sources agree that a woman is an adult female, which you are not. But I guess that depends on the definition of a female. Most sources would refer to the genetic information and sex organs you were born with. The problem with labels continues, especially when we make up our own definitions.

This is where the problem lies. We have people, like you, who do not have the education nor expertise to employ logical structures and real-world references to convey, process, and assign meaning, as well as to manage and resolve ambiguity. You my friend, are not a linguist.

As for most sources refering to the genetic information and sex organs one was born with, I have yet, in the past 31 years, had anyone, any doctor, state or federal government, any agengy or organization require my genetic information or ask to see my sex organs before granting me membership, a loan, a job, medical treatment etc….. Therefore, you are incorrect in your assumption that genetic information or proof of sexual organs is needed to qualify as a female.

On top of all that, my birth certificate has shown that I am female for the past 31 years. I am truly sorry you were not around or aware of your condition when this brief and almost unknown expermental opportunity came along in my home state’s political arena. I was infact in transition at the time and was smart enough to take advantage if it. I would not have known of the program had I not been friends with one of the state senators at that time.

So you see, I am a woman. Learn of what you speak, before you speak. It helps all concerned.

[Veronica27]

You are thinking of "transgenderist", the term Virginia Prince coined to describe someone who is FT and transitioned but does not desire SRS, a term she also used to describe herself.

You are quite right in that Virginia Prince used the word transgenderist to describe herself. The word transgender actually originated sometime in the late 1960's, but there was no concensus as to what it meant. When Virginia Prince became concerned that what she had become in her senior years did not reflect the type of individuals that her organization Tri-ess was about, she felt that she needed a term that would distinguish those like herself from most of the Tri-ess membership. The word transgender seemed descriptive of what she felt she had become, and she coined transgenderist which is simply a noun form of the adjectives transgender or transgendered. Her defining of the term became the standard until the activists broadened it to an umbrella term in the 1980's. Both schools of thought prevail, although the Prince version has become somewhat broader than simply those living full time on hormones but not SRS, while the "umbrellists" have attempted to include intersex, transex and several others in their version.

Veronica

[Veronica27]

This is where the problem lies. We have people, like you, who do not have the education nor expertise to employ logical structures and real-world references to convey, process, and assign meaning, as well as to manage and resolve ambiguity. You my friend, are not a linguist.

You are a tad harsh on Nicole. The post to which she referred made no reference to you having transitioned or being in transition. I jumped to a similar conclusion that there was an inconsistency between your distaste for labels and your use of two labels, your name and woman. For most crossdressers, the reality is that they are not genetic women, despite the fact that they may feel that they are, wish to be one, identify as one or whatever. So you appeared to be injecting a definition of woman after stating such terminology was indefinable. Lets all discuss things in a civil manner.

Veronica

[DanaR]

.................It is important that we are able to define ourselves by WHO we are...NOT "What" we are. The most important thing is the character of the person not the label we or anyone else places on that person.

Cheryl sums my feelings with her two sentences. Speaking only for myself, I am anoyed by terms like transsexual, transgendered, crossdresser, etc. Except for a few members on this forum that I have personally met, most of you know very little about me. So here is my bottom line. I am nothing more than a person and should we meet someday, my only wish is to leave you with the impression that I am a good person. If you think later of me as a TS, TG or CD, then I have failed to live up to my expectations. Does anyone else feel this way?

Babette

This is the way that I feel as well.

[ReineD]

I agree, the media seems to be increasingly more comfortable with the term "transgender" than "transsexual". I wonder if they prefer to keep the "sexual" part of "transsexual" out of their headline, in order to not titillate. We all know how many people have a good chuckle and sneer whenever they see the term "sex" or "sexual". We do live in a puritanical society.

Had the story been about a crossdressing child, I wonder if they still would have used the term "transgender" in the title, in order to stay clear of the negative, fetishistic image that is commonly associated with the term "crossdresser".

Also, transgender is a neutral term that is applicable to a variety of gender identities and expression. People who read the term are free to assign whatever meaning they want to it. The term "transgender" begs for further explanation, which is its purpose. "Transgender" no more defines a person's particulars, than the word "food" when you are describing what you had for dinner. The terms "transsexual" and "crossdresser" have much narrower connotations.

my only wish is to leave you with the impression that I am a good person. If you think later of me as a TS, TG or CD, then I have failed to live up to my expectations.

I hear what you're saying, but when I leave the room people classify me into a gender box. When they later think of me, the most salient categorization is "woman". We all classify at a number of levels: race, gender, sex, social strata, educational level, age, etc, and this doesn't mean passing moral judgment. It is just how we assign meaning to everyone we meet and everything we see in order to organize the data and store it into memory.

EDIT
To everyone who objects to any attempts to understand members of the community, I don't understand why there are so many people in this forum who insist on calling ordinary words, "labels". I suppose everything is a label: every object in a room, every description of emotion or experience. The words assign meaning to the people, places, things, and experiences we are wanting to describe. Perhaps you are confusing the term, "label", with "value judgment", or "insult"?

This is what a sentence would look like, if I refused to label anything: "Last _____, I took my _______ to the _______ in order to ______.; my ________ was with me and _____ was _________ over ________.

And this sentence doesn't even have any adjectives!