Lorileah, you know that the use of leeches is still considered by some as a true aid in healing as they bring fresh blood to damaged areas, just like maggots are sometimes used to clean away dead skin from similar areas. I think the message here is that though his worked is dated, it was ground breaking at the time and lead to the serious consideration of the whole TG side of life.
No, but we use the rest of his ideas, and he founded WPATH, which is the organization that suggests the guidelines for TG healthcare.
I'm all for going with more modern science - what I'm trying to convey to all of you is that there isn't very much. Almost nobody in the scientific community gives a damn about TG folks, we get really poorly designed science fair type projects. 50 years later, we have two additional medical advancements:
1. SRS
2. FFS
The hormone therapy that we use is largely the same, although the production methods for hormones have improved, largely because of the needs of genetic women. Likewise, breast augmentation, that many of us need, is a byproduct of cosmetic surgery for genetic women. For that matter, laser hair removal is too.
The theories about the origins of transsexuality and transgender folks in general, are not very much further advanced from Benjamin's - we don't understand this stuff much better than we did 50 years ago, at least not on any fundamental level. We have more clinical experience with it, and that's really about it.
I'm all for progress - I'd love for us to actually have some, please.
Consider the progress that's been made for conditions such as cancer (name your type), AIDS, MS, just tons of other conditions that have made quantum leaps in treatment.
But us? Not so much. We still get the equivalent of leeches.
Last edited by PaulaQ; 04-23-2014 at 01:06 PM.
This.
I don't think that sexual preference should be part of it, other than an acknowledgment that in each level there are heteros, bis, gays, auto-erotics, and asexuals. And it would be nice to alter the wording to reflect current understanding of gender.
The brilliance here is the acknowledgment there is a scale, rather than trying to lump everyone into the "transgender", or "crossdresser" catch-all terms. The TG or CD terms don't do a thing to acknowledge the differences between people who dress for recreational purposes, to those who enjoy the presentation fluctuation but are predominately male, to those who wish to be feminine males (as opposed to being females), to those who wish partial or cosmetic body modifications and who prefer to not fit into the binary gender, to those who wish to transition but retain male sexual functioning, to those who do want SRS, to the rare few who knew without a doubt at age four they were not the gender their parents thought they were.
The trannier-than-thou attitudes exist only because we don't have adequate terms to define the differences between the major groups of people in the community. We need more than just one category of transsexual, and one category of crossdresser because this does not reflect the existing diversity.
But, even if this scale were retooled to reflect current knowledge, I'm sure there would still be people who fundamentally believe that Level VI, for example, is "better" than Level I, just as there are people who believe that their ethnicity is better than another's. This is unfortunate.
Well, Lucy tried:
http://www.crossdressers.com/forums/...number-are-you
Lucy actually got 3 pages of responses from people who did mostly identify.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I'm beginning to wonder if there aren't just two categories after all: those who know who they are and wish to communicate it, and those who don't.
Last edited by ReineD; 04-23-2014 at 01:55 PM. Reason: Added second quote + response
Reine
“You never change things by fighting the existing reality. To change something, build a new model that makes the existing model obsolete.”
― Buckminster Fuller
Below is a link to an alternate model of gender variance. What I like about it is that it's not based on a hierarchy of "trannyness" like Benjamin's nor sexual orientation like the Blanchard autogynephilia theory. It may not be the "one true way" but I think it's an improvement on the existing models.
THE IDENTITY‐DEFENCE MODEL OF GENDER‐VARIANCE DEVELOPMENT
Jaimie F. Veale, M.A.1, Dave E. Clarke, Ph.D.
http://www.jaimieveale.com/wp-conten...12/idmodel.pdf
Thanks for the link to that paper Stevie. It definitely seems to describe more of the possible outcomes for us, and it's neat that it unifies CDing, Drag, and TS, and that it takes into account MtF and FtM. And it certainly takes into account repression, which so many of us have dealt with. It also tries to unify sexual orientation in the model.
One of the things that surprised me about it is that there is little to no mention of gender dysphoria, which is such a driving force for transsexuals.
Interesting reading though.
The main problem I have with Benjamin is that he seems to regard anyone who is somewhere along his scale as being in need of treatment! Dangerous bullfeathers!
If you always do what you always did, you'll always get what you always got!
Amanda, You wrote your comment like A) He was still alive and B) The chart was not created two generations ago. It's a little like finding a magazine from 1966, interesting, but a little out of date. If Harry Benjamin were alive, and working now, I'm sure he might recommend therapy, but realize 'fixing' us is impossible.
Just thank God he came along. Before him, transgender issues were dealt with electroshock, and incarceration.
Perhaps dysphoria is accounted for as the reaction to repression??? That makes sense to me because any cross gender behavior indicates some level of dysphoria with the status quo even if it only entails dressing up once a year or even less. BTW, Jaimie Veale is TS, so she must have some insight into gender dysphoria.
Yeah, it's just odd they didn't spell it out that way, or really even name it. Perhaps it's buried in their references and is implicit - it certainly seems to be.Perhaps dysphoria is accounted for as the reaction to repression???
The repression mechanisms they talk about ring true to me - I certainly denied and repressed this stuff from a very early age, even though I knew it was going on with me.
This is certainly heaps better than Blanchard's model, although my non-CDing gynephilic TS friend doesn't fit this model well.
Funny this has surfaced, I just had a conversation with a man about what I actually was. I told him I am a "crossdresser", I have no desire to have a sex change, I just love dressing in women's clothes." He tried to convince me I was a transvestite. I never considered myself to be a transvestite, I always thought of a transvestite as a person having a partial sex change or going through the full change. I dress with taste and age appropriate, I have been complimented on the way I dress several time. I don't know where this chart came from or who the guru is that thinks they have decided by how far you go on what you are. If a person wants to consider themselves as a transvestite that's what they are, if a person wants to be consider themselves as a just a crossdresser that's what they are. Why is someone trying to label me.
I looked in the mirror and saw a gurl
Here I come looking for clarity, hoping someone has finally found a way to help me understand who the heck I am and what I do about it, and...
...it looks like I'm somewhere between 3 and 4.
Thanks for nuthin!
Really, though this chart is simplistic and more than a bit outdated, it's fairly remarkable for 1966, only a few years after many gender issues were "treated" with electric shock and insulin shock "therapy".
I admit that I came to understand that I'm transgendered rather late in life, was and am very happily married, am probably bigendered, am heterosexual, and feel that I'm completely happy with flipping back and forth between physical and mental gender extremes. I don't feel deprived, or guilty, or in need of "fixing". Both of my genders enjoy their lives.
So I read the table referenced in the op (and read the rest of the thread), and my first take on all of this is "the professionals" don't really have a clue about those of us who don't need to be treated for anything. Granted, this is old date (more like ancient), but it seems the "pros" still believe this tripe is still important.
Seems to me that it would be a whole lot more reasonable if someone INSIDE our community were to put together an assessment of the current state of gender fluidity. Why is it that we are often assessed from outside? Just sayin'.
Check out this link if you are wondering about joining Safe Haven.
This above all: To thine own self be true, And it must follow, as the night the day, Thou canst not then be false to any
Galileo said "You cannot teach a man anything" and they accuse ME of being sexist
Never ascribe to malice that which can be easily explained by sheer stupidity
I would be a 3 . I go out sometimes but not fully dressed. Light makeup and gender neutral clothing while underdresssed.
" Well that's it then, I will have to build another box to put myself in ! "
I have sometimes wondered why a cross dresser/ transvestite / transexual has not done extensive scientific research on this topic and published it. Perhaps they have and are not known to me.
Also, does anyone know of counsellors or therapists who are themselves cross dressers who offer counseling services?
I never understood the rage some feel when it comes to things like this. Scientists have to identify and classify things in order to study them. The fact he created a scale in order to identify trans behavior is not out of the ordinary in the realm of science, but some seem to take it as a personal affront for some reason. I just don't get it.
Actually there are several researchers who are transgender - Anne Vitale, Ann Lawrence, Jaime Veale - so they are out there. The trouble is getting enough samples, and also that they largely attack this from a psychological perspective - the biomedical understanding of transgender isn't there yet.
a couple things
the assumption that a "true" TS wants a man to marry totally discounts those who don't like men or who are lesbian
The definitive lines drawn are in conflict with the fluid motion of the spectrum. We say ROYGBIV for the colors but in reality they are continuum of color, no hard lines. This scale attempts to make hard lines and assumes, incorrectly, that everyone should fit in a specific box. When data cannot be specifically placed in a position, it must be eliminated and that invalidates the study
spectrum1.jpg
Making a scale that is flawed won't help you in research. Others behind you who try and use your scale and find it flawed won't be able to confirm your research, thus invalidating it
Using pseudo-scientific models when time has passed that has shown that your scale is inadequate does not help advance the study.
This scale has been outdated for years. Just the fact that so many just in this forum can find flaws in it makes it unusable. It may be a box of 8 crayons but it doesn't represent the whole palate
The earth is the mother of all people and all people should have equal rights upon it.
Chief Joseph
Nez Perce
“Love isn't a state of perfect caring. It is an active noun like struggle. To love someone is to strive to accept that person exactly the way he or she is, right here and now.” - Fred Rogers,
Lori, Benjamin did not theorize that only those categories exist. I found the original paper:
http://www.mut23.de/texte/Harry%20Be...Phenomenon.pdf
On page 16 directly under the table of typology, Benjamin clearly states,
"It has been the intention here to point out the possibility of several conceptions and classifications of the transvestic and the transsexual phenomenon. Future studies and observations may decide which one is likely to come closest to the truth and in this way a possible understanding of the etiology may be gained. If this etiology should ever be established through future researches, classifications may have to be modified accordingly."
There needed to be a way to differentiate between the major types of transvestism and transsexualism for diagnostic purposes. How else would the medical community establish the proper medical help for each person if there was no differentiation (using the extremes) between a transvestic fetishist and a transsexual who wishes to have SRS? It stands to reason that gender identity is a spectrum, but to illustrate each finer point on paper for diagnostic purposes would be impossible. The alternative, to not at all attempt to devise a scale of major categories, would have done nothing in terms of coming up with the WPATH Standards of Care.
The Gender Scale is a diagnostic tool and also useful, in my opinion, should a person wish to convey to another where on the scale he or she feels is the closest to. It certainly eliminates the incessant disputes over what "crossdresser", "transgender", and "transsexual" mean. I do think that terms like "pseudo" and "true" should be reworded so as to not give the impression that one level is better or more true than another.
Here's a modified version of the original gender scale that excludes "Dressing Habits and Social Life" and "Sex Object Choice and Sex Life", since these categories no longer apply in today's medical diagnostic criterion:
http://www.shb-info.org/sitebuilderc...les/hbdt09.pdf
Last edited by ReineD; 04-25-2014 at 04:31 PM.
Reine
Thank you to Paula and RenieD. I am not the only one who finds that Benjamins studies were ahead of his time. Archaic now, yes, of course, but from 1966 where things were in terms of TG related issues, this was brilliance. And some of it does still hold water today. And Benjamin himself made sure to state that it is fluid. It was I believe an attempt for a clinical use to guide those who would take on such cases. And while we today should not walk around thinking I am a TV 3 (what I would most likely be if I weighed in on the scale) A clinician could use this to ascertain what a particular gender variant person's needs were. I do not think this is some devil incarnate here at all. While I am in full agreement about how we need not label ourselves, DSMV or whatever it is up to now does just that for just about everyone. Walk in to a mental health practicioners office of some sort and you will walk out with a label (diagnosis) of some sort.
Chickens should be allowed to cross the road without having their motives questioned
I think that this rates right up there with the Global warming Hoax.
Having my ears triple pierced is AWESOME, ~~......
I can explain it to you, But I can't comprehend it for you !
If at first you don't succeed, Then Skydiving isn't for you.
Be careful what you wish for, Once you ring a bell , you just can't Un-Ring it !! !!