Lbgtc

[Sarah-RT]

Hi Pamela

I wouldnt go so far as to adding another letter but id agree that there is a difference between T and C. I recently found a trans rights group for Ireland but with that said it was for transgendered concerns and less so for the other variations of us, however, CDers have far less concerns than trans people, here in Ireland at least such as changing your gender on birth certs etc. The way I see it for CDers is we, or I would be comfortable with passing in public and thats more or less it. being discriminated against is a crime already and covers everything.

I would say that I wish the trans rights group were a bit more inclusive for the rest of us in the same way on LGBT forums ive noticed a lot of gays want to ditch the T but supporting all of the LGBT in their efforts for equality will trickle down to us too so I see now reason to change LGBT to anything else at the moment.

[Lacey New]

Gendermutt,
All I can say is "well said". We hide in the closet, only tell "friends" online, use pseudonyms pay for our panties in cash. In short, we are stealth gender blenders and as long as we stay that way, no on will pay any attention to us let alone know we are there. Some of the retailers know our wallets and they tolerate us in their stores but that's about it.

[docrobbysherry]

If it ain't broke, don't fix it. Here's the main issue as I see it:

TS's SOMETIMES tend to resent or be embarrassed by us CD's. Yet, I'm never seen any resentment, etc. the other way around. Fix THAT issue if anyone can! We dressers mite all stand together a lot better than we do now!

[Pat]

Quote from Trans Bodies, Trans Selves: A Resource for the Transgender Community:

These acronyms can become very long. For example, LGBTT2QQAAIIP stands for Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, Transexual, Two-Spirit, Queer, Questioning , Asexual , Allies, Intersex, Intergender , and Pansexual.

[Terrylynn]

From an official source (Merriam-Webster)
": of, relating to, or being a person (as a transsexual or transvestite) who identifies with or expresses a gender identity that differs from the one which corresponds to the person's sex at birth"

So TG does include TV, CD, etc.

[PaulaQ]

TS's SOMETIMES tend to resent or be embarrassed by us CD's. Yet, I'm never seen any resentment, etc. the other way around. Fix THAT issue if anyone can! We dressers mite all stand together a lot better than we do now!

Honey- you know that at times I've duked it out with other trans women on this forum who had the audacity to come over here and talk trash about CDs. And I hang with CDs from time to time out in the real world, too. And while I agree with you that there are trans women who disrespect CDs, it really does go both ways. There are a number of prominent posters here who's homophobia and transphobia is every bit as nasty as some of the BS a few of the TSs here have slung at y'all.

I've really seen this go both ways, that's all I'm saying. Consider that back in the days of tri-ess, trans women were excluded at times.

The desire to be seen as straight men makes some CDs really say horrible things about trans women. Mostly I assume this comes from fear that it could happen to them.

I get angry when I hear trans women denigrate or not take seriously the experiences of CDs. I have called out many trans women who I've heard make disparaging or dismissive comments about CDs.

There is just no place for this stuff in the trans community - we are sisters as far as I'm concerned.

[Sarah-RT]

Paula you are absolutely right, but I'd further that point on that there should be no place for certain attitudes in any community. Each of us on this planet are all walking along the same road to the same point, instead of forcing others off the path we should be stopping and reaching out a hand to those who have fallen in the muck and pull them back up.

When I was younger I was quite bigoted, racist and intolerant of a lot, I'm not sure why exactly, perhaps the bigotry was like that saying "most guys who hate on gays usually turn out to be gay" maybe I was using discrimination as a cover for myself, the racism I attribute to being unemployed during the worst of the recession and being annoyed that foreign workers had a job when I did not but I've found as ive grown more accepting of myself that I see others in the same way

I'm still not a humanitarian but I look forward to the day when lgbt is replaced by H: Humanity, and everyone in the world is a member

[Teresa]

Pamela,
As many have said the labels are now more or less set in stone officially, the minorities are covered by most of the legislation and adding more is probably not going to happen ! To strengthen our rights we possibly need to amalgamate our groups to be heard, but none of this is going to happen . The majority would prefer to stay out of sight, if they wish to make a point of law most of it is in place now anyway if you have the courage to use it !

After all these years of dressing I believe more now that many cannot say !00% they they don't wish to transition, some doubt rests in my mind knowing that I have a female trait, I have no interest in men and have always had a good relationship with women !
Worrying about acceptance of different labels in society is irrelevant if you don't have acceptance in your own home !!

[Katey888]

There is just no place for this stuff in the trans community - we are sisters as far as I'm concerned.

Paula - what you, Sherry and others have related is very relevant and should be summarised the way you have above for all of us... But what you relate about apparent homophobia and the fear that some of us show is also sadly true - and I don't understand it. At. All.

I've worked with gay and lesbian colleagues in the past (no trans* that I know of) - was I ever concerned that I would be 'categorised' with them (or somehow be infected with their gayness...?) - not at all. But the condition we share IS different. While I'm not mixing mind gender with sexual attraction or physical gender, I can't help but believe there is a connection - however loose and variable - between these related things. I can't explain it, but I do think that until most of the hetero CDers can get over it, we'll continue to see these undercurrents.

Coming back to the question of rights, I have to ask again how we think we would differentiate between TS and CD/TG in a legal sense. I know there are some who probably don't want to have the label discussion again, but I think they're missing the point as to how important that is when you are discussing rights and policies for categories of citizens. Yes: they're sometimes arbitrary - but so absolutely necessary. In simple terms, how do our governments determine whether or not you are discriminated against because of your race or ethnicity..??? To accept protection in society you also have to accept that you fall into one or other of these groups. You can't claim discrimination (for example) because of your ethnicity but then assert you are not mixed race if you are! We also have to accept we are under the trans* banner if we want society to accept our behaviour as a valid reflection of what is going on internally, whether we're shopping, living 24/7, transitioning or doing events a couple of times a year. I can understand how some will assert we are not all pre-op TS - I do believe that myself - the trans* condition is not a continuum (as I've seen some folk describe it): I'm beginning to see it as a spectrum but with distinct clusters and gaps... or energy states for the scientists among us.. My point being, there may have to be a recognition of those different categories because the legal situation will be different. Simple example again: transitioning TS will need to have a legal recognition of gender change as well as protection in expressing their legal or transitional gender in a workplace by how they dress and behave; CD/TG will not need that gender change but may need the presentation protection.

Is that what we're talking about here? If we are, I don't think we can have the discussion fully without accepting both that we all fall under trans* AND that there will be a need for subdivisions beneath that, but only to address the differences in what constitutes protection of our individual rights.

What was the question again..?

Katey x

[Kelley]

Katey, well said. When protections under the law are given we need to be included and terms or labels become very important. I have noticed in some cases where transgender people have rights under the law but there are distinction made (gender identity and or gender expression). So already you can see a separation in the law In some cases. It is important to have one description that is all inclusive if laws are to protect us all.

Kelley

[pamela7]

the trouble is, in a job interview, there are so many subtle reasons why one candidate is chosen. I know i biased my interviews to select the more "different" characters because I valued diversity, all other skills being roughly equal. I can see easily how regardless of legislation a normative-biased interviewer could eliminate candidates from minority groups. I can also see how difficult it is to challenge such things.

IMHO therefore, encouraging, supporting the likes of Selfridges (who made all 3 floors of their london flagship store nongendered), so that dress code loses any norm and just becomes what the person likes. Then we ARE the norm! Get more men in lycra!!!!

[Isabella Ross]

Look...it's really as simple as this: if you crossdress, you are transgendered. It's irrelevant if you like girls, boys, or gurls. It's also irrelevant if you want to transition or just like to wear panties under your jeans. What's so hard about this?

[flatlander_48]

LBG are sexual distinctions. T is gender (of any sexual persuation). The whole thing is a political tool. The T's are such a tiny number, that only by allying with the LBG do we have ANY political clout at all.

We may not be as small as you think. If the LGB population is roughly 10% of the general population, recently I've seen information that puts the T population up as high as 5% of the general.

I agree that the "T" is rather an awkward bolt-on to "LGB"; it doesn't really match. I think it was just added on because it seemed like LGB people would be natural allies to T people (which they sometimes are not...)

In the broader sense, I've mentioned the term "sexual minorities". Perhaps the thought process should be that LGBT covers anyone who thinks and behaves outside of the majority constructs of opposite-sex attraction, a binary gender arrangement and expression of the accepted gender roles based on ones sex at birth. Any difference in any of the 3 (and there could be multiples) would signal that you would fall somewhere under L, G, B or T.

IOne reason I think this is the occasional thread that asks "If you could magically become a woman, would you?" and most crossdressers say yes. So there is some longing there, though not nearly enough to actually take difficult steps to do anything about it or to jeopardize existing relationships and career prospects. I think it's really a matter of degree rather than kind.

Yes, and to me that help to validate the spectrum view of things: Transgender is a spectrum ranging from Crossdressers at one end and Transsexuals at the other.

Great post Paula Q, and I pretty much agree with all of it. One thing I would ponder, and I do not feel any need to add any more letters, but that for those of us who are CDers without a desire to transition, likely because we have a male identity that we wish not to shed

Yes, that can be, but remember that being a Transsexual relates to a near complete, or complete, mismatch between the gender you believe yourself to be and the sex you are physically.

The majority of members here are caught somewhere in the middle. I believe that the reason why "CDers" are largely ignored, or just not accounted for in terms of the media is that there is the "normal" side to us. And we CDers can run to safety of our normal male identity. Also because it is just so darn confusing of a concept, wishing to present as female but not wishing to become one. It is such a subjective intangible state, as we CDers are in a gender purgatory of sorts.

This is a direct analog to how lesbians and gays often think of us who are bisexual and I think is the original statement. It is exactly the same arguement and the source of confusion is similar. "You want to have a same-sex lover, but you're not gay (or lesbian)?" would be how the question would be framed.

Back in the 1980s (there abouts) LG organizations started to become political. They wanted to achieve a lot of what you see happening today. Mostly, it was because so many were getting AIDS and their partner was being denied access to them. In other words, if you came down with AIDS, your parents could deny access to your gay partner. The relationship was not valid. You as a partner, had no rights. Say there were children involved. You want your partner to become the legal guardian should something happen to you. Your family could over rule that decision and not allow your partner to ever see the children again.

The preemptive strike would be dual adoption, but there are still a number of states that do not allow that.

I'm still not a humanitarian but I look forward to the day when lgbt is replaced by H: Humanity, and everyone in the world is a member

Won't happen or at least, shouldn't. There will ALWAYS be differences between humans based on any number of factors. But, the question is whether you respect that information and use it for positive purposes OR use it for evil purposes as a way to separate, discount and create disadvantage.

Coming back to the question of rights, I have to ask again how we think we would differentiate between TS and CD/TG in a legal sense. I know there are some who probably don't want to have the label discussion again, but I think they're missing the point as to how important that is when you are discussing rights and policies for categories of citizens. Yes: they're sometimes arbitrary - but so absolutely necessary. In simple terms, how do our governments determine whether or not you are discriminated against because of your race or ethnicity..??? To accept protection in society you also have to accept that you fall into one or other of these groups. You can't claim discrimination (for example) because of your ethnicity but then assert you are not mixed race if you are! We also have to accept we are under the trans* banner if we want society to accept our behaviour as a valid reflection of what is going on internally, whether we're shopping, living 24/7, transitioning or doing events a couple of times a year. I can understand how some will assert we are not all pre-op TS - I do believe that myself - the trans* condition is not a continuum (as I've seen some folk describe it): I'm beginning to see it as a spectrum but with distinct clusters and gaps... or energy states for the scientists among us.. My point being, there may have to be a recognition of those different categories because the legal situation will be different. Simple example again: transitioning TS will need to have a legal recognition of gender change as well as protection in expressing their legal or transitional gender in a workplace by how they dress and behave; CD/TG will not need that gender change but may need the presentation protection.

Don't know what it is in the UK, but in the US you will see the abbreviation GENDA: Gender Expression Non-Discrimination Act. This is not the law of the land yet; only in some isolated places. I haven't looked in the material in some time, but I think here in New York State it was itended to address things like when there is a mismatch between your identification information and your presentation, being discriminated at work based on gender variance, etc. However, I think it can be a bit difficult to reconcile some things. I remember in my employer's information abut gender issues, thre was some discussion about consistency. In other words, once you present as the opposite gender, you can't flip-flop back and forth. I can see confusion as it becomes a matter of: Who are you today? How should we address you? It can really tough over the phone! Transsexuals wouldn't have that problem as the path is essentially unidirectional.

DeeAnn

[Anna Stouf]

I think if we keep deviding things we as a group get weaker.

Kelley

I think that the vast majority of people only have three categories of gender "buckets" to put people in: Men, Women, and Gays. Anyone who is not a man or woman, as defined by their understanding of accepted societal norms, is gay.

The B and T covers all of us. We need to be added to the L and G in order to have a category large enough to be noticed.

[PaulaQ]

But what you relate about apparent homophobia and the fear that some of us show is also sadly true - and I don't understand it. At. All.

Coming back to the question of rights, I have to ask again how we think we would differentiate between TS and CD/TG in a legal sense.

For the first part, here's some explanations:
1. We sometimes fear what we actually are.
2. Internalized confusion over gender identity/expression vs. sexual orientation
3. Some homophobia is still acceptable in society, and some of us pick up on that and internalize it
4. Some hope to hide their CD better by being homophobic / transphobic, as a way to distract attention from themselves.

For the second part, I don't think there should be any differences in terms of legal rights between a person who transitions and a CD. Realistically, the differences that are likely to crop up are going to be based on medical procedures. I oppose such distinctions, because not all who transition need, want, or are physically able to withstand the medical procedures of trans medicine. What's the difference between a no-hormone / non-op trans woman, and a CD? Gender identity, sometimes - and that is a thing that can't be established in some empirical way. Anyway, the law should treat us the same.

The reality is that some differences are likely because of our gender transition and medical procedures associated with it. I don't agree with that but until people understand us all better, it seems likely.