What is the difference between a FT CD (or a "want-to-be" FT CD), and a non-op TS?

[ReineD]

This will be my briefest post ever. lol The title question pretty well stands on its own. :hugs:

[Miss Misery]

I thought FTCD was a florist. Oh, that's FTD! Time to go to bed.

[Dani941]

I suppose that a FT CD just does it for the clothes perhaps? the person would live their life normally, and have no problem with their gender identity. A pre-op TS or a non-op TS prolly has incomfort not only in the clothes they wear, but also in what they were born as.

[ReineD]

I suppose that a FT CD just does it for the clothes perhaps? the person would live their life normally, and have no problem with their gender identity.

I'm assuming that the FT CD wants to be female full time? Therefore must identify as female? But so many say they are full time (or want to be full time) but they are male. If they are male, then why present as full time female? Honestly, I don't understand. +?

[Shananigans]

I'm assuming that the FT CD wants to be female full time? Therefore must identify as female? But so many say they are full time (or want to be full time) but they are male. If they are male, then why present as full time female? Honestly, I don't understand. +?

I would venture to say that with a bit of prodding (maybe that wasn't the best word choice), one would find that a FT CD is doing it less for clothing and more so because he/she truly identifies with the gender of dress.

A friend of mine who is a non-op TS started off as a FT CD and went through HRT and breast implants; however, she wasn't getting rid of the man parts. When I asked her about this she said, "Are you crazy?? I love my c*ck! Why would I chop it off?!"

Maybe, because you told me that you should've been born a woman?

Oh, Idk. It's to complicated. People are complicated. I'm complicated.

[sterling12]

I think it's The Nature of people to want to have some sort of Title or Label. I would reckon it makes them uncomfortable if they don't have an Identity.

However, it's madness for US to bestow those labels on people. I think a lot of "The Poison" that gets slung about within The T-Community is caused by folks trying to differentiate themselves with labels.

Lets just figure we are all Transgendered, and forget about all those supposed distinguishing differences! They just aren't very important. Full-time 24/7 CD or Non-OP TS? Who really cares, besides The Person who longs for one one of Those Titles.

Peace and Love, Joanie

[Shananigans]

I see what you are saying Joanie, but I also feel like a little bit of labeling kind of gives us a little insight into the struggles or personality of the person.

[ReineD]

I see what you are saying, but I also feel like a little bit of labeling kind of gives us a little insight into the struggles or personality of the person.

Precisely. It's easy enough for a TG to not want to label, since the TG has an understanding of who she is, even if she cannot put it in words.

Not so for those of us who live with you though. :straightface:

[suzy1]

Can you interpret the FT CD TS and so on for me? I’m not joking, I’m just still quite new to this site and a bit thick.

Thanks, SUZY

[Terraforming]

Can you interpret the FT CD TS and so on for me? I’m not joking, I’m just still quite new to this site and a bit thick.

Thanks, SUZY
FT CD = Full time crossdresser
non-op TS = Transsexual who doesn't undergo sexual reassignment surgery

As for the difference... well I suppose it's about how far you take gaining acceptance I suppose. A non-op TS is still probably going to go for a legal name change, HRT, femininization surgery (if needed), and legal gender change on identification. Full acknowledgment of their gender on both a legal and social level. A full time CD wouldn't and (through proper channels) couldn't get consent to by medical professionals.

[Shelly Preston]

This will be my briefest post ever. lol The title question pretty well stands on its own. :hugs:

What is the difference between a FT CD (or a "want-to-be" FT CD), and a non-op TS?

Hi Reine

I would say a Full Time Crossdresser is more comfortable presenting as a female and does not consider themselves to have any problems with there body and there gender

A Non Op Transexual does have a problem as there body does not match their gender but they have decided not to have surgery

[Mirani]

Not so sure there is a definitive answer - can only speak for me.

I suppose it doesn't really matter which label is attached to me - I started to use "non-op TS" after I heard it elsewhere. It is a fairly recent descriptor - perhaps just a different way of saying the same thing. I chose it because it seems a more permanent label ... perhaps ...

I have changed my name on my business, bank account, medical records etc as I see my status as permanently Mirani. It was a sign that I am Mirani.

But, if someone wants to see me as full time CD ... I wouldn't get into an argument over it. As long as they get it that I prefer to relate as a woman . . . call me what you like!

[Annaliese2010]

This will be my briefest post ever. lol The title question pretty well stands on its own. :hugs:lol, ur adorable

[Sammy777]

What is the difference between a FT CD (or a "want-to-be" FT CD), and a non-op TS?


I think it may come down to personal labels and levels of acceptance not only with themselves but the people around them.

I think there are subsections within each one.

FT CD'er #1
Happy with their body and not willing to make any permanent female changes to it.
Know they were born male and are male,
but for whatever reasons decide that they want to live their live acting and being seen/treated as a woman.

FT CD'er #2
Not so happy with their body, possibly willing to make minor permanent female changes to it, ie hair removal.
Know they were born male, but with a more female mindset.
Again decide that they want to live their live acting and being seen/treated as a woman.
I guess you could call this extreme CD'ing, lol.

FT CD'er #3
Not happy with their body, might make major permanent female changes to it, ie hair removal, implants, maybe even try hrt.
Know they were born male, but definitely have a female mind.
Could very well be a TS, that's not willing or ready to accept it.
Again decide that they want to live their live acting and being seen/treated as a woman.

Non-Op TS #1
A TS who for [family, financial, ect] reasons will decide not get SRS. Either permanently, or in the near future.
Will most likely do as much as they can to be a woman and just live their life this way.
May or may not get implants, hrt or change their name/status.

Non-Op TS #2
A TS who for medical reasons just can not get SRS. :(
Will do everything else they can to be a woman and just live their life best as they can.
Will most likely change name and get implants/hrt if they can.

Non-Op TS #3
A TS who is capable of getting SRS, but decides not to.
Will most likely do almost everything else they can to be a woman and live their life this way.
Change name - probably, Implants - probably, hrt - maybe, maybe not.
A TS that is for whatever reasons happy/accept the fact they are a woman with a penis and for some could even like the idea being a [insert slur here].

I am sure there are many more variables within these six examples, but they seem to cover what I think is the basics.

[Fab Karen]

Precisely. It's easy enough for a TG to not want to label, since the TG has an understanding of who she is, even if she cannot put it in words.

Not so for those of us who live with you though. :straightface:
That's where that little-known concept of communication in relationships comes in.

[CallMeMeg]

I don't understand the focus on labelling ourselves. Labels don't define as much as pigeonhole.

I've argued many times with people who do therapy that behavioural labels are mainly there so they can add a diagnosis and give us drugs so we can be "normal".

[Rianna Humble]

The only FT CD's I know are through these forums but for me they are similar to Sammi's first example except that the ones I'm thinking of (all MtF) don't even want to be seen / treated as a woman all of the time. They know that they are men, are comfortable with that but prefer to wear women's clothes. I just wish that the rest of society was as comfortable with someone doing that as I would be.

I guess that full time FtM CD's would be the same but not wanting to be treated as men all the time etc. but as I don't actually know any that is merely my guess.

If you make non-op TS a separate class from pre-op TS, I am probably in the second class. If it is a superset, then I am non-op since I am only just starting out on my RLE and thanks to the medical definition of "straight away" being different to the dictionary definition, don't even know when I can start Gender Counselling.

For me, the big difference is that someone who classes theirself as CD rather than TS has the same brain gender as their anatomical gender. OTOH, someone who is non-op is still suffering from the same sort of birth defect as me but either hasn't had or doesn't feel the need for the surgery. If they can come to terms with their birth defect without needing the surgery, that's great. I don't know if I will be able to but I think that's one of the reasons why the NHS asks for such a long RLE.


Lets just figure we are all Transgendered, and forget about all those supposed distinguishing differences! They just aren't very important. Full-time 24/7 CD or Non-OP TS? Who really cares, besides The Person who longs for one one of Those Titles.

In some ways that would be nice, but think of the threads where people have been vehement that they are CD not TG. Given that many of those FT CD's I am thinking of have contributed to such threads and they do care, I think we should try to understand.

[Nadia-Maria]

I don't understand the focus on labelling ourselves. (...)

I've argued many times with people (...).

The fact you don't understand them doesn't mean they are wrong.
If you want to understand them, then ask them why they think so and please listen carefully to what they want to say instead of dismissing it as bullshit.

Every people are different. To understand other people it needs empathy and an open-mind. Either you lack somewhat of both, or you are the most intelligent person on this Earth and you feel entitled to teach all others the truth ! :battingeyelashes:

[CallMeMeg]

Nadia, I must have been unclear. What I didn't understand was not the people, but the focus on labels.

I was just making two points, I thought:

1. why do we need to label ourselves at all?
2. doctors in general, and therapists specifically, think behaviour has to be labeled so it can be diagnosed and treated. DSM III says I have "gender identity disorder". I don't feel disordered. But now I can be treated and be "normal". If I was young today, I'd probably be labeled ADD and put on some sort of drugs to fix me.

I truly believe labels, to the mainstream medical community are for the benefit of insurance companies and drug companies. They don't help the people being labeled.

[Mirani]

I don't understand the focus on labelling ourselves. Labels don't define as much as pigeonhole.


I have some sympathy with the notion that any labelling pigeon-holes someone. But a label is only a descriptor. Like I am English. It tells you a bit about me, but there are many types of English people.
I am born male - tells you about my genitals but not necessarily about my brain.
I am an Employer - but that doesn't tell you if I am a good or bad employer.
Some people are classified as "Disabled" tells you not a lot more that they may have to have reasonable provision for their disability.

So, a descriptor is the starting point ("you cant tell a book by its cover") comes to mind.
The important thing is to NOT stereotype and communicate, not assume. Ask (as Reine has done).
Listen. Try to understand.

So, label me if you like, but remember not to assume that the last person who explained the label means the same as I do!

[Kate Simmons]

Beats me Reine. I agree with Meg and think of everyone as who they are as a person, not as a this or that regardless of where their path may eventually lead them.:)

[Joanne f]

Precisely. It's easy enough for a TG to not want to label, since the TG has an understanding of who she is, even if she cannot put it in words.

I would not entirely agree with that as the early stages of being TG can be very confusing for that TG if they are not self accepting of both sides.


Not so for those of us who live with you though. :straightface:
But i would certainly agree with this as a TG who has issues with self acceptance can find the slightest thing to go off on one with no real cause .
it can make it a bit like walking on eggshells for the SO (and i know how that feels):heehee:

:D"phew" :D an automated message with a sole :)

[Loni]

sounds like it has been said already.

a cd would be happy with the body they were born into.

a ts would not be happy with the body they were born into.

but both would like to be know as woman, or man as the case may be.

a cd would only do very minor things (reversible) for the look.

and a ts would do surgery, for permanent changes.

a cd is happy as the gender they were born as.

a ts is not happy as the gender born as.

sound about right? it works for me,
but it is all about what make you feel right/good about your self, as you must first accept your self.

.

[Nadia-Maria]

why do we need to label ourselves at all?


In my opinion, there is no such need.
Some people accept to label themselves at times (mainly as an expression mode), while others are reluctant to do it or don't like to label themselves at all.

For instance I may tell you :
. either : 'I am who I am , I like sports and mountains and I also liked my job'.
. or more precisely : 'I am a crossdresser, an alpinist and a retired engineer'.

I believe both expression modes are acceptable. Moreover they have their pros and cons, according to the circumstances.


I must have been unclear. What I didn't understand was not the people, but the focus on labels.


As for myself, I believe you had been quite clear when you told us you "don't understand the focus on labelling ourselves".
Now you might become unclear though : Please tell us more precisely what you didn't understand about "the focus on labels". Maybe we would be able to enlighten you. :battingeyelashes:

[Inna]

Personally one thing comes to mind when I hear a discussion on labels and even though we as people need clarification as to understanding world in our human terms, which turns out to be just labels, I believe that little laughter eases the tension of full of labels day:D:
ttUvsrcxKmI

[Pythos]

Personally for me I would not really have gotten into presenting a fully feminine image, unless for artistic reasons.

I do like a fine mix of male and female. Now considering I do not consider long hair, make up, and several items of clothing or clothing styles to be inherently female, I can present an image that to the untrained eye is nothing less than feminine.

I have styles I do like to wear that at this time are designated for women only. But I will say, aside from the cocktail dress, and another silk ensemble I tried out, everything you have seen me in has been worn in a more gender neutral manner (including the Chenongsam), some have been worn in full male mode.

Now my foray into CDing came about when someone saw me in my Mana Cosplay (a Japanese artist that crossdresses, but NEVER calls himself female, nor does he wear falsies, he identifies as androgynous). A person attending the party I wore that to suggested I would make a "hot" CD. She is one that likes gender variation.

Well I thought, why the heck not, and started my flickr series.

Now, if I would just go about with my male chest, and un tucked, and present my preferred androgynous look without drawing unwanted violence (a thing mostly in my head), then I would really not do full on cding. I would not see a need to present a body shape (hips NOT included, cause my body naturally has a defined waist) that is feminine. No call for a bra and falsies. (Even when presenting enfem my behavior is me. I have as long as I have known moved a bit more "gracefully" than most males, though that has reduced over time...:(. But bottom line being whether in jeans and T-shirt, or a sleek Chinese gown, I behave Like me. Certainly not overly macho, and not feminine.)

Would I like to wear my skirts full time? No. I would however like the freedom of option in what I choose to wear full time, and not have to deal with maybe losing my family, job, reputation, and in the extreme, life.

It is very much harder to don a skirt and hose, light to no make up, natural male hair, and other "male" items of clothing, and get out of the house. I do this often, but usually to just my friend's or the store on the way there. :) My favorite appearance is indeed my Goth androgynous look though.

I wear leggings almost everywhere. LOL

My name here and in many other areas, is in essence a Gender Neutral name. It was the Handle I had in many computer games I played with my friends. It is a combination of my first Handle, Python (based on my love of Monty Python) and then my alternative handle, Gothos, which was from two things, 1) the fact I am Goth, and it is also an Homage to my love of Start Trek, and is part of a title from one of the classic series (the Squire of Gothos), Hence Pythos. LOL.

if you are curious what the heck I am on about, have a look at my flickr page in the Goth collection.Note: if you have your search on unrestricted, I will warn you may see my bare bum if you look in the "risque" set. But that is it. LOL

[Karan49]

Hi Reine,

Twenty-two years ago I legally changed my name after going through the process of hair removal, hrt, and living full time in my new gender. I've considered FFS and SRS but have yet to save the funds to do so. I enjoy the new improved me and have satisfying relationships. I don't know if I'll ever complete the package and it isn't as important as I once thought it to be. I don't know or care which label to apply. But at times I do wonder which label best describes me so I can clue in my friends. Truly, I don't know and it doesn't seem all that important personally.

Karan

[SusieK]

Don't know if anyone can confirm or refute this, based on how they label themselves, but an aspect of the distinction could relate to how much effort goes into voice and mannerisms. My guess would be that a non-OP TS (MtF) would be less likely to modify voice and actions as it's more about being naturally true to the woman that you are, rather than presenting as the woman you would like to be (if that makes sense).

CDing (MtF) is a fundamentally male experience with a male perspective on being female or feminine, whereas being non-OP TS (MtF) is a fundamentally female experience. Whether this changes for 24/7 CDing I don't know. Is it about denial, or just being comfortable with who you are?

Susie

[subaru_forster]

In my opinion, the only common denominator that separates FTCD from TS is whether that person is a man who lives as a woman, or a woman who was born into a male body. This gets complicated because the two can be physiologically and socialogically identical.

What remains is a philosophical question of the difference between a "man who lives as a woman" and a "woman who was born into a male body". I think that the only respectful thing to do is honor what the person identifies as, and forgive if she is wrong. (even she may not know for sure)

EDIT: obviously my example applies to MtF. There are plenty of women who live as men, and men born into female bodies too, so honor their identities as well.

[PretzelGirl]

'Tis easy.

A FT CD dresses mostly in skirts and dresses and wears make-up and a fixed up wig.

A non-op TS dresses mostly in jeans, ties their hair back (if it is long), and might wear light make-up (unless it is a special day).

:heehee:

I really only kid a little. It seems a CD does tend to want to dress up more. I gauge that by the comments about wearing dresses or skirts when going out and not worrying about what others are wearing.

Our lovely TS ladies have commented about how they don't always feel like dressing up if they don't have to and just want to be comfortable.

[Kathi Lake]

Interesting question. On the surface, it seems that there is little difference to it, like it's a game of semantics. For some, they may be a bit gun-shy on the label of TS, because that means, "Oh my! I'm a transexual" with all of the baggage that society heaps on it.

As Mirani has said, I can only speak for myself, but I identify as a crossdresser. Would I like to have some permanent changes? Sure. Nothing "major," i.e. laser hair removal and the like. Would I like to dress full-time? Not really. I fit into Sammy's little "Labels within labels" scale as a FT CDer #2. I was born a male, and will most likely die a male - on the outside. Inside? That's a different story!

:)

Kathi

[Yvetteforfun]

Labels, Labels, Lables & acronyms....:doh: Our human desire to categorize, label, define, and organize often fails to appreciate the chaos that is an equal part of nature. As far as I'm concerned, there are only individuals with individual stories, passions, obsessions, kinks.. I personally don't think any two are alike.

Vive la differance! :)

[sandra-leigh]

A FT CD dresses mostly in skirts and dresses and wears make-up and a fixed up wig.

A non-op TS dresses mostly in jeans, ties their hair back (if it is long), and might wear light make-up (unless it is a special day).


Guess that makes me a non-op CD :D

[suchacutie]

Reine, I can see that for someone trying to understand from the outside, this is not a trivial question. As with every other responder, I can only give my take on this issue:

First of all, I think that it's very possible that one person might slide back and forth betweena FTCD and a Non-op TS until they finally find who they are but they have to start somewhere. Everyone seems to start as a CD. If it continues and expands, there comes a point when a decision has to be made: "How am I going to present myself?" If that decision moves to 24/7 as a woman, then, wherever someone is on the CD to TS scale, the "mental image" of themselves is as a woman. They are not satisfied, mentally, presenting as a male.

For example, when I transform to Tina, I usually go through all the clothing and makeup and hair removal and nails, etc.etc.etc. when I'm home. It's the ritual that gets my mind clicking into Tina's mindset (and I do enjoy her mindset and the presentation as a woman). However, when I'm on the road, the transformation takes place mentally in the elevator heading to my room, finished off by walking into my room, removing my shoes, and stepping into my 5" clogs. At that point, Tina has arrived. Tina lives in that room! I'm not physically presenting as a woman, except for those clogs, yet I have made the transformation, mentally.

So, back to your question, here we have a biological male who wishes to present FT as a woman. Thus, the transition to femininity has been made, and made permanently (unlike most of us who, no matter how committed we are when we've transformed to our feminine selves, will transform back at some time in the future: hours, days, weeks...). The only question left is how the body will be "conditioned" in order to make the support of the transition easier. The FTCD might get tired of breastforms, might get tired of body hair, tired of wigs, etc, etc. Eventually, even though the mental process has not changed, s/he is feminizing an ever-more feminine body, sliding to what most would, on the surface, consider a non-op TS.

Ok...it's just my opinion and my view of things. You can see I've thought about how my own situation might progress and that's how I would see it if it were that to happen. I, personally, am not fond of the rapid frequency of transition and fondly look at the mystical future where the length of stay in any one gender is longer and longer. I also more and more see that the transition is a mental one first, and a physical one second.

It's just a little window into the mind of a bigendered biological male :)

tina

[ReineD]

I can't tell you how awesome you all are for caring enough to answer my question. THANK YOU! It does help, and it will help other SOs who wonder about this too.

I know how distasteful it is for many people to have labels assigned to them and I do see your points. But it is helpful for those of us who are in relationships with you, if we can begin to understand what makes you tick! :hugs:

:love:

[Mirani]

What remains is a philosophical question of the difference between a "man who lives as a woman" and a "woman who was born into a male body". I think that the only respectful thing to do is honor what the person identifies as, and forgive if she is wrong. (even she may not know for sure)


Wise words indeed. :thumbsup:

[Satrana]

I think they are the same thing. Once you believe permanently living as a female is the correct choice for yourself then you have crossed a line in the sand and have changed your gender identity. Some just do not want to accept the TS label because they were not born thinking they were female.

If you have genuinely believed yourself to be a woman all your life then having a male body generates significant distress. Ridding yourself of the unwanted parts would be a central focus.

Then there are those who have been fine growing up as male and have enjoyed the male parts and taken advantage of the male social role, who later make a conscious decision that their preferred gender role is female. Whether they call themselves a FT CD or Non-op TS is up to them and probably reflects the importance they attach to perfecting the female image.

[CharleneT]

Lots of wonderful answers !

I'll throw this out, to me the question is what are the similarities between a FT CD and a non-op TS ? There is a major one: they both dress as a woman (well, you could say they both present as a woman, but many CD's don't do that perse). After that, the differences are many and the similarities are minor. As well, there are non-op TS folks who do not dress as a woman, or present that way at all. Confounding this of course is that fact that many CD's turn out to be TS . . . . but I chalk that up to fear of self realization more than anything else.

[Rhonda Jean]

First of all I must say that a question from you, Reine, gets a little extra thought from me! Luv ya!

For me, the difference would be mostly internal. Externally I suppose if I had a boob job (only) and/or took hormones I'd feel like I had gone beyond CD status and would more accurately described as non-op TS. Other than that it'd just be the diference in how I felt about myself, and possibly what side of the bed I got up on.

I'll throw out one more thing that I think may be even more important in this context. Even as a label-hater myself, I've used them all when referring to myself. My choice of terms was/is situational. I used them to convey an idea that I felt would tend to cause others to see me and treat me in a particular way based on how they interpreted those terms. For instance, when my wife insisted that I was a woman, I insisted that I was only a CD (inferrings that I could choose either to do it or not). The best example of when I chose the TS or non-op TS term is at the beauty school where I went every few weeks.

There were lots of reasons that I prefered to be known here as non-op TS. From a practical standpoint, I think it conveyed a sense to them that I wanted them cut/color/style my hair, do my nails, shape my brows, etc. in ways that would accentuate my femininity, without a thought of me ever having to present as a male. Just as importantly, in this environment, with so many women and lots of time for idle chit-chat, it allowed me to fit in in a way that I don't tink I would have if they'd seen me as an occasional crossdresser. I don't know that for a fact, I just strongly suspect. I usually had two or three girls sitting around talking to me while I had my hair or nails done. On two occasions a few of us went to lunch together. They became my friends. We talked about all the things that I suppose women talk about among themselves (and then some). I doubt that I would have ever heard, "OMG, you're boobs look fabulous!" (when wearing a really low cut top), or would have engaged in meaningful conversations about boob jobs if they hadn't viewed me as the closest thing to a woman without actually having been born one.

To sum it up, I chose the terms to fit the situation. Dishonest? That's probably not as clear as it might seem. Maybe it wasn't just my term of the moment that was situational. Maybe my actual mindset and self-perception that was situational, too.

If you were beginning to get any clarity on this subject by reading the previous posts, maybe this will cloud the water all over again for you. Unfortunately, this is a moving target. Sorry.

Rhonda

[Madame George]

What is the difference between a FT CD (or a "want-to-be" FT CD), and a non-op TS?

semantics and personal identity

[eluuzion]

I'm assuming that the FT CD wants to be female full time? Therefore must identify as female? But so many say they are full time (or want to be full time) but they are male. If they are male, then why present as full time female? Honestly, I don't understand. +?



“If I think, and therefore I am, am I just a thought?”:doh:

Whenever I see a discussion about “labels”, I always think of this…
“Why is the word “therapist” spelled the same as
“the rapist” ???

I have been in “sales” in one form or another my whole life. (most people have) There are several “key rules” to successful communication that have potential to “make you” or “break you”, particularly when conversing with a potential “client”. One of them is to never assume your client defines terms, “labels” and “acronyms” the same as you do. It is really a simple concept…I just ask for clarification. Even if I think I “know”, I ask anyway…it makes people feel important. (“intelligent”)

Anytime I am tempted to use the word "assume", I know it is time to clarify. (it appears you follow the same rule, lol)

I try to avoid using any “term” or “language” that members of a particular group seem to understand, but nobody outside of the group understands. It’s just confusing. (It is also one of the hallmarks of a “cult”, lol).

Nothing is more fuzzy to me than acronyms, titles, degrees and such. If I can’t find it in resources like this…I consider whatever it is to be questionable, and move on.

Acronyms & Abbreviations etc. Dictionaries
http://www.counselingseattle.com/acronyms/xyz.htm#other_acronym

So, I am not familiar with the any "generic" or "universal" definition of FT CD.
(I am still working on the actual meaning of "OK"...) :heehee:

HaveFun/BeHappy,

Eluuzion, ABE (amateur breast examiner) :love:

[Rianna Humble]

amateur breast examiner

Following your example, could you clarify what you mean by "amateur breast" please? :heehee:

[Stephanie-L]

Reine, great thought provoking question.
Personally, I have no idea. I like Sammy's "classifications" even though I think they are rather oversimplified, as I fit into about four of them. I think that gender in general is a spectrum, with those who are totally 100% set in their birth gender on one end and those who are totally 100% set in their reassigned gender at the other and the vast majority of folks somewhere in between. I would think most folks are happy with birth gender but do have the occasional thought, feeling, etc, of the opposite, put them at the top of the bell curve if you will. The difference between a FT CD and a non-op TS, not really much, and I think the two would go back and forth on the spectrum, with the CD thinking, possibly very seriously, about TS, and the TS sometimes regretting and wishing to be "only" a CD. It is in the nature of humans to be this way, and in general I would say that anyone who is saying they are firmly totally 100% one way or the other is probably either lying to themselves or simply deluded. As I tell my patients about to have surgery when they apologise for being nervous, "If you weren't nervous, you wouldn't be normal". It is in our natures to question and doubt and worry. And of course one should consider the truth hidden in the old joke "What is the difference between a CD and a TS, about two years". Anyway, just some of my ramblings on the subject.....Stephanie