Label vs Community

[Marcelle]

Hi all,

As you can see by my tag line "Labels are for soup cans" I am not a fan. However, what I need to clarify is what I mean by that phrase. I do not like labels in that we spend too much time justifying what they mean and they always tend to spiral into debate over right and wrong.

Now when I talk about labels, I am not talking about the term "Transgender". Indeed if you look at the definition of label while Transgender could be included it does not match in my opinion:

Label: a word or phrase which is used to describe a person, group, or thing, but which is unfair or not correct e.g., Cross Dressers are all perverts . . . or all transgendered people want to change sexes. The label and the connection is linked to a misrepresentation/understanding of the term.

In my book Transgender is a community of strong, proud and supportive individuals all working (in whatever way they deem fit) toward a common goal . . . acceptance :daydreaming:.

Community: a feeling of fellowship with others, as a result of sharing common attitudes, interests, and goals.

IMO transgender is not a label so "yes", I will identify myself as "Transgendered" to anyone who asks. Where this goes wrong and I tend to get a bit miffed :waiting: is when we "the community" spend way too much time trying to figure out what "transgendered" means. Specifically what constitutes membership or who has the right to call themselves "TG". Should I be allowed to call myself TG because I go out in public, tell others . . . or . . . do I have to fight the good fight and storm the ramparts of public opinion, march in pride parades. This is when "community" transcends into "labelling".

Goodness . . . let's just accept the fact we are all different and that we belong to this wonderful community of strong, vibrant, productive, normal beings and stop trying to put a definition on the term TG. We are not a label (that is the point of my tag line) we are a community and the sooner we realize that and just go on being in whatever direction we need to go (to each their own) then we can move toward acceptance.

So are labels for soup cans? You bet because "soup" is not a community. Is a label or series of labels sufficient to describe what it means to be Transgendered? IMHO absolutely not as we are too eclectic to have one definition. We do share common attitudes, interests and goals and that my friends is what makes us a community . . . all of us. Not some narrowly defined label.:) :thumbsup:

[BLUE ORCHID]

Hi Isha, There are some people that love labels not me, But like a wise lady once said, To each their Own.

[Katey888]

Isha,

How could I disagree... (particularly when your frustration is beginning to show... ;)) - and I don't disagree with what you're saying in the context of community.

I'm more than happy to put my hand up here with respect to holding a TG banner... Of course, being constrained by my closet in other ways does rather reduce the impact of what I can do, but that doesn't prevent my unequivocal support of that in principle.

My only caution would be just what that word means to others... :) Good old Wikipedia has a fairly comprehensive entry that I can subscribe to - but look on something like 'Yahoo answers' :facepalm: and there are some scary and plain stupid interpretations... but I suppose a modicum of misunderstanding is always going to be there whatever and however we try to define it.

So - now that's sorted, what next? Or do we wait for someone to disagree and bundle 'em... ;)

Katey x

[Marcelle]

No frustration on my part Katey :battingeyelashes: :devil: I just want to point out there is a clear distinction between the pejorative use of labels and what constitutes community. Transgender IMHO is not a label. If some choose to make it a label (pejorative use) or others try to label it to exclude/include others or even themselves, that is their right . . . who am I to judge.

This is my view on things and people can agree or disagree as they see fit . . . no harm no foul, no bounce no play :D I just wanted clarify that when it comes to labels (pejorative use or wrong use) IHMO that dog don't hunt. :battingeyelashes:

Hugs

Isha

[Donnagirl]

I've decided I'm normal.... It's everyone else needs a label...

[NicoleScott]

Isha, as many have pointed out, the problem with labels is that we can't agree on definitions. Transgender, for example.
Oh, the irony, that you define "label" with your own spin - as descriptions that are unfair or incorrect.
No wonder we argue about labels - we can't agree on a definition of the very word.

[Jenny Elwood]

Now girls, please don't fight. You made me reconsider the post I was about to make...

[Zylia]

OK so labels are generally unpleasant and we shouldn't apply them to people. That however doesn't stop a guy in a dress from being a cross-dresser. It's a word to describe a person with certain attributes within a certain context and most of these are pretty clear. We as a 'community' however are very good at muddying the waters with all that postmodern "nothing is true" BS. I think cross-dressers are as much a community as people with prescription glasses.

[Marcelle]

Isha . . . Oh, the irony, that you define "label" with your own spin - as descriptions that are unfair or incorrect.

Nicole,

Not my spin on the definition but Webster's and a whole host of other dictionary definitions. The other definitions range from "tiny piece of paper used to identify some item" to "tag/description to define ownership or manufacture". So no "irony" intended just my understanding of the term label as defined by others :)

Hugs

Isha

[Ineke Vashon]

The only label I like to see is "half price, today only" :D

Ineke

[Jacqueline Winona]

A thoughtful post deserves a thoughtful response, even though we don't agree on this one, Isha. In my opinion (and years of arguing over this hasn't changed my opinion at all, nor have I convinced anyone else I'm right), Transgender refers to people who are actively engaging in dressing, seeking a transition, actually transitioning, dating members of the same gender (whether pre or post transition) because they are members of the same gender. Yes, it's broad, but I don't see how it could ever apply to a hetero CD who dresses at home, doesn't interact with people while dressed except at costume parties, etc. The distinction, at least in the U.S., is that people in the first group in my example do suffer discrimination. Those of us at home don't, we can take or leave this. We don't have desires to date men when we are dressed, thus we really don't have that much in common with the rest of the LGB group. But those who do, or those who date women after or during transition, do relate to the rest of the LGB community. This does not mean, as many accuse, that we have no sympathy for the LGBT community or are afraid to admit we're a part of it, we just do not and never will see how what we do has anything in common with those who are living their lives in the public eye while dressed.
Maybe this helps, maybe it doesn't. By analogy, it would be like me saying "anyone who dresses out of their home on a regular basis is really a transsexual, regardless of whether they know it or believe it." My statement wouldn't be accurate and would probably offend a number of people, as not everyone wants to be part of the bigger group or should be lumped into an umbrella group.

[mechamoose]

Hi Isha!

(big fan)

Part of it is labels (their labels irk us more than our labels do), part of it is community. I'm not a 'standard' CD person. After swimming in the waters here for while, I recognize that I'm an outlier.

We all naturally want to feel included and accepted. We want a community that supports that. This is an awesome space.

If I showed up at a gathering of members who passed or transitioned, I recognize that I would stick out like a big red flag. A large part of me would tell me to NOT show up so that I didn't wreck things for those of you who have put in so much time and effort. I'd *still* want to be there though, because that is where I'd find people who *get* it.

>conflicted<

-MM

[NicoleScott]

OK, Isha, I stand corrected. I did find a source (but not "a whole host of other...") that included "inaccurate" in its definition. Definitions are arranged from most commonly used to least, and this one was way down the list. I guess this illustrates the problem with some labels: some people see them as neutral descriptive terms and others see them in a negative way.

[Zylia]

Kinda like how 'cross-dresser' is a neutral descriptive term according to some while others see it in a negative way. Coincidence?

[mechamoose]

Zylia.. cross dresser is the simple, easy label. People tend to grab on to that first. More than that requires more involvement, which requires that you care more than you would with a casual (public) encounter.

People who know me and are my friends get it, I don't expect the average person on the street to do so.

[Zylia]

I'd say John Q. Public doesn't 'get' cross-dressers either. Hell, I gladly identify as 'cross-dresser' and there a plenty of other cross-dressers who don't get me. We're all special, but ultimately though, I'm still a dude in a dress.

[NicoleScott]

To me and many others, crossdresser and transvestite mean the same, the difference being English vs. Latin-based. But many people prefer crossdresser and are highly offended by transvestite and its negative (mostly sexual) connotations, or so they think.

[Katey888]

In my opinion (and years of arguing over this hasn't changed my opinion at all, nor have I convinced anyone else I'm right), Transgender refers to people who are actively engaging in dressing, seeking a transition, actually transitioning, dating members of the same gender (whether pre or post transition) because they are members of the same gender. Yes, it's broad, but I don't see how it could ever apply to a hetero CD who dresses at home, doesn't interact with people while dressed except at costume parties, etc.

Jacqueline - I think you've demonstrated part of the problem.. Your definition here is way different from mine, and probably from Isha's, and certainly from Wikipedia (not that I'm suggesting it's the absolute resource for everything, but it is a good starting point...). Wiki clearly includes transvestite or cross-dresser in transgender identities... Question for you, from me, would be: are you prepared to accept a 3rd party definition of TG? :)

The rest of your post is a good example of how definitions and myth mix and I think relates to how some here may be offended by the classification TG... If you asked me six months ago if I was TG I would have told you no... That was my ignorance at work... having read a lot here and other academic papers, I am now better informed.

We have to be prepared to be open-minded not just about who we share this community with, but also if we are prepared to accept objective views of how the community can be classified. If we can't do that, it will be more difficult for some parts of our community to make progress - not impossible, but more difficult...

Katey x

[Rachael Leigh]

Labeling has had many not so good consequence's throughout history I mean Germany in the 30s and 40s for example look what happened even if you did business with a Jew. Now that is extreme but I think you understand what I mean. Isha is right in that while society puts labels on us we don't have to agree with it.
We mostly are men who have families, spouses and children that we love and care for them. I for one still don't understand why I do what I do but if it were something else I still would not want to be labeled.

[Beverley Sims]

I have been labelled mad, stupid, idiotic and many unmentionable names.
But I strongly support 'labels for soup cans', so there is not much thought from this neck of the woods.

'Labels' is bordering on 'what colour panties are you wearing?' yep, it's wearing me down. :)

[Dianne S]

For better or for worse, the human brain is designed to categorize. We've evolved that as a survival mechanism. I will inevitably get labeled. so I might as well embrace the labels.

The key is that I am more than just the sum of my labels. While all the labels people apply to me describe some aspect of my being, they don't define me totally.

[PaulaQ]

Honestly, as a community we are mostly invisible. To the outside world, we may as well not even exist. Many of them would prefer that we didn't.

No, you don't have to march in a pride parade - simply doing what you do Isha, and being out in public is plenty good enough to increase our visibility. The world needs to know we exist, and that we are people, not monsters.

The internal disputes in our community disturb me too. We need to pull together, despite our differences, if we want to survive at all. Because the hatred we face is the same.

[Amanda M]

Isha - thought provoking as usual. Mostly, we use labels as shorthand, because often, if we did not, then it would take to long to communicate what we mean. In my business, they can be useful - that said, I detest statements from clinicians of the sort that say "She's a bipolar", for example. It demeans the person, and her condition. However, if a colleague says "She suffers from bipolar disorder", it gives me a great deal of information about what that person might be going through. Labelling - as a means of elucidating on a persons behavior or lifestyle, if it is done with sensitivity, can be useful.

However, when it is done simply to put a person into a category, it is, to me, abhorrent. Every profession uses jargon, (in my case, psychobabble) between it's members. Hopefully, all those involved can see past the labelling to the person underneath. It is easy, though for people outside the particular discipline to get hold of the wrong end of the stick. In summary, for me, labelling is fine within a professional context - for example "This organism is gram negative, non-gasproducing and halophilic". Your average bacteriologist would know exactly what that means, but outside the lab, it is open to misinterpretation.

So Isha, in general, I don't like labels - especially on open fora such as this, but they do have their place.

Finally, my butt hurts from sitting on the fence.

[Marcelle]

Okay, okay . . . I surrender no more talk about labels or engaging in label banter or all things labels (still not going to give up my tag line though).

However my one question is . . . Beverly what colour are your panties? :):devil:

Hugs

Isha

[Kate Simmons]

I think we should put it away for awhile in a storage tub and label it. ;):)

[mechamoose]

You didn't ask me, but I'm wearing bright green ones today :)

[GretchenJ]

Hi Isha,

You causing trouble again :D

Labels are a problem, when there is someone who has a disagreement with it. Cross-dresser is a non controversial term/label because it is a noun. Nouns are easy because it is digital (yes/no)

Transgender is a different term, because to some, it implies that the end result is either gay or SRS. Part of this is that another label that does this is 'LBGT' in which we comprise a very small minority of that community. In my opinion, this is not the case at all. In my world


Not all cross-dressers are transgendered
All transsexuals are transgendered
If you dress for sexual gratification, you are probably not a TG
If you like to dress, but underneath you are still a guy, probably not TG
If you dress to help come to grips with your feminine side of your personality, you are probably TG.
If you feel that your personality is part male and part female, and clothes are just a tool to enhance that, but is not necessary, then you are probably TG


Based upon my own and only my own, I consider myself to be TG. What I do know, without hesitation, that Isha is spot on correct. - you may disagree with the label that you or whoever has place upon you, but this is a very intelligent, observant, supportive to a fault community, and that I am very proud to be a member of

[PaulaQ]

@Gretchen - being transgender doesn't have anything to do with your sexual orientation.

Also, whether it's sexual for you or not doesn't really matter. All it does is suggest you probably aren't at a stage where you'll transition. (Maybe...) Unfortunately it doesn't predict your future.

[Jacqueline Winona]

Jacqueline - I think you've demonstrated part of the problem.. Your definition here is way different from mine, and probably from Isha's, and certainly from Wikipedia (not that I'm suggesting it's the absolute resource for everything, but it is a good starting point...). Wiki clearly includes transvestite or cross-dresser in transgender identities... Question for you, from me, would be: are you prepared to accept a 3rd party definition of TG? :)

The rest of your post is a good example of how definitions and myth mix and I think relates to how some here may be offended by the classification TG... If you asked me six months ago if I was TG I would have told you no... That was my ignorance at work... having read a lot here and other academic papers, I am now better informed.

We have to be prepared to be open-minded not just about who we share this community with, but also if we are prepared to accept objective views of how the community can be classified. If we can't do that, it will be more difficult for some parts of our community to make progress - not impossible, but more difficult...

Katey x

Katey, thank you for the comment and question, I appreciate both the inquisitiveness and the tone of your comment. I asked myself, why does this term bother me so much, and after a lot of soul searching researched it and did find a definition that I believe is appropriate and is in line with my thinking. From UC Berkeley:
Transgender

Transgender

Transgender (sometimes shortened to trans or TG) people are those whose psychological self ("gender identity") differs from the social expectations for the physical sex they were born with. To understand this, one must understand the difference between biological sex, which is one's body (genitals, chromosomes, ect.), and social gender, which refers to levels of masculinity and femininity. Often, society conflates sex and gender, viewing them as the same thing. But, gender and sex are not the same thing.Transgender people are those whose psychological self ("gender identity") differs from the social expectations for the physical sex they were born with. For example, a female with a masculine gender identity or who identifies as a man.
An umbrella term for transsexuals, cross-dressers (transvestites), transgenderists, gender queers, and people who identify as neither female nor male and/or as neither a man or as a woman. Transgender is not a sexual orientation;transgender people may have any sexual orientation. It is important to acknowledge that while some people may fit under this definition of transgender, they may not identify as such.
As you can see, there are two definitions, and you agree with one, I agree with just the first. The law generally recognizes the first definition, but not the second (not always, of course). To me, TG is a lot more than dressing once in a while, popping on a message board every few weeks, etc. If the second applies, are we really TG all the time or only when we dress? Can the prom kings in the post above call themselves TG because they are cross-dressing for an occasion? I see this as part of your core-being. Either you are all TG or you're just not, and I'm not. A few years ago a particularly obnoxious poster (long gone now) tried convincing all of us that the difference between a CD and a TS was "two years." In other words, once you admitted you were a CD you were bound to be a TS in time. I thought that was the most ridiculous comment I'd ever heard then, and still do. But the notion that we are all TG whether we want to be or not strikes me as being nearly as incredulously wrong as the "two years" line. I support anyone who claims to be a TG to a point (never going to agree with sports, having a really hard time thinking any genetic male should ever be in my daughter's lockerroom, but that's the dad in me), but no,I'm not willing to bend on this one. This isn't convincing me that the kid in the saggy pants and baseball cap who utters strange sounds is really not a bad guy as my daughter's boyfriend, this is about who I am, and on that I don't compromise. Before I again (yes. I've been through this argument several times here) get accused of not supporting TG rights, know that I do support the core beliefs of TG's and empathize strongly with them. But I can't pretend that I am TG when I know in my heart that I am not.

[Michelle789]

There are no labels with regards to being TG. There is no right or wrong way to be TG.

Dressing for sexual gratification may be strictly a fetish, or may be a sign of being TG or TS. You may or may not end up transitioning.

Many stay fetish dressers for life. Many go from being a fetish dresser to a non-fetish dresser but remain male identified CDs. Many go from being a fetish dresser to being a TG but not TS nor transitioning. And many go from being a fetish dresser to be a TS and end up transitioning.

There is no right or wrong way to be trans, or to be a cross-dresser.

You may be a male-identified CD. You may be a TG but not TS. You might be dual gender, bigender, two-spirit, genderqueer, androgynous, or something else entirely. You may be a TS.

I'm trying to learn that it's important to be me, my authentic self, without worrying about labels or what others think. This isn't easy, but I'm working at it.

We are all God's children. I am me, and you are you.

[GretchenJ]

@Gretchen - being transgender doesn't have anything to do with your sexual orientation.

Also, whether it's sexual for you or not doesn't really matter. All it does is suggest you probably aren't at a stage where you'll transition. (Maybe...) Unfortunately it doesn't predict your future.

Hi Paula - totally agree with you! My point was that being bundled as the T in the LBGT, some people in error make that leap
I think we are on the same page!

[GretchenJ]

There are no labels with regards to being TG. There is no right or wrong way to be TG

Many stay fetish dressers for life...

We are all God's children. I am me, and you are you.

Correct, there are so many darn variables it is impossible to make a conclusive definition.. And at the end of the day, it really doesn't matter, does it ?

Amen to that.

[Lucy_Bella]

Correct, there are so many darn variables it is impossible to make a conclusive definition.. And at the end of the day, it really doesn't matter, does it ?

Amen to that.

Correct I feel the same" gender spectrum" ...

Some may Identify fast and may skip all stages ( Trans Sexual ).. This is Gender Identity..You want your Bio sex to match your Gender..

Some may start out dressing as a "fetish" or "because it feels right" and the feminine/masculine feelings may grow or become a part of life..( dual gender /trans gender ) some may even go full time opposite of Bio sex but never transition and some may..transition... But many may dress only part time This can be both Gender Identity or After Fetish..

Some may not go past the fetish stage but may fully dress by adding to the fetish over time .. The amount of time dressed could or can grow longer as the need for gratification drops or diminishes.. This is a different feeling not related to gender identity.. Not Trans Gender..

[Jilmac]

Hi Isha, and thanks for a very thought provoking thread. I often use the term "transgender" when describing our community, however when describing myself, I prefer bi gender which by my definition is a person who is just as comfortable presenting as a woman or a man.

[JenniferYager]

Isha, what is it with you and soup? What did soup ever do to you?

224229

[Adriana Moretti]

Labels??? I thought all you cd's were gay? am i wrong? i like the label ( unique) I will take that anyday.

[Lady Slipper]

Wow, this thread has just made so mad I can't think of anything I can post that won't be deleted by the Mods. Wow, just wow, in this place of all places. I used to think the "tranny-er than thou" attitude was a myth. I see now how wrong I was, and that makes me terribly sad. If we can't hang together, we will surely hang separately.

[PaulaQ]

I used to think the "tranny-er than thou" attitude was a myth. I see now how wrong I was, and that makes me terribly sad. If we can't hang together, we will surely hang separately.

Hon, only a couple of us who are transsexual have even posted on this thread - I think mostly it's been me. If I've said anything to convey a "trannier than thou" attitude, please PM me about it - I can assure you that this has *never* been my intention. I have nothing but love and respect for the CDs of this forum, and consider us all to be sisters. But if I've said anything that has offended you, please let me know and give me a chance to explain myself, and hopefully make things right. Because I agree with you that we have to stick together.

[Zylia]

I kinda jumped ship because of Godwin's Rule of Nazi Analogies, but I only see "not tranny at all" attitudes in this thread.

[Michelle (Oz)]

Wow, this thread has just made so mad I can't think of anything I can post that won't be deleted by the Mods. Wow, just wow, in this place of all places. I used to think the "tranny-er than thou" attitude was a myth. I see now how wrong I was, and that makes me terribly sad. If we can't hang together, we will surely hang separately.


I kinda jumped ship because of Godwin's Rule of Nazi Analogies, but I only see "not tranny at all" attitudes in this thread.

I had decided to ignore this thread having the same reaction as Lady Slipper and Zylia. I just find this sort of discussion as WTF ... if 'we' can't work it out what chance does the public have. Do we simply spread even greater confusion?

As I posted in a similar thread the world around us does apply labels whether we like it or not. The vast majority see life in very simple, clear and easily understood terms - male or female. The 'GLB' part of 'GLTB' also fit into that simple dichotomy - perhaps the reason we are isolated.

I am very comfortable labelling myself as TG. In some ways such a label makes it easier for me to understand and accept myself. I am accepted in the community as me and doubt that friends and acquaintances waste much time trying to understand me.

What I won't enter into is an unfulfilling and unproductive debate about whether I am more or less TG than others, or whether as a CDer I even qualify. It is better IMO for us to accept that labels will be used and to shape their use than to debate the finer points well beyond society's (mis)understanding.

Michelle

[ReineD]

Isha, there are many disputes here about labels, but I don't think it's because members use the terms pejoratively. Who here will say that their fellow members are perverts?

There are, however, disagreements about what the terms mean. Here is a sampling of the many ways that people define "transgender" for themselves. And "crossdresser". And "fetish".

Transgender: an umbrella term for groups of people who transcend culturally defined categories of gender, including gender roles and/or presentation. This includes DQ, DK, CD, genderqueer, bigender, gender non-conforming, gender-variant, etc.

Transgender: a synonym for transsexual (this is used extensively in the media).

Transgender: a term used by transsexuals who wish to distance themselves from the "sexual" part of the term "transsexual".

Transgender: a term used by transsexuals who do not wish to have SRS.

Transgender: a term used by individuals who feel they are more than "crossdresser", but not quite "transsexual".

Transgender: a term used by crossdressers who believe that the term "crossdresser" has a negative, fetish association.

Transgender: a term used by individuals because it's just plain easier. They are tired of all the disagreements about all the terms.

Crossdresser: a term used by men who engage in the behavior solely for the purpose of sexual gratification.

Crossdresser: a term used by individuals who need to express femininity for other than sexual reasons.

Crossdresser: a term used by men who dress in feminine clothing but who are adamant they are men and so adamant that any term that has "gender" in it (transgender, crossgender) does not apply to them. They don't feel they cross any gender barriers.

Crossdresser: a term used by individuals who present fully as women.

Crossdresser: a term used by individuals who present as men wearing feminine clothing.

Fetish (older definition): a perverted sexual practice.

Fetish (newer definition): an alternate, valid, healthy preference for non-standard sexual practices.


Isha … can you see why so many people here shy away from defining themselves? No one can agree on any of the terms! At least the term "transsexual" is fairly straight forward … except even this term carries with it disagreements as to whether a non-transitioning and/or non SRS individual is transsexual.

I like Benjamin's categories. Levels I to VI. No disagreements necessary.

[PaulaQ]

I think one of the big reasons people here don't like the term transgender is that being lumped into a category with transsexuals seems pretty extreme (and rather scary) to someone who's "just a CD". It's especially scary for wives. It's a category that seems to have this huge question mark hanging over it - will you transition?

Of course most on this forum won't *ever* transition.

But some of you will, and the truth is, nobody knows who will transition and who won't transition in advance.

It's a scary thing to have dangling over your heads - I acknowledge this.

[Lucy_Bella]

Transgender..The original label coined by professionals for Trans Sexual because many Trans people did not like "sex" in the original label for Trans Sexual..

Why the label became a umbrella for all Trans people and how is not certain but many believe it happened due to the internet from Individuals typing in Trans* with a asterisk* for "Trans Masculine" or "Trans Vestite" for discovering their own experience .. But older 80's GLBT message boards suggest the term was always T*.

However in the 90's Trans* was the chosen click for describing the younger generations experience while searching the internet which could mean a new label today is only one click away..

[ReineD]

Transgender..The original label coined by professionals for Trans Sexual because many Trans people did not like "sex" in the original label for Trans Sexual..

Lucy, sorry to disagree again, but the term "transgender" (or transgenderist) originates from the 1970s when Virginia Prince wanted a term that would describe her. She wanted to live as a woman full time while retaining her male body. She didn't feel that the term "transsexual" applied to her because she did not want to change her physical sex.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Virginia_Prince

[Lucy_Bella]

Lucy, sorry to disagree again, but the term "transgender" (or transgenderist) originates from the 1970s]
Actually no it didn't in fact she never used the word transgender until the 80's..


Virginia Prince is oftentimes given credit for coining the term “transgenderist” and “transgenderism” in 1978. In 1977, Prince writes of three types of different types of trans experiences: “regular transvestite or femmiphile”; class two—those males who live as women openly and in society; and class three—those who undergo or who “seriously plan” sex change surgery. There’s no mention of “transgenderism,” “transgender,” “transgenderal” or “transgenderist.” She goes on to wrote: “People in class two know the difference (between sexual and genderal identity) and consciously elect to change their gender identity without surgery . . . Since class two people recognize the difference between sex and gender we can make a conscious decision to become a woman—a psycho-social gender creature.” As late as 1977, Prince is not using this term.

It should be noted that when Prince was 81 years old, she said that she the thought she might have said the term “transgenderist” at a conference in 1974 or 75; however, around that same time, she also told Leslie Feinberg that she coined the term in the late 1980s:

“The term transgenderist was first introduced into the English language by trans warrior Virginia Prince. Virginia told me, ‘I coined the noun transgenderist in 1987 or ’88. There had to be some name for people like myself who trans the gender barrier – meaning somebody who lives full time in the gender opposite to their anatomy. I have not transed the sex barrier.’” – Transgender Warriors by Leslie Feinberg, 1996, page X of introduction


I should also note that prior to that being "coined" People who lived opposite of their bio sex were considered Transexuals.. I think again we are agreeing ( so when I said TS it was meaning pre 80's logic ) :)

[Katey888]

Wikipedia indicates the term was first coined in 1965 by psychiatrist John F. Oliven ? And first used by Virginia Prince in 1969 in an issue of Transvestia? If we trust Wiki ;) isn't it plausible the term was being used from the late 60s on in discussions amongst folk not dissimilar to ourselves, trying to understand and describe the what and why of all the flavours of our shared passion?

Now we're getting into debating origins of a word which we still can't completely agree on the meaning of!

Reine - your earlier post listing the diverse interpretations of both TG and CD (and probably not all of them either...) was very pertinent to Isha's original point - we sometimes seem to place more emphasis on fragmentation than community; defining our own little silo rather than accepting we are part of a bigger picture, perhaps because justifiably, some of us are reticent to be categorised with others. Perfectly understandable, as I believe there also existed (or exists) similar semantic conflicts amongst the LGB community.

How about we put TV, TG and TS together as the 'BIG-T' community? Or just 'T' or Trans? That is common to all the descriptors....? And there can't be anyone who doesn't fit under that... can there...???

(OK - I know it won't fly, but I felt I had to try... :doh:)

Can we please also try to keep the discussion on Isha's OP around Community?

Now I must go back to negotiating a truce between Kiev and Moscow...

Da svidaniya, tovarich...

Katey x

[ReineD]

Reine - your earlier post listing the diverse interpretations of both TG and CD (and probably not all of them either...) was very pertinent to Isha's original point - we sometimes seem to place more emphasis on fragmentation than community; defining our own little silo rather than accepting we are part of a bigger picture, perhaps because justifiably, some of us are reticent to be categorised with others. Perfectly understandable, as I believe there also existed (or exists) similar semantic conflicts amongst the LGB community.

Totally agree. :)

But at the same time, I think it would be useful for researchers perhaps to come up with a system of identity (adequate and precise words are very helpful for those in the process of self-identification) in order to differentiate among the major groupings in this community. And preferably this system of identity would not suggest that one level is "more than" or "less than" another.

The community may be formed of millions of individuals all with their own personalities and sense of identity, but still there is a finite number of major groupings of individuals ... although it is foolish, IMO to expect everyone to fit in only three separate categories CD, TG, & TS. We all know the quibbling that goes on trying to decide what those terms mean. :p We do need to get rid of qualifiers like "true", "genuine", "pseudo", "primary" vs. "secondary", etc. Or even words like "fetish", which many people take to mean "deprived" or "perverted" when increasingly it is considered a healthy alternate sexual expression.

[JaneHenderson]

I used to think we were all scared of our sexuality. Now I realize that there are too many types of sexual desires (and their absence) among us to even countenance categorization. In my experience the things we seem to share, invariably, are intelligence and wit...xx

[Jacqueline Winona]

True, Jane, very true. What we have in common are 1) we are all male, unless we are female, and 2) we all agree, except when we disagree. We are so very different. HRC recognizes this as well (from their website):
Is there a difference between cross-dressing and being transgender?

Yes, cross-dressing refers to people who wear clothing and/or makeup and accessories that are not traditionally associated with their biological sex.

Many people who cross-dress are comfortable with their assigned sex and generally do not wish to change it. Cross-dressing is a form of gender expression that is not necessarily indicative of a person’s gender identity or sexual orientation.

[KellyJameson]

A label when applied to oneself can be a useful tool to deepen self awareness and understanding.

The problem with labels is while they may expand ones understanding of self they also increase the risk of limiting the very understanding one seeks because by there very nature they are self limiting so you in essence have placed yourself in a box.

A label also can be loaded emotionally because once applied to the self or others it carries with it the cultural and social history of the word.

I associated the word transvestite with crazy and mentally ill (Rocky Horror Picture Show) for many years and this was my own internalized transsexual phobia which at its core was the fear of a deeper truth that my subconscious mind was aware of.

Typically those on the LGBT spectrum , crossdressers, ect... have not been shown in a positive light in western culture so there can be great resistance to applying the label to oneself which than prevents or slows down self acceptance and self understanding.

Applying the label can trigger fear in others who may at some point become comfortable applying the label once they have moved beyond their fears.

The label becomes part of ones identity. Think of the labels that are readily embraced such as brave, smart,wise,couragous, ect...

If the label casts the person in a negative light in their own eyes or they fear it will in the eyes of others or if it defines them in ways they do not agree with or are not ready to agree with than there will likely be resistance.

In the end it is my opinion that labels are private matters and it is best to refrain from applying them to others.

Usefull but dangerous tools toward enlightenment.

[Lucy_Bella]

If the label casts the person in a negative light in their own eyes or they fear it will in the eyes of others or if it defines them in ways they do not agree with or are not ready to agree with than there will likely be resistance.

In the end it is my opinion that labels are private matters and it is best to refrain from applying them to others.

Usefull but dangerous tools toward enlightenment. Yes and thank you for saying that.. In the eyes of so many we are all the same no matter where we fall in the gender spectrum ..I did not pick the label so many apply to me in fact nobody did .. In the eyes of the professionals we all have our own labels in the eyes of the public we have different labels ,but more important we all in some way or another tend to labels ourselves as well..

I do not see why there should be a problem with having an open discussion about it after all we are defining ourselves and I've yet seen anyone try to define one individually unless of course it's that darn old "umbrella term" that a few of us here refuse to accept ,including myself ..Because it doesn't define me...I think a few people understand that now but many still resist the fact that even though we are one community we are not all the same..

[Taylor Ray]

We as a 'community' however are very good at muddying the waters with all that postmodern "nothing is true" BS.

This is most definitely not true, in the sense of truth-telling. But in regards to "truth" in the sense of real truth, the label "truth" is more appropriately delegated to non-descriptive labels (as opposed to truthfully descriptive ones.) This is especially true when one is attempting to tell the truth about wearing dresses and playing the guitar.

[LilSissyStevie]

Wow, I don't think even Judith Butler could have said it better.:beatup:

[Lucy_Bella]

But in regards to "truth" in the sense of real truth, the label "truth" is more appropriately delegated to non-descriptive labels (as opposed to truthfully descriptive ones.) This is especially true when one is attempting to tell the truth about wearing dresses and playing the guitar.

Know what Stevie?..Yeah.. The truth ....Plain and simple ..Brings a lot of understanding..

[Zylia]

This is most definitely not true, in the sense of truth-telling. But in regards to "truth" in the sense of real truth, the label "truth" is more appropriately delegated to non-descriptive labels (as opposed to truthfully descriptive ones.) This is especially true when one is attempting to tell the truth about wearing dresses and playing the guitar.
You just blew my mind. I am Zylia (just a label I use to identify myself), I am me. None of us but me are me, we are all ourselves. A dress is really just a label for something to cover up your naked body. There are no big truths, only small realities.

[Katey888]

Like I said earlier - let's stick to the OP which was slightly more leaning towards Community... :)

Too much philosophical stuff and those interested can move to philosophyforums.com.... :facepalm:

Thank you...

Katey
Moderator