Do you know the 6 categories...Yikes!

[switcheralso]

I was talking to a friend about my C/D and he informed me about Harry Benjamin. I appreciate Harry working hard on the 6 categories but I might fall into TV1, TV2, TV3, TS4, TS5 and TS6...I think there are truly a infinite rage between the categories. What do you think?

http://harrychart.goiar.f-m.fm/Original/OriginalChart.jpg

[jackie_p]

Well, its not binary but it is still too rigid. I agree that there is a whole spectrum of individuals in between
these categories that Harry just tried to lump into bins.

[Katey888]

Heidi - I think your typo might prove to be prescient...


I think there are truly a infinite rage between the categories....

Now we have labels in categories on a TABLE! Yikes indeed!!

I guess Harry did his research and has developed some nice boxes for us all to drop into... :)

Now, I'm just ducking behind this sofa here and we'll see how much collateral damage I can avoid....

(We should be able to fly red flags around the outskirts of threads like they do at the ranges when live firing...)

:hiding:

Katey x

[Kate Simmons]

I had one but the wheels fell off :heehee:. We are who we are, charts notwithstanding. If someone wants to try and categorize that let them knock themselves out I say.:)

[stephNE]

You girls said it - YIKES!

[Nicole Erin]

Everybody thinks they need their own special category. Some will not be happy no matter what you call them.
All this does is make people afraid to talk about it in case they use the wrong silly word.

Remember that you are unique, just like everyone else.

[switcheralso]

Katey888 Thank you for pointing out my typo...It did make me smile and laugh out loud...

[Donnagirl]

And the conundrum continues... Definitely YIKES!

I doubt I will have the stability to ever be categorised... The roundest peg in a world of square pigeon holes....

[Megan70]

I had Cable TV ( TV1) but now have satellite Dish( TV2) and and much happier.:)

Relieves my sexual tension, making libido better .lol:eek::devil:....WTF????

[Zylia]

The Sex Orientation Scale (SOS) was Harry Benjamin's attempt to classify and understand various forms and subtypes of transvestism and transsexualism in biological males, published in 1966. It was a seven-point scale (with three types of transvestism, three types of transsexualism, and one category for typical males); it was analogous to the Kinsey Scale as it relates to sexual orientation, which also had seven categories. Much like Kinsey's understanding of sexual orientation, Benjamin understood the nature of gender identity and gender expression not as a discrete scale, but as a spectrum, a continuum with many variations.

[...]

Benjamin noted, "It must be emphasized again that the remaining six types are not and never can be sharply separated."

Source: Wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Benjamin_scale)

Case closed?

[CarlaWestin]

I was going to sheepishly report where I scored on the TV scale but, of course, the chart clinically and stupidly leans toward curability. The predisposition that TVism is something to suffer from is just ignorant and insulting. But, what else would you expect from the amazingly edgimacated psychobabble clowns.

[Jenniferathome]

[I]The Sex Orientation Scale (SOS) ...published in 1966. ...

Case closed?

Yup. Closed. Freude is pretty famous but NO ONE follows his nonsense science any longer. 1966 was the Jurassic epoch, right?

[Rianna Humble]

Back in the 1960s Harry benjamin was one of the first (if not the first) medical practitioners to take cross-dressing and transsexuality seriously and not treat them as a mental abberation requiring electro convulsive therapy or worse.

He tried to systematise the support and treatment where people wanted treatment and his scale was a major step forward in developing standards of care. His work is still used as the basis for the care standards adopted by the World Professional Association for Transgender Health. Whilst understanding has evolved, we would be wrong to dismiss his work as stupidity or as ignorant.

Of course, you may be amongst those who would prefer the previous answer - ful frontal lobotomy.

[Zylia]

It's definitely not stupid or ignorant, but those who try to interpret his work, including the topic starter, must understand that even Benjamin himself believed that gender identity for biologic males is a continuum rather than six (or seven) distinct categories. The Benjamin types are archetypes (based on the understanding of sexuality and gender of the 1960s), not definitions.

[I Am Paula]

Please girls, remember this is ARCHAIC. Harry Benjamin started writing this chart in 1966, and was dead by 1986. No scholar or Doctor is using it anymore.
Categorizing transgenderism is impossible. Use the chart as a bit of a parlour game, or on a journey of self discovery, but remember there's way more to it, and you may well find yourself in many categories, or none, or two different ones, at opposite ends.
We all have to thank Harry Benjamin for getting the ball rolling, but remember that newer and better research is available.

[CONSUELO]

Whenever a member of this site brings up an issue of "categoraization" or "definition" there are howls of protest that we cannot be described that way.
Knowledge advances in discontinuous steps and categorization is one way of trying to analyse a suite of complex phenomena and some stand the test of time and use and others do not. Categories can be misused and they often fall by the wayside as new understanding comes along. Absent a thorough biological theory of the origin of sexual behaviours, analysis is just one way of trying to gain understanding.
In botany the Linnean categories were used and were found very useful to sort out the huge amount of information. The advent of DNA has shown that many plants have been wrongly assigned. New understanding has allowed better explanations and better sorting and categorization.

One day, the same will happen to our understanding of human behaviour, including sexual orientation and feelings about one's gender. Until then, we have to manage with things like Benjamin' s categories. They are just a way of trying to unravel and understand something that is very complex and will have to change to accommodate new knowledge, so don't get mad at him or his analysis. Do get mad at those who misunderstand and misuse such work.

[Beverley Sims]

I thought TV3 was a good channel to watch in the UK, I notice you do not mention TSA. :)

[Marcelle]

... Now we have labels in categories on a TABLE! Yikes indeed!!

Katey . . . LOL :roflmao: Not even going to touch this one . . . I think I'll just go make some soup :stirthepot: :)

Hugs

Isha

[Adriana Moretti]

Zylia for class president !!!

[sanderlay]

This is very interesting. I was actually looking for some categories of cross-dressing last night, so this is very timely. I was looking for it in terms of the word Transgender. But I think that word came later than this chart? I also appreciate looking at this in a scientific way. It's is true this is old and outdated but it's work was ahead of it's time, as Rianna has pointed out.

The variations on the scale are very limited and it does not appear to take into account an androgynous presentation, anything non-binary, a note about double personality. But with that said I fall into Type three, more or less. Parts of what are said are wrong but on the whole it basically works for me.

If anyone knows of updated work I would be interested in links. :D

[PaulaQ]

Although Harry Benjamin's scale is indeed out of date, you believers in modern science need to keep a few things in mind:

1. The most obvious missing elements from his chart, FTMs and gender queer were pretty unknown in 1966.
2. Benjamin was a genius - his research and inspiration to try cross sex hormone therapy to treat transsexuals was ground breaking. The realization that the minds of TS individuals are gendered indelibly, and that the only treatment is to make the body conform to the mind hasn't been matched in the subsequent 50 years.
3. The developments of SRS, and FFS are really the only two medical developments that have happened for us that are in the same ballpark as Benjamin's development .
4. Most of the subsequent research on TG folks has frankly been shit. That's the most charitable way to talk about it. Most of it ignores the CD, unlike Benjamin.
5. Although flawed, Benjamin's scale is still kinda useful, and pretty damn good for 1966. Compare with Blanchards theory of AGP from the 80's. It should take you about 5-10 minutes in a typical TG support group to find multiple people who don't conform to that theory at all!

[Tracii G]

OMG not this sh&% again.

[Lorileah]

5. Although flawed, Benjamin's scale is still kinda useful, and pretty damn good for 1966. Compare with Blanchards theory of AGP from the 80's. It should take you about 5-10 minutes in a typical TG support group to find multiple people who don't conform to that theory at all!

would that be the same thing you could say about the Corvair in 1966? Leeches were pretty damn good in 1900. Does anyone in the medical therapy side use this? Time we moved ahead. When do I get to be a "true". I say we throw both them out and start a CD.com scale (the first one who actually does that will get deleted:)).

[Rachael Leigh]

I guess for me I'm somewhere between type 2 and 3. Kinda interesting

[Sarasometimes]

Harry lost me with his "cure" references in transvestite categories.

[Marcelle]

. . . I say we throw both them out and start a CD.com scale (the first one who actually does that will get deleted:)).

Drat . . . I was all set to have a nested label within a category on a Likert-scale of 1-7 within a trendy table all centered around a hierarchical taxonomy. Guess I'll just make a paper airplane instead :)

Hugs

Isha

[AllieSF]

Lorileah, you know that the use of leeches is still considered by some as a true aid in healing as they bring fresh blood to damaged areas, just like maggots are sometimes used to clean away dead skin from similar areas. I think the message here is that though his worked is dated, it was ground breaking at the time and lead to the serious consideration of the whole TG side of life.

[PaulaQ]

would that be the same thing you could say about the Corvair in 1966? Leeches were pretty damn good in 1900. Does anyone in the medical therapy side use this? Time we moved ahead. When do I get to be a "true". I say we throw both them out and start a CD.com scale (the first one who actually does that will get deleted:)).

No, but we use the rest of his ideas, and he founded WPATH, which is the organization that suggests the guidelines for TG healthcare.

I'm all for going with more modern science - what I'm trying to convey to all of you is that there isn't very much. Almost nobody in the scientific community gives a damn about TG folks, we get really poorly designed science fair type projects. 50 years later, we have two additional medical advancements:
1. SRS
2. FFS
The hormone therapy that we use is largely the same, although the production methods for hormones have improved, largely because of the needs of genetic women. Likewise, breast augmentation, that many of us need, is a byproduct of cosmetic surgery for genetic women. For that matter, laser hair removal is too.

The theories about the origins of transsexuality and transgender folks in general, are not very much further advanced from Benjamin's - we don't understand this stuff much better than we did 50 years ago, at least not on any fundamental level. We have more clinical experience with it, and that's really about it.

I'm all for progress - I'd love for us to actually have some, please.

Consider the progress that's been made for conditions such as cancer (name your type), AIDS, MS, just tons of other conditions that have made quantum leaps in treatment.

But us? Not so much. We still get the equivalent of leeches.

[ReineD]

It's definitely not stupid or ignorant, but those who try to interpret his work, including the topic starter, must understand that even Benjamin himself believed that gender identity for biologic males is a continuum rather than six (or seven) distinct categories. The Benjamin types are archetypes (based on the understanding of sexuality and gender of the 1960s), not definitions.

This.

I don't think that sexual preference should be part of it, other than an acknowledgment that in each level there are heteros, bis, gays, auto-erotics, and asexuals. And it would be nice to alter the wording to reflect current understanding of gender.

The brilliance here is the acknowledgment there is a scale, rather than trying to lump everyone into the "transgender", or "crossdresser" catch-all terms. The TG or CD terms don't do a thing to acknowledge the differences between people who dress for recreational purposes, to those who enjoy the presentation fluctuation but are predominately male, to those who wish to be feminine males (as opposed to being females), to those who wish partial or cosmetic body modifications and who prefer to not fit into the binary gender, to those who wish to transition but retain male sexual functioning, to those who do want SRS, to the rare few who knew without a doubt at age four they were not the gender their parents thought they were.

The trannier-than-thou attitudes exist only because we don't have adequate terms to define the differences between the major groups of people in the community. We need more than just one category of transsexual, and one category of crossdresser because this does not reflect the existing diversity.

But, even if this scale were retooled to reflect current knowledge, I'm sure there would still be people who fundamentally believe that Level VI, for example, is "better" than Level I, just as there are people who believe that their ethnicity is better than another's. This is unfortunate.





I say we throw both them out and start a CD.com scale (the first one who actually does that will get deleted:)).

Well, Lucy tried:

http://www.crossdressers.com/forums/showthread.php?212562-Just-for-fun-and-not-to-debate-what-number-are-you

Lucy actually got 3 pages of responses from people who did mostly identify. :)


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I'm beginning to wonder if there aren't just two categories after all: those who know who they are and wish to communicate it, and those who don't. :D

[LilSissyStevie]

“You never change things by fighting the existing reality. To change something, build a new model that makes the existing model obsolete.”

― Buckminster Fuller

Below is a link to an alternate model of gender variance. What I like about it is that it's not based on a hierarchy of "trannyness" like Benjamin's nor sexual orientation like the Blanchard autogynephilia theory. It may not be the "one true way" but I think it's an improvement on the existing models.

THE IDENTITY‐DEFENCE MODEL OF GENDER‐VARIANCE DEVELOPMENT
Jaimie F. Veale, M.A.1, Dave E. Clarke, Ph.D.

http://www.jaimieveale.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/12/idmodel.pdf

[PaulaQ]

Thanks for the link to that paper Stevie. It definitely seems to describe more of the possible outcomes for us, and it's neat that it unifies CDing, Drag, and TS, and that it takes into account MtF and FtM. And it certainly takes into account repression, which so many of us have dealt with. It also tries to unify sexual orientation in the model.

One of the things that surprised me about it is that there is little to no mention of gender dysphoria, which is such a driving force for transsexuals.

Interesting reading though.

[Amanda M]

The main problem I have with Benjamin is that he seems to regard anyone who is somewhere along his scale as being in need of treatment! Dangerous bullfeathers!

[I Am Paula]

Amanda, You wrote your comment like A) He was still alive and B) The chart was not created two generations ago. It's a little like finding a magazine from 1966, interesting, but a little out of date. If Harry Benjamin were alive, and working now, I'm sure he might recommend therapy, but realize 'fixing' us is impossible.
Just thank God he came along. Before him, transgender issues were dealt with electroshock, and incarceration.

[LilSissyStevie]

One of the things that surprised me about it is that there is little to no mention of gender dysphoria, which is such a driving force for transsexuals.

Interesting reading though.

Perhaps dysphoria is accounted for as the reaction to repression??? That makes sense to me because any cross gender behavior indicates some level of dysphoria with the status quo even if it only entails dressing up once a year or even less. BTW, Jaimie Veale is TS, so she must have some insight into gender dysphoria.

[PaulaQ]

Perhaps dysphoria is accounted for as the reaction to repression???
Yeah, it's just odd they didn't spell it out that way, or really even name it. Perhaps it's buried in their references and is implicit - it certainly seems to be.
The repression mechanisms they talk about ring true to me - I certainly denied and repressed this stuff from a very early age, even though I knew it was going on with me.
This is certainly heaps better than Blanchard's model, although my non-CDing gynephilic TS friend doesn't fit this model well. :)

[Rhonda Ann]

Funny this has surfaced, I just had a conversation with a man about what I actually was. I told him I am a "crossdresser", I have no desire to have a sex change, I just love dressing in women's clothes." He tried to convince me I was a transvestite. I never considered myself to be a transvestite, I always thought of a transvestite as a person having a partial sex change or going through the full change. I dress with taste and age appropriate, I have been complimented on the way I dress several time. I don't know where this chart came from or who the guru is that thinks they have decided by how far you go on what you are. If a person wants to consider themselves as a transvestite that's what they are, if a person wants to be consider themselves as a just a crossdresser that's what they are. Why is someone trying to label me.

[Sarahwithanh11]

Here I come looking for clarity, hoping someone has finally found a way to help me understand who the heck I am and what I do about it, and...

...it looks like I'm somewhere between 3 and 4.

Thanks for nuthin!

Really, though this chart is simplistic and more than a bit outdated, it's fairly remarkable for 1966, only a few years after many gender issues were "treated" with electric shock and insulin shock "therapy".

[suchacutie]

I admit that I came to understand that I'm transgendered rather late in life, was and am very happily married, am probably bigendered, am heterosexual, and feel that I'm completely happy with flipping back and forth between physical and mental gender extremes. I don't feel deprived, or guilty, or in need of "fixing". Both of my genders enjoy their lives.

So I read the table referenced in the op (and read the rest of the thread), and my first take on all of this is "the professionals" don't really have a clue about those of us who don't need to be treated for anything. Granted, this is old date (more like ancient), but it seems the "pros" still believe this tripe is still important.

Seems to me that it would be a whole lot more reasonable if someone INSIDE our community were to put together an assessment of the current state of gender fluidity. Why is it that we are often assessed from outside? Just sayin'.

[Rianna Humble]

Funny this has surfaced, I just had a conversation with a man about what I actually was. I told him I am a "crossdresser", I have no desire to have a sex change, I just love dressing in women's clothes." He tried to convince me I was a transvestite. I never considered myself to be a transvestite, I always thought of a transvestite as a person having a partial sex change or going through the full change.

You are confusing transvestite (latin for cross dresser) with transsexual

[shelley johnson]

I would be a 3 . I go out sometimes but not fully dressed. Light makeup and gender neutral clothing while underdresssed.

[Melissa_59]

Well, its not binary but it is still too rigid. I agree that there is a whole spectrum of individuals in between
these categories that Harry just tried to lump into bins.

Yes, I think there was another thread about labels and why they're not a good thing. I really don't like labels.

People who use labels are categorizers... *wink wink*

~Melissa

[Underdressed]

" Well that's it then, I will have to build another box to put myself in ! "

[CONSUELO]

I have sometimes wondered why a cross dresser/ transvestite / transexual has not done extensive scientific research on this topic and published it. Perhaps they have and are not known to me.
Also, does anyone know of counsellors or therapists who are themselves cross dressers who offer counseling services?

[Vickie_CDTV]

I never understood the rage some feel when it comes to things like this. Scientists have to identify and classify things in order to study them. The fact he created a scale in order to identify trans behavior is not out of the ordinary in the realm of science, but some seem to take it as a personal affront for some reason. I just don't get it.

[PaulaQ]

Actually there are several researchers who are transgender - Anne Vitale, Ann Lawrence, Jaime Veale - so they are out there. The trouble is getting enough samples, and also that they largely attack this from a psychological perspective - the biomedical understanding of transgender isn't there yet.

[Lorileah]

a couple things

the assumption that a "true" TS wants a man to marry totally discounts those who don't like men or who are lesbian

The definitive lines drawn are in conflict with the fluid motion of the spectrum. We say ROYGBIV for the colors but in reality they are continuum of color, no hard lines. This scale attempts to make hard lines and assumes, incorrectly, that everyone should fit in a specific box. When data cannot be specifically placed in a position, it must be eliminated and that invalidates the study
224338

Making a scale that is flawed won't help you in research. Others behind you who try and use your scale and find it flawed won't be able to confirm your research, thus invalidating it

Using pseudo-scientific models when time has passed that has shown that your scale is inadequate does not help advance the study.

This scale has been outdated for years. Just the fact that so many just in this forum can find flaws in it makes it unusable. It may be a box of 8 crayons but it doesn't represent the whole palate

[ReineD]

Lori, Benjamin did not theorize that only those categories exist. I found the original paper:

http://www.mut23.de/texte/Harry%20Benjamin%20-%20The%20Transsexual%20Phenomenon.pdf

On page 16 directly under the table of typology, Benjamin clearly states,

"It has been the intention here to point out the possibility of several conceptions and classifications of the transvestic and the transsexual phenomenon. Future studies and observations may decide which one is likely to come closest to the truth and in this way a possible understanding of the etiology may be gained. If this etiology should ever be established through future researches, classifications may have to be modified accordingly."

There needed to be a way to differentiate between the major types of transvestism and transsexualism for diagnostic purposes. How else would the medical community establish the proper medical help for each person if there was no differentiation (using the extremes) between a transvestic fetishist and a transsexual who wishes to have SRS? It stands to reason that gender identity is a spectrum, but to illustrate each finer point on paper for diagnostic purposes would be impossible. The alternative, to not at all attempt to devise a scale of major categories, would have done nothing in terms of coming up with the WPATH Standards of Care.

The Gender Scale is a diagnostic tool and also useful, in my opinion, should a person wish to convey to another where on the scale he or she feels is the closest to. It certainly eliminates the incessant disputes over what "crossdresser", "transgender", and "transsexual" mean. I do think that terms like "pseudo" and "true" should be reworded so as to not give the impression that one level is better or more true than another.

Here's a modified version of the original gender scale that excludes "Dressing Habits and Social Life" and "Sex Object Choice and Sex Life", since these categories no longer apply in today's medical diagnostic criterion:

http://www.shb-info.org/sitebuildercontent/sitebuilderfiles/hbdt09.pdf

[Rosie87]

Zylia for class president !!!

If this was Facebook then I would "Like" this comment :)

[Tina_gm]

Thank you to Paula and RenieD. I am not the only one who finds that Benjamins studies were ahead of his time. Archaic now, yes, of course, but from 1966 where things were in terms of TG related issues, this was brilliance. And some of it does still hold water today. And Benjamin himself made sure to state that it is fluid. It was I believe an attempt for a clinical use to guide those who would take on such cases. And while we today should not walk around thinking I am a TV 3 (what I would most likely be if I weighed in on the scale) A clinician could use this to ascertain what a particular gender variant person's needs were. I do not think this is some devil incarnate here at all. While I am in full agreement about how we need not label ourselves, DSMV or whatever it is up to now does just that for just about everyone. Walk in to a mental health practicioners office of some sort and you will walk out with a label (diagnosis) of some sort.

[BLUE ORCHID]

I think that this rates right up there with the Global warming Hoax.

[Lucy_Bella]

Old but at onetime very ground breaking I would agree..

I am not so sure about the updated version, however ,I am sure that most all here would agree that sexual preference and gender are separate ..But then again does sexual preference not have a place on the gender scale?

It may not have any meaning to most of the T.G. scale but somewhere along the line it does come into play when it's sexual preference verses ones biological sex as a T.G.( insert T.S. here if that is the preferred label )in a certain gender role..Some T.G.s ( again insert T.S.if that is the preferred label) wanna live the whole biological female experience ( including sex with a male partner using the proper female equipment)..

So can it be fair to say that at times in the gender scale ,sexual preference can also play a part for a T.G. ( or T.S. if that is the preferred label) to feel complete in that gender role?

[Tina_gm]

Lucy, gender and sexuality can cross paths at some point for some. I think there is enough evidence on this site, and this is among the cleanest of sites. We can say that a majority of CDers are hetero, and that can be established as fact.... but that the TG spectrum will be more variant when it comes to sexuality is also more variant as well.

[Taylor Ray]

Um..........."Hairy Benjamin"?

Last time I tried that it didn't end too well.