Our favorite "Why" questions

[Pat]

This is looong. Sorry.

I recently read an interesting book ("The Psychobiology of Transsexualism and Transgenderism: A New View Based on Scientific Evidence" by Thomas Bevan. Great book if you're comfortable reading scientific summaries. (A bit expensive - you'd be wise to get it from your local library.) The book is a survey of recent (book was published in 2015) research on transgender topics. I had considered writing a "book report" style post but, honestly the book covers too wide a range of information to squeeze into a single post and have it make any sense. So I just want to write about my take on a couple of "why" topics that we see come up on this forum over and over again. (1) Why do transgender people exist? (2) Why do we do what we do?


tl;dr: The answers to 1 & 2 according to Bevan:
(1) Gender is biological. Scientific opinion is closing in on a two-factor explanation: genetics and epigenetics
(2) Biological 'gender preference' drives our choice of culturally-defined gender role.


Disclaimer: I've galloped through the information and simplified a lot of things based on my (probably iffy) understanding of what I read. I know we have real genetics professionals who come to this site who can feel free to correct me where I went off track. Please do.

Also note up front - this post is specifically NOT for meta-discussion about the pointlessness of knowledge or labels or kids-these-days or whatever. Do feel free to start your own thread, but please do not attempt to derail this one. (Moderators, please take note.)

In terms of nomenclature, anywhere you see me use the term "transgenderism" you can be pretty sure he used the term TSTG (transsexual/transgender.) It's apparently the norm in his field. Since people on this site get cranky about new acronyms, I just replaced it with a more common word. He also uses the term HT where we use HRT. He explains that HRT is Replacing hormones that have gone missing, while Hormone Therapy is a treatment used in transgenderism. I agree with his reasoning and may start to use it in my own life, but I'm not going to try to convert the transgender community single-handedly. ;)

1. Why do we exist?
We see a lot of origin stories on this forum with ideas from "exposure to environmental agents" to "because my Mom dressed me in my sister's clothes when I was young," to "I think it happened as I got older and my testosterone dropped." All of which get a polite "no" from the research reported in this book.

The current thinking is that children are aware of "basic gender concepts" at 18 months and understand gender stereotypes by 2 or 3 years. If they are cisgender, they have a grip on their expected gender behavior by 3. Transgender children have the same learning milestones, but if they are not accepted as transgender, they learn to conform to the gender behavior that their parents expect of them to avoid rejection. (They become role-players.) If they understand their gender situation enough to verbalize it, they may voice it between 3 and 8 years (a common narrative of TS folks and the transgender kids we're seeing in the news these days.)

Because children's awareness of transgenderism seems to occur around 3 or 4, there are a limited number of things that could cause it. DNA, epigenetics and early childhood interaction are the factors that get the most focus.

Early Childhood Interaction
Early childhood interaction is basically dismissed as a cause of transgenderism. Scenarios that have specifically been ruled out: Emotional relationships with parents, prenatal sex preference of the mother, parental separation, parents/siblings dressing a child in wrong-gender clothing, parental abuse and violence (though it's noted that TG children do get abused more, it appears the abuse is because they're TG; they don't become TG because of the abuse.) Studies are cited for all of these situations, if your favorite explanation of why you're transgender shows up in this list, please refer to the book for details.

Genetics
There is a lengthy section summarizing results from twins studies from around the world and the upshot seems to be that transgenderism is "heritable" (i.e. can be passed along family lines,) and biological in nature with DNA as "a" (but not "the") causal factor. The correlation is considered "strong."

Finger length ratio between the index and ring finger ("2D:4D ratio,") shows a high correlation to transgenderism in both MtF and FtM individuals. This ratio was already known to have a strong basis in genetics. The ratio is higher in MtF people relative to cis-males and lower in FtM people relative to cis-females. He says this with some confidence, however, the individual studies summarized in the book seemed to have conflicting results.

Another oddity present for both MtF and FtM is tooth diameter. In a cisgender population, male tooth diameters are larger, female tooth diameters are smaller. Amongst TS people tooth diameters follow the pattern for the person's gender, not their sex. Again, tooth diameter has previously been linked to genetics.

A favorite meme of MtF transgenderism is that MtF people tend to have more male siblings. It turns out that result didn't hold up to scrutiny. Male siblings hold for sexual orientation, but not for transgenderism. What did hold up was MtF people seem to have more maternal Aunts than Uncles. No theories on why.

A search for DNA markers is ongoing and some appear to have been found. It's worth noting that most study is on transsexual (TS) individuals since they are considered the "most" transgender of all the people under the umbrella, but some/few also include folks who identify as TG, though what that means is vague (given that we can't come up with a definition among ourselves, it's not surprising.)

Bevan notes that markers have been found near the androgen receptor gene (AR) in male-to-female transgender folks and "a hormone metabolism gene" for female-to-male transgender folks. He cautions that a full genome scan has not yet been done and there probably are other genes involved. The multiple gene scenario has precedent -- eye color in humans is the result of at least five genes at work, he says (despite what you may have learned in middle-school.)

There are two very interesting things about MtF transgenderism being associated with the Androgen Receptor gene -- the first is that's where an anomaly that causes Androgen Insesitivity Syndrome is located -- AIS causes an intersex condition where female external genitals develop in people with XY (male) DNA. The author notes that if AIS only effected formation of genitals, then we'd expect the people to have a gender preference of male to match their DNA but in general they don't -- they're very happy living as female. The other interesting thing is that anomalies on that gene also are associated with "non-right-handedness" -- that is, the person is not necessarily left-handed, but tends to do some things with their left hand that a right-hander would normally do with their right. That particular trait has a strong correlation to MtF transgenderism. (There used to be an oft-retold story that there was a corelation between transgenderism and being left-handed. Now it may be that there's a stronger corelation to being non-right-handed.)

He notes that the politics of research funding skews the research to MtF transgenderism because if the anomaly is related to the anomaly that causes AIS, then researchers can get money to study AIS, classified a disease, more easily than they can find money to study transgenderism (which is no longer considered a disease. It turns out *that* battle was a double-edged sword.)

It is not known yet if the DNA anomalies are strictly inherited (germ line,) are a mutation that happens spontaneously at conception (de novo mutations,) or occur because people have multiple DNA in a single body (mosaics.) But since a number of traits that are affected cannot be affected by purely psychological issues, there is strong evidence that transgenderism has a biological/genetic component. But it seems like there is another factor in play...

Epigenetics
Epigenetics are external factors that can change DNA or may change the way DNA expresses without changing the DNA itself. Different factors have been identified for study, but none have convincing results yet.

One popular epigenetic theory (which up to now had been my favorite) about MtF transgenderism is that it might be a response to an anomolous amount of estrogen (or failure to get sufficient amount of testosterone) at week 10 of gestation when neural pathways in the brain are being formed. The idea was that if there wasn't sufficient testosterone to enable construction of the male neural pathways, female pathways would be created "by default." However, research doesn't bear this out: not only does neurological formation of sex-specific structures start before gonads are mature enough to produce sufficient testosterone, but a naturally-occurring condition, Kallman's Syndrome, results in low testosterone, which should mean males who have it should largely be transgender, but they're not. And further research on neural development has shown that the mechanism for creating the neural pathways is actually fueled by estrogen which is converted on site to testosterone as needed. So my favorite theory is on the floor.

The presence of DNA markers for transgenderism makes it less likely that epigenetics is the sole cause. However, there still might be an epigenetic factor...

Two-factor model
It could be that you need both an epigenetic event AND the specific DNA that makes you respond to it to create a transgender outcome. This is a "two-factor" model which seems to be leading the pack as an explanation at the moment. It would mean that without the DNA, the epigenetic event would not produce a transgender result. And without the epigenetic effect, DNA alone would not produce a transgender result. You'd expect a trait that requires both things to be true at the same time to be very rare, and it is.

So, no capital-A answers, but interesting advances in knowledge.

2. Why do we do what we do?
So if there's a biological reason for transgenderism, how does that work? Isn't gender a social construct? Here it gets complex. But actually it's another two-factor model: Societies define gender roles, or what Bevan describes as "gender behavior categories." We understand those categories at a very young age and in evaluating those, we are drawn to the one that best fits our biological "gender preference." The idea is, that you are most comfortable/happy when doing the activities identified with the gender behavior category most closely aligned to your gender preference. You are less happy doing the activities of a gender behavior category that is not aligned with your preference (but the activities themsevles are, in fact, genderless. Girls can play with trucks, boys can play with dolls and nothing explodes.) So when the question is "why do I feel so right when I put on women's clothes?" The answer is that doing that has nothing to do with the cloth or how it's sewn together and everything to do with your recognition that this is a thing appropriate to your gender preference.

Long ago, I asked in a post if people would rather wear jeans bought in the women's section of the store than the same jeans from the men's section. And most of the answers (as I recall) were, yes, they would prefer them from the women's section, though few knew why. Maybe now we do. ;)

An interesting thing is that gender behavior categories are defined by cultures. In our culture, there are two (male and female.) In other cultures there are three, four or five. Cultures have created these categories throughout history and all over the planet. Asia and Africa have cultures to this day that have more than two roles. Tribes in the Pre-Columbian New World also had them. There is evidence of European cultures that once had such categories but somehow they (the categories) got lost.

Now, this is me speculating here, this is not in the book -- those cultures that recognize the need for more than two categories certainly wouldn't have developed them if there were no folks who fit into them, which I think could explain why we have the non-binary category of transgenderism in our community today. Our preferred category doesn't exist, and so, like on a standardized exam, some people (TS) see a clearly correct answer. Some (non-binary/stable) pick the one that is most-nearly-correct. And, some (non-binary/fluid) oscillate back-and-forth between answers.

Anyway -- the point is that science is marching on and we're discovering new information that may or may not be welcome news. I know many people who hope for a day when you can take a "trans test" and settle the issue unambiguously. And I know folks who dread that day. And, of course, if new, verifyable evidence comes along that shows we're just a biologically sound human variation, that has big implications in law, religion and sociology. No matter how you feel about it, it's probably good to know where things stand and where they're trending.

Again -- keep in mind -- this is my opinion of Bevan's opinion of hundreds of peer-reviewed studies. If you're interested look up the book. You might read the book and get an entirely different take-away. In which case, please come tell us about it.

[Lana Mae]

Pat, thanks for sharing! I found that interesting, especially since I am non-right handed! I am right handed with almost anything but if I have to aim I do it left handed! Like shooting pool or a gun! I do not understand the finger ratio thing but my ring finger is about a quarter inch longer than my index finger! I also had more maternal aunts than uncles! I did not know about the multiple genes thing! I do not remember why but there was a time in my life that I thought I might be Mosaic! This is interesting! Good to hear there is some research going on about us! Hugs Lana Mae

[aprilgirl]

Hi Pat,

Thanks for sharing. Like you favored, the theory of the hormonal wash at week ten of gestation was mine, at least it made the most sense to me. Now what? Pass me the Excedrin.:) I may have to wait for the Reader's Digest version!

Seriously, thank you for bringing this research to the forum, and providing your valued takes. I concur that further research dedicated to transgenderism is only a positive.

[DIANEF]

Pat, I read that post right through and a few things did jump out at me. Left hand right hand, I can do anything with both except write neatly with my left. More male siblings, raised by my mother and lots of aunts (real and just family friends). Drawn to more creative pursuits as a child (reading, drawing especially). Looking at my index and ring fingers, they are almost exactly the same length.
Was I born this way?, maybe, but what I do know is that I didn't choose this thing, it chose me.

[Samantha uk]

Absolutely fascinating, thank you for taking the time to post. I too fit the 2d 4d finger ratio and I always wondered why I brush my teeth, do the ironing, brush my hair etc with my left hand when I'm right handed! anecdotal evidence is interesting to a point but to hear that it might well be DNA is great for my self acceptance

[Nikki.]

Great info, thanks for taking the time to post it.

[Dana44]

Nice research Pat. So I wonder that the DES kids synthetic estrogen was came to us in the womb . I sure wonder what that did to us. It really messed the girls up also. Far more knowledge is known about the girls than the boys. I think that is why both sides of my brain is open. and it switches back and forth on who is boss.

[Rachael Leigh]

Ok I don’t normally read these long threads but being that I’m beginning to transistion I wanted to see what was said
As you said a lot of scientific talk but the thing about left handed ness got my attention. I am for the most part right handed
however I can do certain things left handed and I was told by my parents that my grandmother said I was going to be left
handed.
I suspect I may have been. So this part of the study was most interesting for sure

[Kayliedaskope]

Pat, a number of years ago (like 20), a TS friend of mine participated in a brain scan study. In the test group were ten men, ten women, and ten transsexuals (both FtM and MtF, five each - Kristi is a MtF). When the results came back, the scans were given to a group of neurologists who did not know anything about the test subjects, and were asked to identify the male and female brains. Apparently, the MtF's brains were smaller and more like the actual GG's brains (no jokes about small-minded women, please), while the FtM's of the group compared more to the male brains. In fact, all of the neurologists agreed that Kristi was a genetically-born woman.

Kristi was able to keep copies of her scans, but was (gently) teased for weeks afterwards about "people reading her mind" or "having her head scanned and finding nothing." :)

[Rayleen]

Thanks Pat, very interesting reading...was born left handed but in school it did not work that way, was slammed by the teachers until I used the right. most of the stuff I also do with the left and in my head a battle between whoever wins.

[Gillian Gigs]

Thanks for the post! I'm very ambidextrous with almost everything, but write only with my left hand. It has been obvious through out my life that I thought differently than most people. I get along best with other left handers though. It is only when real research gets done that the truth about this subject will come out.

[Ressie]

I don't see any mention of crossdressers. Wouldn't this belong in a different forum?

[NancySue]

Interesting thread...but, Ressie is right. No mention of CDing. From my research, while there are some similarities, cding, transgenderism and transsexualism are three totally different conditions.

[Ineke Vashon]

Possibly correct. But all of the above do spring from the same basic roots.

Ineke

[Megan Nicole]

Wow. Interesting. Fingers, ambidextrous, but write and eat left handed. The more I read here the more I was reading about myself. I would like to know WHY I’ve always been this way. Though I don’t dwell on it anymore and accepted this a long time ago, I could at least have some reasoning. Thanks!!

[Pat]

I don't see any mention of crossdressers. Wouldn't this belong in a different forum?

I don't believe so, but you can use the little, triangular icon in the lower left at the bottom of the OP to raise an objection to the site staff. I really can't rule on it since it's my thread. My thinking is that crossdressing is the intersection of the transgender community. No matter where we may end up, most of us start here. And many CDs view themselves as transgender, though admittedly there are some who say they're not. So I think crossdressers are discussed and I think the section on why we do what we do certainly applies to at least those crossdressers who accept being transgender. But report the post if you're unconvinced.


Like you favored, the theory of the hormonal wash at week ten of gestation was mine, at least it made the most sense to me. Now what?

I think the hormonal wash and DES (Dana) are not ruled out completely, they're just not the whole story. If they were, then there wouldn't be DNA markers, as I unnderstand it. But they could be the epigenetic event of the two-factor theory.

Another interesting thing is that the Androgen Receptor gene is located on the Y chromosome, which is contributed by the father. But there's that correlation to having a large number of Aunts on the mother's side. Correlation isn't causation, but it's weird. There has to be a story there.


Pat, a number of years ago (like 20), a TS friend of mine participated in a brain scan study.

The book covers huge swaths of transgender study. Population frequencies, social costs, history and culture, etc. A part of the book discusses brain scan studies, both MRI and fMRI -- fascinating, but as I said, too much for one post. So I went for the two Big Questions that I see come up on this forum (another reason I chose this one) over and over.


I am right handed with almost anything but if I have to aim I do it left handed!

Oddly, I am the exact opposite. Anything I have to aim goes to my right hand, everything else (including throwing a ball, signing my name, etc.) goes to my left. I was really surprised (and happy) to see this concept of "Non-right-handedness" because I had always known about the correlation to full on left-handedness but it always seemed weak. There is a diagnostic tool called "Edinburgh handedness inventory" which uses 20 tasks that a user performs under supervision to determine how right-handed they are. The correlation of non-right-handedness seems much stronger than the previous measure.

[Meghan4now]

Great post Pat. I always enjoy a good bit if research and analysis. Of course nothing you mentioned really indicates that I would be trans, or whatever. But I think there are so many variables, causes and influences, it's hard saying.

And as far as crossdressing being part of transgender, at least for me, I believe it to be on the spectrum. Even if one is doing it for kicks, it is clearly not "normal" and had gender nonconforming aspects, so.....

[GracieRose]

Sounds like an interesting book, but heavy reading. Thanks for the summary.

[Gillian Gigs]

This is off topic, but shooting has more to do with the dominant eye, than anything else. I don't know what causes one eye to be more dominant than the other.
I just did some checking and found that there is no correlation between your eyes and brain sphere dominance. Apparently the eyes are controlled by both spheres of the brain.

[Samantha uk]

I think this is the most interesting thread on this site and I think it should be made a sticky. What also seems to be coming out is that some people are seeing crossdressing as something separate to transgender. I am of the opinion that transgender is an umbrella term and that we all fit under it somewhere, I think crossdressing feels a bit different to to other peoples experience of transgenderism because there is a fetish element attached to it.

I believe that the fetish element comes from our culture and the power that clothes have in expressing ones self as female. Let me explain.

I'm a heterosexual male and I find feminine women very attractive. Our culture as developed so that femininity is powerfully expressed through clothing and makeup, however at the same time I also happen to be transgendered, which as we all know is nothing to do with sexuality. The most powerful way I can express my feminine side is through wearing the things associated with that gender, which is the very thing I'm attracted to. Pretty confusing eh!

So theres no wonder CD'ing feels different, confusing and a difficult thing to come to terms with and put a label on, but I still believe it should be under the term of transgender. A good thought experiment is to try and imagine what a world would be like if we all wore the same clothes, would we feel any different about the term transgender if we couldn't get the enjoyment of wearing womens clothes and makeup and we only expressed our feminine feelings in our behaviour and body language.

Its not our fault that CD'ing doesn't fit in our culture very well, its our cultures fault and just goes to show the power that clothes have in feminine expression

[Charlotte7]

Thanks Pat, a very good post and an interesting read. Let me start by saying that I am a cross dresser and I am quite happy to accept that this fits into the transgender spectrum. Actually, it's important to me that it does. When I dress I am expressing the girl within me. I don't want to be a girl, but it's essential that part of me is allowed out. For whatever reason, what I seek to do is specifically girly, and for me, that certainly falls under the transgender side of things. Some of the points raised I find particularly interesting. I have the finger ratio thing and only aunts on my mother's side. I have, also always been a CD as soon as I was aware that there were differences between boys and girls. I did suppress this though to conform to my expected gender. Interestingly I don't have a left hand bias, and those few things I do left handedly (batting in sports for example) are sufficiently explained by the stronger eye scenario. All in all a good read and an entertaining start to a Friday morning. I'm now off to a well know website to see if I can get a copy. Once again, thanks.

Edit: Just back from the well known website. It looks like I've got to save for a bit before I can get a copy, but these academic books are never cheap.

[Fiona123]

Interesting. Great summary. I contracted polio as an infant. My right arm from the shoulder to the fingertips was affected. I use my left hand for everything. Am I naturally non right handed? Who knows. Am I transgender? Yes.

[GretchenM]

Oh, my goodness, Pat. You are such a dear. Thank you so much for your post. Gotta get the book. I spent nearly all of 2013 trying to find as much information from peer reviewed papers as I could and I did pretty well. But two years later someone else really pulled it together.

I like the two factor or maybe even multi-factor (?) cause idea. Somehow one must account for the wide array of expression of the personal gender sense we have and the fact that this behavior is not exactly common. In ecology, my specialty which can be defined as the sociology of Nature, whenever we come across patterns that are uncommon in a population and have no readily apparent single cause we jump into the deeper water and look for interactions between factors that cause the pattern. Almost always we find that factor interaction is the explanation. I have sensed that in myself with regard to my transgenderism and now this book has apparently implicated that as a possible cause in much the same way I do in my ecological studies. Wow! Amazing. Thank you so much.

As a side note, I have one blood line uncle and three aunts. The three aunts played a huge roll in raising me and my uncle. Neither of us had a strong father figure, but my uncle fared better in that department than I did. My uncle (5 years younger than me) and I are fairly androgynous but I am the one who exhibits a lot more transgender behaviors and thinking. A really good match to what you pointed out in your post of a correlation in that way. It is exactly what I have been focusing on in my thinking lately. Thanks again. Gotta get the book.

[susan54]

I was intrigued by the non righthandedness thing. I am right handed but from childhood have wanted to do certain things as though I was left-handed, specifically sport requiring a bat or club to be grasped with both hands. I never heard of anyone else doing this and had not realised it was a 'thing'. In the end I did not persevere with tennis and when playing golf just adapted to standard right hand clubs and am now more comfortable with this. Thanks for the info.

[SarahleeNH]

Fascinating! Thanks for posting that, Pat. I’m a DES son, and I quickly embraced the epigenetic factor as the obvious answer when I first heard of it years ago. But I was unaware of the Androgen receptor and its impact on DNA; nor had I heard about this two-factor suggestion. I will see if I can find a copy of the book! It sounds like it’s one I will have to read!

[Genni]

Thank you for sharing your take on this book, Pat. I need to find and read it, but your summary is very helpful and insightful.

[docrobbysherry]

Thanks for the post, Pat. Now, I know exactly why I am, or maybe am not, trans!:heehee:

Now, if only soneone would answer the age old question: How many angels can fit in the head of a pin?:)

[Shelly Preston]

Very interesting Pat

Moderator Note
I would just add this
It is possible that cross dressing is caused by a differing strength of testosterone wash at the ten week gestation period.

I am sure research in the future will reveal more.


( I can remember when they use to say nothing is smaller than an atom)

[Sarah Doepner]

. . .
2. Why do we do what we do?
So if there's a biological reason for transgenderism, how does that work? Isn't gender a social construct? Here it gets complex. But actually it's another two-factor model: Societies define gender roles, or what Bevan describes as "gender behavior categories." We understand those categories at a very young age and in evaluating those, we are drawn to the one that best fits our biological "gender preference." The idea is, that you are most comfortable/happy when doing the activities identified with the gender behavior category most closely aligned to your gender preference. You are less happy doing the activities of a gender behavior category that is not aligned with your preference (but the activities themsevles are, in fact, genderless. Girls can play with trucks, boys can play with dolls and nothing explodes.) So when the question is "why do I feel so right when I put on women's clothes?" The answer is that doing that has nothing to do with the cloth or how it's sewn together and everything to do with your recognition that this is a thing appropriate to your gender preference.


Thank you Pat for wading through that book and providing what seems to be a great summary.

I selected this quote from your post because it seems to support the explanation I've been working with for the last couple of years. My version suggests that when we are uncomfortable with how we are experiencing gender we "self medicate" by changing our choices about appearance and behavior. (Other words that might be better than "self-medicate" might be "accommodate" or "adapt" or "mitigate"). How that manifests depends on how strongly one's dysphoria is being felt. Some are happy to wear clothing for a short time, maybe have an opportunity to climax, and then go back to a totally male presentation. Others need a 'stronger dose' and may dress fully with makeup, hair, forms and go out in public. And that may still not be sufficient for others who need to live full time and transition socially and medically to make their gender preference and self image be congruent and appropriate.

I'm very much right-handed and my 2D:4D ratio is slightly tilted toward the masculine, but my gender dysphoria seems to be fairly strong more often than not. So the multi-factor explanation may hold more correlates than you've been able to summarize here or have been identified so far. Anyway, thanks again for providing this summary.

[Teresa]

Pat,
I like the the two factor model, I do feel there is more than one influence driving my feelings and needs . I also think I do it because the outer appearance shows the World how I feel inside .

I must admit without thinking I can do some jobs left handed as well as my right .

I personally don't feel I was affected by outside influences as a young child , the T kicked in early and and brought together all the loose ends . My gender counsellor did suggest I had a strong male/female conflict going on and the female side was trying to take over, I called it a gut feeling which started at the age of 8-9 years and I've lived with it 24/7 ever since .

I do think Susan makes an interesting point, the majority of the public don't know why we dress, it was also a point I raised in the TS section , standing side by side they don't know what anatomy has been changed . Do they assume we are all in transition . Cders don't get so much coverage because most believe it's something we do in private at home possibly for sexual pleasure alone or maybe with a male partner.


Pat,
I meant to thank you for giving an insight into this publication .

While we all look to experts we mustn't forget they wouldn't be so without us , we are the source of their information . When we exchange our thoughts here it's from the horses mouth and not second hand .

[Samantha uk]

While we all look to experts we mustn't forget they wouldn't be so without us , we are the source of their information . When we exchange our thoughts here it's from the horses mouth and not second hand .

This is very true but we can only tell the world how it feels, science will explain to the world why we feel it. Thats why I think posts like this are very important

[Charlotte7]

This is very true but we can only tell the world how it feels, science will explain to the world why we feel it. Thats why I think posts like this are very important

We should also bear in mind that the author of this book is also one of us (see here (https://dartmouthalumnimagazine.com/articles/dana-thomas-bevan-69)) and so also speaks from first hand experience.

[GretchenJ]

As a person that meets the criteria for the 2D 4D criteria and the non righthanded characteristic (most things I do with either hand with specific things done with right (write, throw) and left (hammer, shoot basketball, hockey). Racket sports I will switch hands (no back hand shots), it provides a bit of validation as to what makes me what I am. Thank you Pat for the very insightful article and analysis

[GracieRose]

Pat,
Thanks for the synopsis. some interesting stuff there that makes sense. Although it may not answer the "Why" question, it appears to present a lot of food for thought.
The index-ring finger ratio applies to me, so I find any findings along those lines interesting. Tooth diameter is a new one to me. I may have to ask my dentist or oral hygienist how they would classify my tooth diameter (if I can think up a way to ask without sounding weird). I've read of the non-right handedness also. I don't think this applies to me, but the Nuns were good at discouraging left handed activity.
I may have to read the full book now. You've piqued my interest.
Thanks for finding it.

[docrobbysherry]

Interesting post, Pat. Do u recall seeing anything in the book that mite explain late in life dressers like myself?

Finger length and non ritehandedness aside, I had zero gender issues until I was 50 and tried on women's things for the first time. For an as yet unknown reason!:straightface:

[Becky Blue]

Fascinating thread Pat, thanks for brining it to the top again Doc. Perhaps it should be a sticky.

Interestingly I have the 2D:4D for a woman but I am very right handed, I also can't read a map unless its the same direction I am driving in :)

[Beverley Sims]

Pat,
Nicely put up article, it makes interesting reading but does not explain as to why I am what I am.

maybe one day there will be a definitive answer.

[Pat]

Interesting post, Pat. Do u recall seeing anything in the book that mite explain late in life dressers like myself?

The book doesn't really address that directly. Again, since it's a summary of recent published peer-reviewed studies, it only addresses things that there have been academic papers on. He does say two things that stood out to me as addressing it indirectly:


It is clear that many TSTG emerge from secrecy later in life. Some remain as closeted cross-dressers into advanced ages. We do not have good longitudinal studies on these secretive TSTG because most of them never perceive the need to see a mental health professional.

Bevan, Thomas. The Psychobiology of Transsexualism and Transgenderism: A New View Based on Scientific Evidence (p. 158). ABC-CLIO. Kindle Edition.

The other thing he gives a whole chapter (Ch. 11, Conscious Choice and Spirituality) over to is why people come out. Which you could look at through the other end of the microscope as addressing your question. The basic premise makes sense: that people tend to come out around the time of an existential crisis.


Yalom (1980) identified four types of existential crises:

•Realization that you will die.
•Realization that life has no intrinsic meaning.
•Realization that we are forever isolated from one another.
•Realization of freedom of action.

Existential crises have effects on transsexual and transgender people who are closeted and keep their TSTG behavior or status a secret. For transgender people, the crisis may provoke a TSTG to stop dressing alone in secret and to go out to a support group. It may also increase the frequency of going to TSTG-friendly clubs and organizational events. Existential crises may trigger complete coming out by transgender people and the desire to begin transsexual transition. Those who are already out may also be affected by increasing the frequency of their TSTG behavior. Finally, existential crises can trigger transsexual transition progression including surgeries to change appearance and TS GPS.(Note: "GPS" = Genital Plastic Surgery. The term he uses for what we call SRS or GCS.)


Which is pretty much my story in a nutshell - I was semi-closeted until I had a near-death experience that made me realize the crushing regret I'd have if I died without coming out. Suddenly the need to come out outweighed all the reasons I should remain closeted. I don't know if it applies to you.

[Stephanie47]

I have to fall in with Beverley. I read your post. I have read other articles slanted to the layman for easier reading. After analyzing all the information thrown at me over the decades I still cannot see any model that fits all. Why do I do what I do? It's still a firm I have no idea. I consider myself a plain vanilla cross dresser. I think your comment concerning a near death experience may be applicable to many people. Such experiences seem to, but not always, change a person's perception of his or her values living life. Does a near death experience cause someone to engage in activities of self gratification before it's too late? Get those dresses out of the back of the closet? Buy that sports car? Take the trip around the world? Drop out from society? Or, engage in activities helping those who are less fortunate? The waters for me remain muddy.

[Tina_gm]

Interesting thread...but, Ressie is right. No mention of CDing. From my research, while there are some similarities, cding, transgenderism and transsexualism are three totally different conditions.
I do not believe that Cding and TG and TS are totally separate. I personally believe it all comes from the same basic points, gender variance. Much like matter, combinations of the same thing can create something completely different. But, they came from the same stuff... That is how I see TS/CD.... We end up living totally different lives and have entirely different circumstances. The gender variance IMO originates at the same place.

I believe that what Pat is putting out is some science which correlates those things. It is IMO, loosely able to connect some dots. I am not against anything in the book per say, but I don't see it being rock solid. More like that there are things in science that can help with building a foundation of knowledge that we who are at least somewhere on the spectrum have reasons for being there other than just mommy or daddy did/didn't love me enough, or my sister had fun painting my nails when I was 3.

[Pat]

I have to fall in with Beverley. I read your post. I have read other articles slanted to the layman for easier reading. After analyzing all the information thrown at me over the decades I still cannot see any model that fits all.

I doubt there will be one. My only intention is to bring this info forward because it will resonate with some, probably for entirely different reasons than it resonates with me. I totally recognize that there are others for whom it does not resonate at all, especially for those who don't feel they're transgender.


Does a near death experience cause someone to engage in activities of self gratification before it's too late?

Again, the answer will be different for depending on the individual. And the viewpoint. Some may see my decision to come out as an act of self-gratification. I don't see it that way. I felt I had been given a rare and wonderful gift and had left it unopened up to that moment. And I regretted it, not for what I might get from it, but from embarrassment at having spurned such a wonderful thing that had been crafted for me. (Edit: Odd as it may sound, I felt I was being ungrateful.) I don't know if there's an afterlife, but I realized if there was, I was going to have to carry that regret into it. Next time around, I'm going to go into whatever comes next joyful. ;)

[njcddresser]

A fascinating read. Like many of you, "Why?" is the $64,000 question and one that I have spent a great deal of time thinking about. I still don't know the answer to the question as it pertains to me.

What I have accepted in respect to my CD, TG or whatever initials you want to apply to me....

It's something that has been inside me from a very early age
For the most part, I suppressed it from an early age well into my 40's
5 years ago, for the first time, I accepted that this was who I was and began to explore what this meant to me. At the time, I thought I was just a guy who liked wearing women's clothes.

I've come to learn that it is much more than that. I feel a big part of who I am is very feminine and I've come to accept it. I now describe myself as much more than a crossdresser but not quite a transgender.
I don't think I'll ever fully transition as there are to many personal factors at play. I've fully accepted that this is who I am and have never been happier. I feel no guilt whatsoever and continue on this amazing journey.

I have many of you to thank for all the support that you've provided for me. I couldn't have done it without you!!

[ClosetED]

Thank you Pat - great find and I know it takes great effort to enter in a long writeup.
I certainly knew of the genetic findings, but not the non-righthandedness or the 2D:4D.
I am right handed, but fairly ambidextrous. I can write fairly well with left and can do a Vulcan sign with both equally well.
my 2D:4D ratio is close to 1 with 4 being just slightly longer.
Despite there being an estimated 5 times a many CDers as TS, we hide better so fewer studies.
Hugs, Ellen

[Tina_gm]

A fascinating read. Like many of you, "Why?" is the $64,000 question and one that I have spent a great deal of time thinking about. I still don't know the answer to the question as it pertains to me.

What I have accepted in respect to my CD, TG or whatever initials you want to apply to me....

It's something that has been inside me from a very early age
For the most part, I suppressed it from an early age well into my 40's
5 years ago, for the first time, I accepted that this was who I was and began to explore what this meant to me. At the time, I thought I was just a guy who liked wearing women's clothes.

I've come to learn that it is much more than that. I feel a big part of who I am is very feminine and I've come to accept it. I now describe myself as much more than a crossdresser but not quite a transgender.
I don't think I'll ever fully transition as there are to many personal factors at play. I've fully accepted that this is who I am and have never been happier. I feel no guilt whatsoever and continue on this amazing journey.

I have many of you to thank for all the support that you've provided for me. I couldn't have done it without you!!

wow NJC, your feelings and your timeline are so very similar to my own. As have you, I have come to realize its not the cloths but the reason why I put them on in the 1st place. A real internal femininity that is not created by clothing, but that the clothing and any other feminine expression is not an effect but a reflection of the person I am inside.

[giuseppina]

Fascinating thread, Pat.

I am more or less ambidextrous, able to do most things with my left hand nearly as well as my right with the exception of handwriting.

Some research gives support to the hormonal wash theory; I've never thought that is the whole story.

Does the book make any mention of body shape at puberty? Mine was more like that of a cis-female without breast development than a cis-male. It would be interesting to see how my brain stacks up wrt male/female characteristics.

For those who want to read the book without buying it, the best bet is a university or college library that supports a significant Department of Psychology. I still have and use borrowing privileges where I obtained my B.Math.

[GretchenM]

Hi Pat,

In an earlier post I said I needed to get the book. I got the book and, oh my goodness, what a transformation that produced. Back in 2013, I spent months reading peer reviewed literature on the subject and learned a great deal. But found no answers to my questions, particularly the question of "Why?" As a biologist and ecologist studying such different behavior is important to understanding the full range of diversity in a species and its adaptations and adaptability. And when it is personal it is even more important. This book has brought me so much comfort in recognizing who I am. It is so exciting and the long list of references at the end of each chapter provides a source to go to journals and find the original work. Bevan has done the field a great service. But what is really interesting is that he concludes the book with a comment about how he also wanted to provide the kind of knowledge that we need to defend ourselves when faced by criticism. Not sure he accomplished that in a way that is really useful to most of us who are not biologists, but it is a start and a very, very good one.

Unfortunately, and this is not a criticism of the book, although the science can provide a lot so we can understand better who we are and why we are the way we are, it does not provide a lot of guidance in how to live with it. That is up to us. With the knowledge though, it opens a lot of creative doors to allow us to move more freely in the world and be able to defend ourselves against the critics. It is not an easy book to read, even for a biologist, but your initial summary is right on and so helpful. I agree with someone else who suggested this become a sticky - it is well worth it as it goes to the heart of what troubles so many of us: "Why am I this way?"

Thank you so much.

[Pat]

Unfortunately, and this is not a criticism of the book, although the science can provide a lot so we can understand better who we are and why we are the way we are, it does not provide a lot of guidance in how to live with it. That is up to us.

That's certainly true. But Beven did what he set out to do. He can't build the whole structure, but he can be a brick in the foundation. ;) The rest *is* up to us.

I think one of its most important functions is that it gives people a "science" explanation on why we exist; why we are drawn to do what we do. And when we know that this is *not* an aberration, not a mental illness, then more of us can give ourselves permission to be. And what we see so much of in the Crossdressers forum is people who need to give themselves that permission. I was hoping some of the information would take hold and I'd start seeing it pop up in the discussions and spread out from there, but that hasn't happened. But at least it's out there.

[MaryG]

http://www.gires.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2014/09/The-Psychobiology-of-TSTG-Book-Review.pdf

found it to be an excellent review

[marlacd]

Fascinating read. I fit into the ambidextrous category, I always wondered why my left hand was my right's worst enemy. Everyone that knows me, knows I have a horrible time with right and left. And in the 2D/4D comparison, 4 is longer on me.

In the testosterone wash, I'm inclined to believe that I got the short end. In conversations with my dad after my mom passed away, I found out mom's sexual drive just wasn't there. She wanted nothing to do with him for the last 20 years of her life. Since testosterone is a vital ingredient in woman's sexual pleasure, her lack of may be a piece of why I like the dressing side of me.

For whatever reasons we're drawn to this, we will do it. One little sidebar I've noticed, that has been mentioned before in other threads, I've never felt guilty about dressing. The couple people that knew I did, could never understand why I never felt it. Oh well, like it or leave. I'm not changing for you.

[Shayla]

Thanks for doing the 'heavy lifting' with this book, Pat. Very interesting.

Your quote, "I think one of its most important functions is that it gives people a "science" explanation on why we exist; why we are drawn to do what we do. And when we know that this is *not* an aberration, not a mental illness, then more of us can give ourselves permission to be. And what we see so much of in the Crossdressers forum is people who need to give themselves that permission", says it all for me. The more knowledge the better for us and those who don't understand us.

Just to add to the impromptu survey, I am totally right-handed but fit the 2D4D exactly.

[Sometimes Steffi]

I was intrigued by the non right handedness thing. I am right handed but from childhood have wanted to do certain things as though I was left-handed, specifically sport requiring a bat or club to be grasped with both hands. I never heard of anyone else doing this and had not realised it was a 'thing'. In the end I did not persevere with tennis and when playing golf just adapted to standard right hand clubs and am now more comfortable with this. Thanks for the info.

I am very right hand dominant, but I play hockey as a lefty.

As for epi-whatever, Wikipedia has a very good "article" on finger length. The key premise is that finger length is correlated to a 39 month long estrogen/testosterone wash, and is not genetically determined.

I do believe that there is some generic inheritance pattern. I have a very small extended family, but on my paternal mother's side of the family, there are 4 out of 25 or so "non-binary": a gay man, a lesbian, a lesbian or possibly FtM and me, "just a CD". It seems like a very percentage of non-binary and a wide variety of non-binary expressions.

[suit]

well here is a thought https://science.howstuffworks.com/life/inside-the-mind/human-brain/10-brain-myths3.htm
so you pick up a skill by practicing and working on it and thinking about . your plastic brain gets modified by your own thoughts >
think about crossdressing and looking at" hot teacher/banker indian cheif", your brain expands and accomates the skill of your obsession ,be it hunting, motorcycling , art , calculus of planetary orbits, or crossdressing , cause that's what it does.
you keep going to class keep seeing hotty and thinking how awasum it would be to be her clothes to be able to feel what they feel ..to be in her clothes ...you just made your brain a crossdresser...do it for 3 weeks ..it's almost an addiction throw in a couple of orgasums > ooh your ****ed now << life long slave to panties , lip stick, snug wool skirts on taffeta slips swishing on nylon covered legs and the clicking of hi heels or what ever you dreamed about it . so is crossdressing a bad habit started long ago or is the study on finger length right ? occam's razor says simple is closest to truth . curiosity killed the cat satisfaction brought him back well curiosity made the feline and damn does it feel nice ,purrrrr. So the parallels between a 12 step program and falling off the wagon really run close can you say oxycodone trigger? "the love chemical". now if I had heard some where pre puberty about bad habits and how setting a goal can literally change how you think and are able to think by expanding >literally <your minds tablet size in the area you give a lot of thought to > I might not have let it get such an acreage of canvas to draw on . I might have picked a different less obsolete more saleable and social skill in the same area..but knowledge about scandal girdles how many psi they hug with(.8 to 1.2 corsets as much as 4 psi more on men,ribs are thicker ) , what % the different parts stretch and speaking of calculus & fluid pressure there is...friction,
swish factor when she moves..
in the realm of over thinking silly stuff> rabbit holes , you tube, and anything that happens more than 6 thousand years ago around africa and the pyramids> deep rabbit hole! interesting, math of one explains the location of the next<
question is ,are the aliens* that used their dna to modify the neanderthals dna responsible for the minds plasticity, or the neanderthals for being able to learn ? I'll tell you, playtex makes a girdle, no mater what they call it .*(they need a good miner for the gold they aconded with and used local resources )https://www.google.com/imgres?imgurl=https%3A%2F%2Fs-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com%2Foriginals%2Ffd%2Fea%2F26%2Ffdea26 3a74b322f184ba447f2aba6f2b.jpg&imgrefurl=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.pinterest.com%2Fpin%2F 405605510174057616%2F&docid=ne56XaSYtKX2jM&tbnid=a3Xy7av4UiBhQM%3A&vet=10ahUKEwierdPDicXYAhXJ4iYKHR7IBDsQMwi3ASgHMAc. .i&w=600&h=600&hl=en&bih=608&biw=1224&q=evelution%20with%20alian&ved=0ahUKEwierdPDicXYAhXJ4iYKHR7IBDsQMwi3ASgHMAc&iact=mrc&uact=8
https://www.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.thedailyquarterly.c om%2Farticles%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2013%2F04%2FEvolutionOfMan.jpg&imgrefurl=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.thedailyquarterly.com%2 Farticles%2F2013%2F05%2F23%2Ftdq-investigates-some-chick-scientist-says-men-will-one-day-become-extinct%2Fevolutionofman%2F&docid=k-SiAl7PcMce7M&tbnid=ux9_8m2O6aJBwM%3A&vet=10ahUKEwjujfGkicXYAhUDziYKHcZcDU04ZBAzCE8oTTBN ..i&w=800&h=465&hl=en&bih=608&biw=1224&q=evelution%20&ved=0ahUKEwjujfGkicXYAhUDziYKHcZcDU04ZBAzCE8oTTBN&iact=mrc&uact=8

[sometimes_miss]

1. Why do we exist?

Because we're a normal variation in sexuality.

2. Why do we do what we do?

Because we exist.


The error we see in virtually every study done, is that they try to find the ONE, and ONLY ONE, cause of crossdressing. So they come up with a hypothesis, and then it all comes crashing down when they find someone who doesn't fit; they then try to disregard everything about them that doesn't fit their hypothesis in order to justify to themselves that they are really right after all, but the more they study, the more they find out that there are too may exceptions to their hypothesis for it to be correct.

Only when they realize that there is no ONE single cause, will they be able to make advances in this field of study.

It all stems from the either outright, or subconscious desire to figure out how to identify the ONE cause, and stop it, or reverse it.

'Oh, his mom dressed him as a girl when he was a child. Well then, all we have to do is stop anyone from dressing their son in girls clothes, and we can stop everyone from ever becoming a crossdresser'. Or, 'Ah, it seems that he was exposed to more estrogen and not as much testosterone when he was in the uterus, so all we have to do is monitor hormone levels and make sure they are correct, and this will prevent anyone from becoming a crossdresser'. Or maybe, 'Oh, we found a genetic variation that is found in more crossdressers than normal folks, so all we have to do is identify those parents with the potential to pass along this anomoly and we'll be able to stop people from having children that might grow up to be crossdressers'. The list goes on and on. All in order to figure it out, and stop it from happening. Why? Because they can't stand the idea that we are different. Because they're frightened that THEY or THEIR children might wind up being a crossdresser, and, of course, that they might be gay.

All because of homophobia. Hey, world, it's the 21st century. Gay people are no danger to any of you, no less valuable contributors to society; in fact, most of the ones I know are even nicer than the general straight people.

Let it be, already.

[BettyMorgan]

Pat, thank you for this summary and response. I am left handed but do many things with my right. Ambidextrous is what I've called it, but in an atypical fashion. Knowing how I became the way I am is good to know but I am this way and what's best is for me (and society) to accept that.

Regarding the CD comment, I consider myself to be trans. The easy answer is I'm a crossdresser, but the more complex answer is I'm transgender.

[Pat]

1. Why do we exist?

Because we're a normal variation in sexuality.

A variation in human gender experience, yes. A variation in sexuality? Most people who study this say no, it's distinct from sexuality.



2. Why do we do what we do?

Because we exist.


I do love a good tautology and I can't really argue against it. But I was trying to emphasize the mechanism for a biological trait interacting with what many think is an invented social norm.

[Melanie Moxon]

It is an interesting summary.

Finger length ratio for me is almost equal, borderline male but you'd have to measure it to see the difference, as for the handedness thing, I am predominantly right handed, I do everything with my right hand except for one thing; using a knife and fork :thinking:

For me the clothes thing is a big factor I know what feels right for me I would rather have the jeans from the women's section and I cannot explain why that is other than "I am Trans" it has nothing to do with the feel (silky, satin etc.) the impression of a sexy look. When I dress I wear 'womens' clothing, jeans T's, bland as you like, but it feels 'right', I feel comfortable, I feel good (but not in a sexy fetish way).

To boot I hate buying mens clothes, they don't and have never interested me, possibly because deep down I have never wanted to be a 'man' whatever that means. I have lost nearly 40lbs over the past year and a bit. My work trousers are like MC hammer pants now, some of my shirts lose and fairly ill fitting as my waist has dropped from ~38 to around ~34in. But I'm not going to replace them until they are worn out because I simply do not want to because I don't like them.

[Becky Blue]

Fascinating thread, Pat.

Does the book make any mention of body shape at puberty? Mine was more like that of a cis-female without breast development than a cis-male. It would be interesting to see how my brain stacks up wrt male/female characteristics.


Giuseppina how interesting... when i see pics of myself as a child at puberty and even for a while after I definitely looked like a pre pubescent girl with a flat chest..

[Pat]

Does the book make any mention of body shape at puberty?

I apologize for missing the question. No, that isn't mentioned. I wouldn't be surprised if it hasn't been studied yet.

[docrobbysherry]

Thanks for posting this and for being so diligent with your replies, Pat!:hugs:

[marlacd]

Something pretty simple occured to me. Some people, (My uncle comes to mind) are unreasonably fixated on continuing on the family name. A simple idea like that just might be driving a lot folks to be bigoted against accepting us as we see ourselves. Finding out we may be predisposed to the opposite gender only upsets them more. And of course there's the ever popular "I don't like it, so you shouldn't do it." ploy. We're all too familiar with that one.

[phili]

Thanks to Mary G for finding the review- it supplements Pat's thorough summaries, and includes this reference:
"Bevan also draws on biopsychology's findings that conscious choices are rooted in prior subconscious mechanisms to argue "the motivation for TSTG is mediated by subconscious mechanisms that cannot be directly controlled by conscious thought". It can neither be "learned through experience or lost through forgetting".


http://www.gires.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2014/09/The-Psychobiology-of-TSTG-Book-Review.pdf

I found it to be an excellent review

Trying to capture my subconscious motivations in fleeting moments of awareness has not been easy, and perhaps it is just trying to understand my motivations when I can't see my biology or genetics. I'm sure biological drivers manifest as preferences and this leads to more elaborate subconscious choices. On the other hand, a lot of subconscious drivers can operate at a cultural level.

I don't like to wear all women's clothes, for example, but I ecstatically and peacefully love to wear those that reflect my view of myself in different roles- peacefully sitting and looking at the ocean, out doing errands, playing tennis, being part of the art work in a museum, fashion sewing student, etc. As a child, when I didn't have access to the particular clothes, and a much simpler life, I would still try to make up a dress from a sack, so the age-old, consistent need is clearly to signal to myself, and to other, my sense of qualifying membership in the class of 'woman'. That was before I had any knowledge or experience of the many choices and styles of womanhood. So it was more of a simple receptive/assertive dynamic. Or maybe that was my mental sense of some biology. At the same time, I didn't and don't want to give up my membership in the class of 'man'. I really like and value parts of man territory.

I've tried to determine if I am TS and just trying to make body reality fit, and maybe I am very similar to a girl wanting to stay a girl but have 70's style women' liberation! Until there is better definition of identity, I can't get a better answer than to say that gender is clearly a many-stranded experience, with dozens of roots in prenatal biology, significant experiences in gender role training, interaction with culture and what kinds of people we are exposed to, etc.

The complexity of gender, as evidenced by the narratives we are sharing, is even more fully elaborated by this scientific exploration. It is clear there is no short path to a complete theoretical and practical understanding. This is enough to support banding together and arguing for broad inclusion. Letting people be is actually very simple.

[CONSUELO]

While we all look to experts we mustn't forget they wouldn't be so without us , we are the source of their information . When we exchange our thoughts here it's from the horses mouth and not second hand .

Indeed we are the subjects of study but we form a wide spectrum of experience and how "transgenderism" expresses itself may be influenced or modified by other factors that may be social or biological. Also it is difficult for us to examine ourselves objectively. Bevan's meta study is an important contribution to a complex issue. Is he correct? Probably in some or most of what he states but this is a scientific study and so it has to be falsifiable. In other words, other studies and experiments and measurements will be made and compared to Bevan's conclusions. The conclusions may be supported or may be found wanting and so the search for a solution will go on.
My take from this is that my fetishistic transvestism probably has roots in my biological makeup but I wonder about the fetishistic part. May that have come from external causes?

Still lots of questions but it is encouraging to see that the questions are still being asked and careful studies are being made. Each of us has an opinion of why we may be the way we are but how many of us subject those opinions to rigorous analysis of the sort that Bevan brings to the puzzle?

Finally my thanks to Pat for doing her part to study and summarize Bevan's work. That was no small task.

[Terri_Cross]

Thank you for posting this. I'll need to read back through this a bit more slowly later. But it does give me a bit of insight as to why I do what I do.

[monnica_blake]

Fascinating read. I have spent many sleepless nights wondering why I am the way I am. I attribute it to external factors but maybe I missed that in my makeup, there is something that gives me the desire to dress and act female.

[NicoleScott]

I hesitate to get into discussions about anything transgender unless that word is defined by the user. It means so many different things to different people that it ends up meaning nothing. To me, it's the umbrella meaning, and includes everyone who identifies and/OR expresses in varying degrees as the gender opposite their sex.
I read the OP but not the book. I don't think the use of transgender in either the book or OP is meant to include crossdressers, especially crossdressers (like me) who have strong male identities and like it, but enjoy crossdressing at times. This may sound strange, but I think it is that maleness (and my male response to feminine things) that drives my crossdressing. Maybe a topic for a separate discussion.
So it's not surprising that crossdressing wasn't mentioned.
I don't think that TS and CD are peas from the same pod that went on different development paths. We are fundamentally different in many ways but often are mentioned together because of one thing we do: wear women's clothing. Even in that, there are differences in how and why we do it.
I have a forum friend with much in common in both crossdressing and non-crossdressing, and we discuss both often via PM. I identify as TG,a male-identified CDer under the TG umbrella, but she, also a male-identified CDer, does not consider herself TG because she does not identify as a woman. To better communicate, when someone uses transgender, it would help to know what they mean. Sorry, but "everybody knows" isn't so.

[Pat]

I don't think the use of transgender in either the book or OP is meant to include crossdressers, especially crossdressers (like me) who have strong male identities and like it, but enjoy crossdressing at times.

The book says this when distinguishing identities:


It should be noted that there are reasons for cross-dressing that fall outside of the contemporary TSTG definition. Historically and even today, cross-dressing may be motivated by factors other than gender predisposition including theatrics, politics, adventure, religion, publicity, economics, and necessity.

Bevan, Thomas. The Psychobiology of Transsexualism and Transgenderism: A New View Based on Scientific Evidence (pp. 65-66). ABC-CLIO. Kindle Edition.

which I take to mean that outside of the stated exceptions, the author views crossdressers as transgender.

As far as the OP, I understand that we have some crossdressers who think they are not transgender on this forum and I don't care to get into the business of telling others who they are. If you accept being transgender, this book is about you. If you reject being transgender, we're not talking about you. You get to make the sole decision if you are transgender or not. Please don't side-track this thread.

[NicoleScott]

Pat, I'm not trying to side-track your thread. I was commenting on others' observations that crossdressers weren't mentioned in the OP. I would have liked to see a definition of TSTG before discussion about "whys".

[Lisa Gerrie]

This thread really should be sticky.