Printable View
OK Reine, I appreciate your reassuring comments. I'll let it go... I know Batty doesn't back down, and I have read nearly every new post on most of the forums for over a year. Mildly amusing thought...when you said words to the effect, "why do i feel like i'm walking into a mine field?", my first thought was, "not mine field, Bat trap!"
Be well, dd
Quote:
Originally Posted by ReineD
No, I'm not. Morality is subjective. Ethics are not. And I'm not judging others. And I suggest you show exactly what of my statements are beliefs and not conclusions based on evidence.Quote:
Originally Posted by letsdance GG
Yes, subjective morality. But there is an objective reality and there are objective principles of right and wrong that apply no matter a persons individual morality determining right and wrong in interactions with others. Ethics. And I am simply making logical statements that IF someothing is considered right (honesty with spouse, protecting family) and it's opposites wrong Then something else is right (honesty with other non-romantic relationships, protecting TG descendants and TG kids in the community from transphobia) and it's opposite wrong.Quote:
What I believe to be true may not apply to someone else.
I'm not questioning your actions, but if you feel there is no objective measure of right and wrong then you agree with their being no laws, no protection from or objection to murder or rape, no police, terrorists are A.O.K. even if it's you they kill etc. If you do not agree with all of that then there must be objective measures of right and wrong and I suggest over 5,000 years of Ethics Philosophy might be it and if not and you think you have an answer I suggest you could get the nobel prize for finding an alternative.Quote:
Both of my children do indeed know about my ex husband being TG. How I treated that situation is not open to debate amongst anyone that feels they have the pulse on what it right and wrong. It is MY family and I don't feel the need to justify my actions to anyone.
See above. Being a CD or TG doesn't take us out of access to principles of social justice on the community scale or the personal. You might be very good for all I know, but you and I and everyone are not free from such unless we believe in pure total anarchy. As an alternative I reccomend reciprocal ethics http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethics_of_reciprocityQuote:
How I interact with CD's, TG's and others isn't open for debate either.
Once again, and I don't know where your missunderstanding, I'm discussing and analysing what is right and what is wrong because of what would make it right and what would make it wrong, not judging the actions of individuals.Quote:
And I do have many I consider my family by the very nature of where we are as friends. All relationships require an open mind. Not one closed by the supposed failure of others to meet your expectations. NO ONE has the right to sit in judgment over others perceived actions. By doing so you are saying that you are right and they are wrong! How 'passe to be so judgmental:Angry3:
Now unless your the kind of extreme fundamentalist anarchist (or unless you are a psychopath, I shouldn't discount that possibility either, psychopaths are people too and often so from birth or head trauma) whose ok with rape and murder then there must exist objective measures of right and wrong to some extent and if there are for some things (rape and murder) and not for others (what you do and do not disclose to a child about their inheritable characteristics) then I suggest you find a cogent explanation of why that is so. If you are though I don't mind discussing the issue of right and wrong within Anarchy, I may just have some Chomsky here to refresh my mind on that.
And if you cannot then logically it makes sense to look for something further in the Why what I have said might be wrong, not the fact that their exists any notion of right and wrong at all.
The point was not what was safe, pragmatic, easy or risk-free but what was right. The right thing to do is often the most dangerous. There is risk to coming out to an SO whatever time it is done! Lets try some IF/THEN logic statements...Quote:
Originally Posted by LA CINDY LOVE
So IF it is right to come out to an SO, especially from the outset THEN is it not right to come out to every relationship for the same reasons?
IF an SO thinks that a CD should risk everything coming otu to them, especially from the outset THEN should they not take the same risk themselves they demand of the CD AND should they not be obliged to act in order to remove the obstancle other CDs in the future will have to their coming out to future SO's?Quote:
But to suggest that your SO should risk their families, their friendships and their jobs about being open that they are in a relationship with a CD.....is asking for to much.
Actually this whole thread is doing just that! Thinking about the needs of other relationships, other communities, the children of CDs and TG children especially.Quote:
We Cd's are very selfish it is alway about me me me and the need to express myself and self acceptance.............do we really think about anyone else needs.
It could be argued, though it's not my point, that an SO who never tells their possibly TG-gene carrying children and insists the CDing remain closeted in perpetuity is being selfish by holding a double-standard in insisting the CD be out to them is right but being unwilling themselves to risk the negative consequences they demand is right from the CD to them and by putting their comfort and safety ahead of that of their TG descendants.
However I am not saying that, as I argue selfishness requires a conscious choice to put ones own desires over others needs, so someone needs to be aware of that possibility before that choice could be considered selfish. Instead I'm talking about what ids right, what a persons obligations are which is different from saying what is wrong (especially as there can be plenty of lesser-evils as well as neutral choices in most things).
That's not remotely what I'm saying.Quote:
Originally Posted by letsdance GG
I'm saying that IF honesty about CDing is an obligation in one relationship THEN isn't it also one in other relationships?
And IF one has an obligation to protecting a child AND considering the growing evidence that child carries 1 or more genes likely to cause an increase in the chances of being a CD THEN for that childs sake and their childrens sake as well as for the sake of all other TG-gene carrying relatives and their descendants and all the TG kids of the future in the community SURELY both CD and GG parents have an obligation to do everything within their power against Transphobia in the community to protect the child AS WELL AS to inform the child of their possible genetic heritage (just as one should if carrying a svhizophrenia gene or a breast cancer gene or autism etc) especially to prepare them for the increased chance they may have TG kids or grandkids one day.
See how different that is? The WHY is important there. And if you think the conclusion is wrong, rather than just objecting to it why not work out what part of the reason for the conclusion is wrong to find another more accurate conclusion?
ReineD, your spot on about the statements I'm making, though it's not as such to make a mission-statement but just to explore the right and wrong of the situation, to test my conclusions against the reasoning of others to see if it's right and to increase peoples consciousness of it if it is right. But if it is right, and so far there's no reasons mentioned yet why it isn't, the a mission-statement is a good idea to take from it. And you raise very good points about ways to move on from that conclusion.
No this is Ethical Reasoning. Metaphysics is about what exists and what does not. Ethics is about what is right and what is wrong. Different branches of philosophy (they cross over in Existentialism of course but I'm not bringing that into this, too cumbersome and it will come to the same conclusions at the end anyway).Quote:
Originally Posted by AmandaM
As for sacrificing their lives for what they don't understand.. yes there is some risk being out, especially for non-white Transwomen... but if our generation doesn't take those risks or act directly to reduce those risks then we pass the buck to the next generation.. who can call that moral or ethical and what's so hard to understand about that? And what's hard about asking GGs to take the same risks they expected thier CD partner to have taken in telling them?
Oh WOW! New word! New word! New word! I'd never heard that word before! I just had to use my dictionary for something besides spelling for the first time in months! Thankyou, thankyou, thankyou! :hugs:Quote:
Originally Posted by Deedee Dupree
Indeed. Very much so.Quote:
Originally Posted by ReineD
Though the risk to livelihood and the risk of hate-crime can't be ignored either, though nor can TG-suicide rates and TG-youth-suicide rates.Quote:
Originally Posted by AmandaM
But it was not one. Admittedly many are not versed in intellectual language because schools have tended to remove it. And same with philosophy and Ethical Reasoning because it's rarely taught. So it's easy for people to missunderstand or to react emotionally. Especially when their own choices are challenged by the ideas involved. But that doesn't make it an attack.Quote:
Batty's post has been viewed as an attack.
No. I'm not. Firstly I'm discussing both Moral and Ethical obligations. I'm not saying I've done better than others either. Until relatively recently I didn't even admit i was a CD to myself but for rare occassions.Quote:
Batty is saying she has the moral high-ground
I am discussing a chain of reasoning that leads to a conclusion. If there is an error or vital omission in the reasoning then the conclusion is invalid. If not then it is true no matter how disquieting, discomforting or even horrible that truth may be.
This is philosophy not religion. It is thought not faith. Conclusion not belief. And as I said, it finds my past actions wanting too and dictates the right and wrong of my future choices.. if it is correct.Quote:
and we have all been found wanting unless we believe as she does.
I place it here to stand the test of others reasoning. And it should be tested and re-tested and there will never be a time when it is not apt to raise a challenge to it. It is true so long as it cannot be shown to be in error. When it can we refine it or discard it in favour of a new hypothesis. Just like in any science or higher-reasoning.Quote:
Therefore, Batty has laid the groundwork that her moral argument is superior just by her stating it.
I'm far from the humblest of people that's true. But there is nothing arrogant inthese posts. These ideas and statements could carry in any philosophy paper, lecture, discussion forum or casual conversation, except for being written in fairly laymens terms and language and without a formal structure.Quote:
If this is true, it's the height of arrogance.
Yup.Quote:
I assume of course, that that is not what she meant. I'll leave it to her to clear the air.
I agree wholeheartedly. Irregardless of how Batty takes it, I find it offensive as the reader/passerby. To make a personal attack, with the use of the language she used, not to mention where it says Moderator *edit* (excuse me, I mean administrator) on her name is irresponsible and AGAINST THE FORUM RULES that she so implicitly enforces against others.Quote:
Originally Posted by Deedee Dupree
Batty,
Have you ever considered making a formal dissertation on this topic? There are so few free thinkers left in the world, and even fewer of them are transgendered. You should attempt to publish some of these hypotheses.
Interesting idea.Quote:
Originally Posted by JodyCD
Though I haven't got around to getting a formal degree yet because of my disability, though several professors have pestered me to do so recently from Peace Studies to Philosophy to Law.
Hmm.. i might do a casual-language post on my blog for the time being and maybe if I can manage my symptoms well enough after the current human-rights measures I'm working on pass or fail I might try to work out which degree would maximise my effect...
Or just go for a book instead?
I am sure the last time I looked at Tamara's title said
Tamara Croft
^_^ Administrator ^_^
there is a difference is there not....lol:battingeyelashes:
As for not stepping into a "mine field," but a "bat trapp"...laffing...:devil:
guess something was sprung....was that the belfry.....laffing.....:devil:
sounds like theres a lot of stepping in "something"...
round......here.... that needs a couple buckets n shovels to muck it out... laffing...:devil:
I do think that those of us GG's have expressed their feelings quite clearly.,
Maybe its Time to move on peoples,...enjoy what the forum is about, the support advice that is given for those that dont have supporting SO's or those GG's just learning the CDing life of their partners...etc.,
We as human beings can make life difficult when it needs not to be,
But if those of us that can make a difference, we know we have the ability to do this, without being coerced., preeched to or some postings gone to boredum by the lengthy words that have been posted, when we go overboard in our quest to put forward our point,or for someone to pull it apart n tell us we are wrong.
How can you love/help someone if you Judge/judgemental of them.
:battingeyelashes:
Life is too short, we need to live life , laugh and laugh hard.,love & support, to move forward.
For Life is what you make it.:love::D without standing on the roof tops to tell the whole world how you live, at someone elses request. ;)
I think what all these threads show is there is a need for an academic discussion section for the less emotive... I'm quite tired of seeing counter threads spawn in seeming retaliation for an inability to win a war of verbal attrition. It is only right and proper to intellectualize what we are and face, and a simple 'no, I think you are wrong is all it takes'.
Do you hear those of us with an interest in or who are partners of men bemoaning the fact of how they are not included or not appreciated by this community? I'm sorry but agree or disagree at least keep it civil.
Lisa x
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lisa Golightly
well put & said lisa. :rose:
Publishing a formal argument is a good idea, and including it in your blog in layman's terms is an even better one! There is no need for any further testing! We all agree with your hypothesis. No one is arguing with you regarding the right and the wrong things we SHOULD aspire to do. Most people have responded emotionally because they believed you were telling them their best efforts or their next best efforts were not good enough. So again, to paraphrase the core issue, [SIZE="2"]the right thing to do is to move forward (however each person CAN) in overcoming their internalized opression so that we can help society rid itself of transphobia.[/SIZE]Quote:
Originally Posted by battybattybats
So let's do that then. Who wants to begin? I challenge the next person in this thread to post what they feel they CAN do, or post ideas on what they feel they COULD do. Better yet, let those who have concrete ideas on how they feel they can themselves move forward begin a new thread and let others join in to relate what they already do.Quote:
Originally Posted by battybattybats
Let's just move on, shall we?
If fact, I'll begin. I challenge myself to look at the next person who stares at my SO and I the next time we are out in public and (with my SO's permission), ask them politely, with a smile if they have any questions.
All I will write is that people do not understand the reasoning behind the reactions that threads (and posters) such as this occasionally garner. Emotions are riled and expressed honestly and, occasionally, instinctively. And for those who feel this is inappropriate or inconsistent with policy, well, life sometimes throws a curve.
Now then, unless you have a reaction to the thread topic at hand (yeah, this means you actually have to read all the posts -- sorry), please save your comments about other members or staff for private communication.
Ok, I'll offer up my own current mini-action plan. Becky and I are currently reminding those who know about our situation that it's not just me transitioning. Our commitment to each other means that my transition causes Becky to make a transition too. This is important because it requires people to think a bit further out of the box than normal.Quote:
Originally Posted by ReineD
Sarah...
You can publish a scholarly work without a formal degree, however it would probably carry a lot more weight if you did have the coveted Phd next to your name. But either way your words should be published and analyzed by people who can carry an intellectual discourse on the subject. Writing a book would probably be good to although your audience would be largely the same types of people on here.Quote:
Originally Posted by battybattybats
As to the hypothesis you have made, while I don't necessarily agree, I do lack any evidence against it for now.
Well it's a bit late tonight for blogging it, but when I have some time from human rights campaining I'll get a blogpost together.Quote:
Originally Posted by ReineD
I'm not so sure everyone is agreeing actually. And that's fine. Hopefully they will look into it more and either find flaws or exceptions or difficulties with it or failing to then agree with it till some turn up.Quote:
There is no need for any further testing! We all agree with your hypothesis.
I expected there would be such a reaction. Sometimes we do make bad judgements me included, sometimes we think we did the right thing only to have someone challenge our way of looking at things that results in uncomfortable or even painful reassessment. So some outrage, disstress or outright anti-intellectualism is bound to occur whenever the reasoning of peoples choices are called into question, not the choices they made at the time though as they were based only on the evidence and ideas available to them at that time which makes a massive difference. Sometimes the best decision someone makes based on the available understanding is the wrong thing to do, specifically because their are parts of it they didn't know or understand. Surely everyone has done that before.Quote:
No one is arguing with you regarding the right and the wrong things we SHOULD aspire to do. Most people have responded emotionally because they believed you were telling them their best efforts or their next best efforts were not good enough.
My whole point is not what was thought to be right or wrong for people to choose before.. that can only be judged based on what they knew then (so when a CD is judged for hiding it from a wife it's important to know whether they genuinly thought it would go away or if they had been informed already before then that it would not! Same with GG's and their past choices).. but rather it's about what is actually right and wrong based on what is known now.
The data from Australian scientists that at least one gene is more common in TS than Cis and their view that more will likely be found to be a part of it and to explain CDs too is quite new, but like the same finding with breast cancer and schizophrenia it has massive consequences for what is right and what is wrong for ALL our further decisions CD and GG alike.
Even those without kids! Because almost every CD without kids will have brothers or sisters or cousins who will likely be carriers of these genes and have kids!
So it can't even just apply to parents! Every CD with any sort of biological relative must be considered to have some burden of responsibility to the CD relatives they will have!
Indeed. I keep finding further valid arguments for a personal responsibility to others and have found not one counter yet, and in the mean time if just one of those is valid then every day wasted is harm we do through inaction to others! Again not everyone can be out to everyone right away, but we can surely all find ways to improve?Quote:
So again, to paraphrase the core issue, [SIZE="2"]the right thing to do is to move forward (however each person CAN) in overcoming their internalized opression so that we can help society rid itself of transphobia.[/SIZE]
Hmm.. I'm already increasing my outness, added another person I explicitly said i was Transgender to yesterday. I'm putting TG issues, mentioning CDs into the national spotlight on the governments human rights concultation forum. I'm in fact spending hours each day on TG rights issues and increasing TG publicity and when these long nails aren't digging gauges in my keyboard for us their long painted appearance is raising visible gender non conformity in the community. I'll have some more time to ponder in a few weeks when the community consultation closes though, till then focusing on it is doing a lot.Quote:
So let's do that then. Who wants to begin? I challenge the next person in this thread to post what they feel they CAN do, or post ideas on what they feel they COULD do.
But I'm sure there's more I can do.... I just need to work out what... suggestions are welcome.. certainly I'll have an open conversation with everyone I speak to tmorrow if it comes up, and I'll be picking up my anti-transphobia-artwork from the gallery as the exhibition finished so maybe that will be a good opportunity for some education...
Edit: Just in case it wasn't clear in other posts ther I just included specifically that I am transgender on a public human rights forum under my birth name http://www.openforum.com.au/NHROC/2n...tationQuestion
Quote:
Certainly some of the people at HREOC (now AHRC) did their level best when they put together the Sex and Gender Diversity issues study which I as a Transgender person contributed to but the results were exceedingly inadequate because resources were stretched so thin that a group with so many issues needing to be adressed had but one issue properly focused on in the report and which has seemingly been forgotten about in the corridors of power since then. And though Comissioner Greame Innes has made several statements since then on these issues they seem to fall on deaf ears.
The ONLY person that a CD needs to come out to is their SO that is IT, their is no reason or need to tell ANYONE else and tell me Batty what if the CD want to come out to all but the SO dose not want that and just wants to keep this in the family ...............and what if the CD come out to all family, Friends, co-workers and job against the SO wishes.....was it right......was it the right thing to do.Quote:
Originally Posted by battybattybats
NO a SO should not HAVE to take the same risk just because the CD came out to them and are NOT obliged act to remove obstacle for other Cd's, each CD and their SO need to work out their own obstacle.Quote:
IF an SO thinks that a CD should risk everything coming otu to them, especially from the outset THEN should they not take the same risk themselves they demand of the CD AND should they not be obliged to act in order to remove the obstancle other CDs in the future will have to their coming out to future SO's?
Tell me what going to happen to the kids when the CD comes out to all what do you think is going to happen when it gets around school the kids are going to tease them and just how much of a burden are the kids going carry..........for the right thing to do.Quote:
Actually this whole thread is doing just that! Thinking about the needs of other relationships, other communities, the children of Cd's and TG children especially.
LA CINDY LOVE
[QUOTE=LA CINDY LOVE;1745427]
Why?Quote:
The ONLY person that a CD needs to come out to is their SO that is IT,
What makes the difference?Quote:
their is no reason or need to tell ANYONE else
Then isn't she allowing transphobia to still exist by not challenging it? Assuming hse doesn't do so some other way.Quote:
and tell me Batty what if the CD want to come out to all but the SO dose not want that and just wants to keep this in the family
And if TG is genetic isn't she allowing her descendants, maybe her own children, to suffer and be at risk for her own comfort and safety?
That may depend on other circumstances. But in this case i'm suggesting both CD and GG have an obligation to reduce transphobia and that insisting on one form of honesty for just one form of relationship may be a double-standard unless a reason for the difference can be identifiedQuote:
...............and what if the CD come out to all family, Friends, co-workers and job against the SO wishes.....was it right......was it the right thing to do.
Thats not ehat i said. It's not because the CD did come out to them but if they think the CD should have come out to them, especially from the start. That difference is important. If you don't agree with my actual stated point again I ask WHY.Quote:
NO a SO should not HAVE to take the same risk just because the CD came out to them
Why? IF a GG thinks their CD should have been up-front, and transphobia is the reason they weren't able to then isn't a GG who doesn't try to remove that obstanccle for others being hypocritical? Aren't they failing their responsibility to the community? To their possible TG descendants?Quote:
and are NOT obliged act to remove obstacle for other Cd's,
Why when no-one exists in isolation, the CD is already effected by the society, as is the GG. And both as Sheila has said before are part of the society. Doesn't it make it their fault if they let the society stay transphobic and others suffer just like them later?Quote:
each CD and their SO need to work out their own obstacle.
If we don't act now future generations will suffer just as we did. Look at the TYFA links I already posted! Look at how wmein and African Americans had to deal with standing up and taking risks for them and their families or condemning their families to more of the same.Quote:
Tell me what going to happen to the kids when the CD comes out to all what do you think is going to happen when it gets around school the kids are going to tease them and just how much of a burden are the kids going carry..........for the right thing to do.
And finally look at the suicide rate of TG people.
Also I'm NOT saying everyone needs to be out now!
I in fact pointed out the ENDA stuff as many would want it passed before they (or their partner) get outted accidentally or out themselves.
Seriously. I didn't say everyone should be out. I just pointed out an apparent double standard. If you don't feel everyone should be honest.. fine!
But where do you draw the line and insist you must be honest to THESE people but not to THOSE? WHY?
Batty, here we go again with the single purpose examples that fit only one specific set of circumstances. They make the argument circular, and they take us away from the core issue. People do read your posts and of course apply them to their own personal situations, believing that you are suggesting they should stretch beyond their ability to stretch at the moment. Remember: from step 1 to step 2, and not to step 5 omitting steps 2, 3, and 4.
So please, no more argument about whether we should move forward or not. We all know IT IS THE RIGHT THING TO DO.
Again, let's focus on each one of us determining what we CAN do. Batty, I am sure you will agree, and I am putting this in very large letters to help people stop arguing about what they believe they CAN or CANNOT do:
[SIZE="3"]"It is each person's responsibility to determine for themselves how much they CAN stretch in order to overcome their internalized oppression. This is in accordance with the Principles of Intrinsic Inalienable Self Evident Rights."[/SIZE]
Cindy, if Batty's suggestions do not fit your own personal circumstances, then you are in your every right to feel the way you do for yourself. But others, for example couples who are fully out, may feel differently than you do. :hugs:
Uncompromising ethics are the bane of man.
I thought Batty was hanging from the rafters in an attic.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sharon
All kidding aside,my wifes children have no clue,her children have no need to know because of their religious indoctrination,the men I work with here in the green zone have no clue,I can't be myself here I have to wait 8 more months to get back to normal.
Personally because the way I was treated as a child,like I was a freak,an outsider,I truly wish I had never been born this way.
Wow...this is weird?
I can completely relate, in order for one to stand on a "soap box" to preach acceptance would depend on where you fall at, in the spectrume.Quote:
Originally Posted by Kate Lynn
It appears to me, that Batty is proud of her lifestyle and she wishes to express it, I believe she is only concerned that others who appear to be afraid to step out of the closet or dipping their toe to test the water are afaid to take that first step. I see nothing wrong with her speading her good fortune to put herself out there by letting others know in here it is ok to do that.
However I DO NOT understand how some in here get offend with her crusade? Batty is a wealth of information, she has yet one time lead anyone a stray that I have ever seen. Too much confusion lays amoung the spectrume that allows certain spectrumes to easily become offended as I fell victum to already in here.
Until this matter is corrected there will always be a division of US and THEM in this ficticious spectrume that in my ophinion does not exist. How can all lay within a certain catagory when divided we fall into men who wish they where females and men who enjoy dressing from time to time?
I can't figure out if that was a compliment to Batty's political bend or not. Recently I don't seem to be getting some posts. However I don't know the law of which you speak. Did I miss a caucus?Quote:
Originally Posted by Berinthia
One of the things that Batty is working toward here is being taken seriously. 60 years ago no one would take a black man who's father was a Muslim seriously either. 40 years ago you would be considered a criminal. Things change and often they change because someone finally says "enough! what you think is incorrect!"
As far as keeping your mouth shut, once again I refer to the poem written just after WWII that ends "there was no one left to speak out for me."
First I owe Batty an apology, yesterday while responding to another thread I made some rather harsh remarks about her academic writing. What I should have said was I do not agree with your statements and here is why. As it is I fell prey to my emotions as any who has taken the time to get to know me will tell you is not uncommon. An admitted character flaw on my part. I am working on it though.
In any case I offer you my humble apology. For my seemingly anti intellectual remarks.
But to try to answer your question. If I am advocating honesty between SOs do I have a moral obligation to have the same standard for relatives, children and close friends, and the community. Also my SO has the same moral obligations (please forgive me I am para phrasing) ?
t and
My answer is no, for several reasons all based on my own life experiences.
First let me explain that I live my life openly with a great deal of discretion for many reasons. That is to say I am quite honest about being transgendered something I do very little to hide. However I don't shout from every rooftop look at me I wear a dress. At the same time I have never lied to anyone about my gender, but I haven't told everyone either nor do I intend to. Like you in my day to day existence I am very gender neutral. I wear femme jeans and jewelry girls kicks, bandanas or scarves, my body is kept hairless and I wear some femme jewelry once in awhile a little make up. I guess the word is gender queer. My point is everyone and I mean everyone who knows me has seen this. If someone should ask are those girls jeans I simply reply "yes they are but i like them" the simple truth as it were. I come and go in full girl mode in broad day light whenever I feel like it. If the people across the street or next door wave I smile and wave back. However I have not gone over to them and had a long discussion about being transgendered , nor do I intend to. I quite simply live my life. On the very rare occasions when asked if I crossdress I answer yes.
So that is the open part now on to the discretion part. I am not at all ashamed of who or what I am (although this was not always the case) However there are many people I choose not to tell. A perfect example would be one of my closest friends who happens to be a GG. She although a wonderful person is not emotionally equipped to handle anything gender variant I wont go into why, I just use this as an example. So in this instance my moral obligation is to her and her emotional well being.
My next example would be my children, My two sons whom I love more than life need their father, they both know dad is different but still very much their dad. I choose not to share thais part of my life with them because it will do them (as individuals) no good. If I had a reason to tell them if it would benefit them in some way, then absolutely I would tell them. My youngest son is somewhat gender nonconformist himself, I simply allow him to play with and wear what he chooses and make sure he knows he is loved and not judged and his creativity is not hindered. As a parent of gender nonconforming child, this is the best thing I can do for him. He has a mother a female role model to say it is OK to play with Barbie. He needs his father to say it is OK as well, ( I do of course ) But even for him seeing me in over the top girl mode would do no good. My children are better off not knowing for now. if and when circumstances change I may come to a different conclusion.
My thoughts on transphobia, The murder rate per capita in the US is 1 in 18,000 The Murder rate for transgendered persons in the US is 1 in 12. Every time I interact with someone while I am wearing a skirt I am doing a little bit to further the cause. In view of the statistics I think what we do is enough and should not be marginalized. I do what I am capable of doing and I won't put my career, or the well being of my family at risk. I would be remiss in my moral obligations if I did.
My problem with your point of view batty is that it is binary in nature as is usually the case when dealing with moral and ethical questions in an academic/forensic discourse. There are just to many variables to consider. And they change from person to person, or family unit to family unit.
[QUOTE=battybattybats;1745451]
Then isn't she allowing transphobia to still exist by not challenging it? Assuming hse doesn't do so some other way.
[QUOTE]
That may depend on other circumstances. But in this case i'm suggesting both CD and GG have an obligation to reduce transphobia
[QUOTE]
Why? IF a GG thinks their CD should have been up-front, and transphobia is the reason they weren't able to then isn't a GG who doesn't try to remove that obstanccle for others being hypocritical?
[QUOTE]
Doesn't it make it their fault if they let the society stay transphobic and others suffer just like them later?
So a family way of life, a family stability, a family value and the love for ones family should be sacrificed for transphobia?...........because that is the right thing to do..............WOW.
Any time a CD gets dress and walks out that front door they are doing their part to reduce transphobia.
Any time that a family stays together and accept or tolerate a CD that family is doing their part to reduce transphobia.
LA CINDY LOVE
I am an ex wife. I was married to a transgendered person for 25 years. We raised 7 wonderful children together. We were pretty good parents. I do believe we loved each other.
I found out about her transgender when we were ten years married. Yes, I was shocked and I accepted. Why would I not? It is a huge part of this person. It is just is.
In our marriage we adopted four children to go along with our three birth kids. Our children are now quite grown and a diverse group. Racially, varying abilities, gifted ect ect. Different children needing our love. All our children.
One of my personal dilemmas, as I was busily hiding her transgender, not willing to take that risk in my own life, was knowing this hiding was truely not in adherance to my own values. Those values were ones of honesty and truthfullness. Hiding transgender was a contraction to the many lessons I was trying to pass on to my children.
It was this dilemma that eventually forced me to share with our children (along with my then husband) about this part of their father. I still believe this was a wise choice. Doing so helped to match up our values with this part of his/her life.
And in finally being honest with myself I came to the reality that I could not stay married. Yes transgender played a big part and so did other issues.
I think the responses to the OP were of course emotional. This is obviously an emotional issue. The OP was posted I believe as a *debate*, a discussion with other (opposing) POVs welcomed. I have been a member of debate boards for many years. Personal retorts are usually frowned upon. The *game* is the debate, the back and forth, the discussion. In the course of the debate sometimes POV will change, many times they will not. But the discussion opens up minds IMO. And I do love the debate, lol.
I certainly do not always agree with Batty but I sure do enjoy reading her posts, academic or not.
Louise.
Personally, I find this whole argument irrelevant because I reject the premise that there is an obligation for the CD to tell his partner in the first instance.
Every day we all make judgement calls on how much to tell each and every person we meet. We do this in order to maintain relationships, to ensure our own safety and success, and in order to protect others from unnecessary harm and distress.
We make these decisions continuously. We all understand the goals to aim for, ie total honesty, but in reality total honesty is an impossible summit to reach. These are our decisions to make and we must live with the consequences.
It is not unethical to withhold information from another. However if we are to be considered a good, loving, trustworthy persons then we must reach decisions by carefully weighing the interests of all parties involved and coming to what we believe to be the best compromise. We must resist our selfish drives to tip the scales too much in our favor. We have an obligation to ourselves to ensure we do our utmost to be fair to everyone we love and value when deciding what we believe to be the best course of action.
So the ethics involved here is about how a decision was reached on whether to reveal the CD behavior. There is no obligation. Some SOs may get upset that they did not have the opportunity to decide for themselves but then there are others who say they wish they had never been told. There is no absolute right or wrong.
And if a SO is given the full facts, then she then goes through the same process of deciding if she should then inform others (with the partner's consent) or if it is best to withhold the information.
Included in that decision making matrix, should be the moral issue of educating the public and tackling transphobia. However understandably private relationships will be prioritized.
Louise, that was exactly my understanding of the Batty's original post and why I was taken aback by some of the ad hominem style responses.Quote:
Originally Posted by Carin's Wife GG
its a tricky question and touchy based on some of the responses.i kept my cding a secret for approx 28 years before telling my wife and during that period of secrecy it was hell at times,nobody to talk to,nobody to answer questions,at times i thought that my head would be no longer capable of handling it and that i was going insane.when i told my wife and 4 close female freinds it was such a relief to have somebody to talk to,shop with etc,i now wish i had told them many years ago.when it comes to kids,parents and freinds they have not been told and that will remain,yep i would love to tell them,but take my kids 4 example they would be ridaculed at school for having two mommies,proberly bullied,i would not put them through that.some people may differ but they are my views,i think this is a debate that i could write a book on but i dont have the time or space on this site.in a nutshell i am happy with things the way they are at present with my situation,taking baby steps i guess.have a great weekend ladies.
Who said anything about uncompromising?Quote:
Originally Posted by AmandaM
And your mentioning the word bane is going to have those who know me laughing a lot. As it's rather close to my birth-name.
Wells ee that there is a really important point. The crucial IF at the very beginning! Unless that first IF is true then the rest ends up false. Which is a very valid interpretation of the idea!Quote:
Originally Posted by Satrana
But aren't there reasons a person has a disclosure obligation? Like having an STD needing to be disclosed before sex?Quote:
So the ethics involved here is about how a decision was reached on whether to reveal the CD behavior. There is no obligation.
But doesn't the gene found suggest that there is need to make the world more TG friendly for the sake of children and childrens children? Doesn't it make overcoming transphobia part of protecting our own familes (mine too, I still have cousins!)Quote:
Included in that decision making matrix, should be the moral issue of educating the public and tackling transphobia. However understandably private relationships will be prioritized.
Edit: for those concerned about harm to the children if parent is out, might I suggest we consider that some will experience this already anyway? That there are TS parents, Intersex parents like blogger Zoe Brain and TG kids too. Looking at TYFA's group for kids of TG parents might be an idea.
On that point i have to disagree entirely!Quote:
Originally Posted by Satrana
If you are planning to spend the rest of your life with someone, then surely she has the right to expect total honesty from you regarding something like crossdressing, which could affect whether or not she would want to spend her life with you!!
Also, by the same token, i would expect total honesty from my life partner if she did something that could affect my decision to want to spend the rest of my life with her!
I think being honest about the major issues before committing yourself to and expecting honesty from your partner before she expects you to commit to her, would save a lot of problems later on in most long term relationships!!
I agree, each such person should be told as much as we deem relevant in our relationship with them and as to how much it could affect that particular relationship.Quote:
Every day we all make judgement calls on how much to tell each and every person we meet.
Most people i know in my life i would never tell, there is no reason to tell them and with many it would have a negative impact on our relationship if i did.
But by the same token, if i was planning to spend the rest of my life with someone, i would try to be totally honest from the start and would expect the same in return!
But wouldn't telling an SO before making a life commitment involve the same risk?Quote:
Originally Posted by deborah jane
and wouldn't waiting for her to be in love enough that your both ready to make that committment be bieng already unfair if honesty up-front is important?
Also, you suggest you have no reason to tell anyone else.. but consider these points. (and by WE i mean both CDs and GGs too)
* if we are the ones to most know transphobia exists and we do nothing, aren't we then most responsible for it's continued existence? and the suffering others will endure?
* if transphobia is the main reason people aren't told up front and we do nothing to stop it aren't we partly responsible for other wives not being told from the start?
* if transphobia causes a 50% suicide attempt rate and we are the ones with the most power to stop it and dont arent we responsible for the deaths?
* if the TS gene or one or more like it is the cause of CDing doesnt that mean that not trying to reduce or stop transphobia is negligence to our families?
Now I certainly don't suggest coming out is the only way to resolve those points... but as we are the ones who right now are most aware of these issues, are we not then the ones respobsible for them?
Batty do you mean trans phobia or internalised transphobia, as GG's by your own admission cannot have internalized Transphobia?Quote:
Originally Posted by battybattybats
At the end of the day A PHOBIA IS AN IRRATIONAL FEAR ...................... it is perfectly possible to actualy dislike a TRANS PERSON without actually being TRANSHPOBIC or is that too difficult for you to understand ............... I am by Birth a SCOT .............. I do not like all SCOTS .................. that does not make me A SCOTOPHOBIC SAVVY:)
There is a huge difference as it needs to be said for a lifelong commitment . The risk of telling later or getting found out could be extremely unpleasantQuote:
Originally Posted by battybattybats
There are and awful lot of if's in that statmentQuote:
Originally Posted by battybattybats
You can also fight transphobia without coming out as you say but I dont see how we can be responsible just because something exists
We may have a duty to do what we can to eliminate it but thats not quite the same thing
Both! One creates the other. Both are merely part of the same phenomena.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sheila
No it's not! Thats only classical phobias. The terms Xenophobia, homophobia and transphobia are different http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phobia#...discrimination please follow that link.Quote:
At the end of the day A PHOBIA IS AN IRRATIONAL FEAR
I'm aware of that. But have you looked into the evidence of subtle unconcious biases on all forms of discrimination since I last mentioned it? Transphobia takes many forms not just hatred or disgust at all TG people. For example with race many people considered they were not racist as they got on well with black men and women so long as they weren't 'uppity' or in other words as assertive as they would accept in a white person but viewed differently from a black person. Same where women are still often disliked in the workplace for showing the same qualities admired in men in the workplace.Quote:
...................... it is perfectly possible to actualy dislike a TRANS PERSON without actually being TRANSHPOBIC or is that too difficult for you to understand
Often we are unaware of such double-standards we experience or perpetuate.
In degree yes, but principle? robbing a million dollers is not the same as 100 but we consider them both theft because they both involve stealing. Right has degrees but each degree still works on and is right because of the same principle, same with wrong.Quote:
Originally Posted by Shelly Preston
Yes! Which is why i told about a week or so from the first date with my ex-girlfriend. However there is HUGE risk any time you tell if your closeted! If they freak out and out you it risks all your friendships and family relationships instantly without having the time to prepare how to tell them.. you place a massive trust when telling anyone when deeply closeted!Quote:
The risk of telling later or getting found out could be extremely unpleasant
And waiting till your sure you can trust them (and you can always be mistaken!) likely means they will feel hurt you didnt tell them earlier.
Either way it's a gamble involving tremendous risk unless the CD is prepared to be totally outed from the start!
Yes but they are if/then logic ifs, not normal ifs. Do you think any of the IFs are not true? Do you disagree with any of the THENs when you agree with the IFs or even if you just assume the IFs are true for the sake of examining the idea of the THEN?Quote:
There are and awful lot of if's in that statment
It's because we have the choice to act or not act. Whenever someone has a choice they become responsible for the predictable consequences of that choice. Even when the choice is to do nothing.Quote:
You can also fight transphobia without coming out as you say but I dont see how we can be responsible just because something exists
If we can swim well and a child who cannot is drowning in front of us and we turn away and do nothing we choose the childs death. Certainly that's so right?
Well we are the ones who most know this problem exists and we are the ones who can try and do something about it. Each of those, the knowledge and the power that others in the community don't have means we are the ones best equipped to change social transphobia to reduce the internalised transphobia that kills people.
The person with the choice and power to change the situation is the one responsible for changing it. And by not doing so they become more responsible than those who act on it who don't know any better!
Is being totally outed from the start not a tremendous risk as wellQuote:
Either way it's a gamble involving tremendous risk unless the CD is prepared to be totally outed from the start!
It seems to me that can be more of a risk due to the fact some groups take a dislike to people just because the dont fit with there idea of normal
That has nothing to do with transphobia because they dont just pick on a particular group . They just chose those who are different
Lucky for me I'm a person of low moral fiber... And some of my best friends are liers and cheats... So I have no moral conundrum about not telling someone something that would hurt them...
And since no one ever asked me. Straight out "Are you a crossdresser" then I have never dishonstly replied about my hobby..
How's this for a new take, the earlier you come out to people around you the quicker you can move on to find new friends IF the old ones drop you or party with the ones who accept you. Then you won't be worried about losing friends for such a long time. Life is short, most people's memories are shorter when it comes to something like this.
Take the hit, move on. Or to put it in Karren's vernacular Take the hit, if you get caught serve your 2 minutes and then skate on. Usually you score soon after
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sheila
Just because wiki says that, does not make it right. We can all find answers with different opinions about something, it doesn't take rocket science to use google and start pasting links.Quote:
Originally Posted by battybattybats
According to answers.com
Xenophobia
People who have an irrational fear or hatred of foreigners ironically suffer from a condition whose name is composed of two Greek words, xenos and phobos.
Homophobia
An irrational fear or intolerance of homosexuality, or behaviour that is perceived to uphold and support traditional gender role expectations.
According to trans-academics.org
Transphobia
The irrational fear of those who are gender diverse and/or the inability to deal with gender ambiguity.
So, instead of constantly telling people they are wrong, use that intellect of yours and research things properly.
Just wondering, are there rational fears? I guess dying after jumping off the Empire State build would be a rational fear wouldn't it. Or would it be a guarantee?
Fear of being bitten by a rattlesnake seems like a rational fear so it wouldn't be a phobia. OPHIDIOPHOBIA is the fear of all snakes which would be irrational but Crotalusphobia (if there is one) seems to be rational for most people. So can a phobia be rational?
And why is it ironic that two Greek words form a word? Technically the Greeks who formed the word were not strangers or foreigners. It is interesting but not ironic.
And why do I sound like Andy Rooney?
I thought I covered that. That any time someone closeted risks being outted there is risk.Quote:
Originally Posted by Shelly Preston
Unless you mean being out from the start rather than out-ed?
In which case with friends and family you have the luxery of telling them in your own way, of trying to build up, drop hints, prepare, practice with friends before coming out to family etc. And it gives you more time to find new accepting friends if you lose them, the same argument about coming out to an SO early gives both more time to find someone more truly compatable no?
However unless you work for the big companies with gender expression on their anti-discrimination rules it can still be bad for career.. a good reason for everyone to fight for enda who is not out in case one day they are outted by accident.
Dont I know it!Quote:
It seems to me that can be more of a risk due to the fact some groups take a dislike to people just because the dont fit with there idea of normal
I have lots of personal experience there! I took punches to the face to make Goth acceptable in public! And public violence against the different was more acceptable in the late 80's and 90's Australia. Any difference was labeled 'poofta'. However violent attacks on Goths are rare now. Because lots of Goths are out.
Well thats only sort-of true, as everyone is different somehow and those groups choose parameters they accept and those they don't often in ranges at that.Quote:
That has nothing to do with transphobia because they dont just pick on a particular group . They just chose those who are different
And most conformists have something to hide anayway, like most homophobes are repressed gays. And bigots can have intersections of bigotry just as oppressed people can have intersections of discrimination against them.
For certain just looking at the TDOR list there's a lot less whites than a proper equal split per proportion of the polpulation. so they suffer Racism + Transphobia and they make up most, not all but most, of those at risk.
And doesn't that just add more responsibility to the white TG people who can be out safer to help the non-white ones who are more at risk?
Edit to avoid double-post:
True but it doesn't make it wrong either!Quote:
Originally Posted by Tamara Croft
The problem in this case isn't source. Yours backs me up also. Rechanging the emphasis of bold text:Quote:
We can all find answers with different opinions about something, it doesn't take rocket science to use google and start pasting links.
According to answers.com
There's a lot of meaning in the word 'or'.Quote:
Xenophobia
People who have an irrational fear or hatred of foreigners ironically suffer from a condition whose name is composed of two Greek words, xenos and phobos.
Homophobia
An irrational fear or intoleranceof homosexuality, or behaviour that is perceived to uphold and support traditional gender role expectations.
According to trans-academics.org
Transphobia
The irrational fear of those who are gender diverse and/or the inability to deal with gender ambiguity.
Intolerance and 'deal with' can include subtle levels, just like racism and sexism.
http://books.google.com.au/books?id=...sult&resnum=10 whole chapters of etext evidence for you there on unconcious sexism which corollates with unconcious homophobia and unconcious transphobia.
Lets cut straight to homophobia and transphobia with some detail now shall we? http://www.uoguelph.ca/hre/hr/docs/R...terosexism.pdf
Now combine that with the info on iunconcious biases such as the unconcious sexism in that book on applied ethics i gave the link to above and you get the full picture.Quote:
Homophobia and transphobia can range from discomfort and fear to disgust, hatred and violence, and are manifested in four different ways:
1. Personal or internalized homophobia/transphobia consists of personal beliefs and prejudices.
2. Interpersonal homophobia/transphobia (harassment and individual discrimination) involves individual behaviours based on those personal beliefs.
3. Institutional homophobia/transphobia includes the ways that institutions discriminate against people on the basis of their sexual orientation or gender identity.
4.Cultural homophobia (heterosexism) refers to societal values and norms that advantage heterosexuality over all other forms of gender expression and sexual orientation.
Cut-and-paste from that document is messy but people may like to look at the long lists of what gets classed as homophobic and transphobic behaviours.
As well as the Recognising Heterosexual and Gender Identity Advantage.
In fact it's an all-round great resource, much better than pulling out the sociology and ethics and womens studies textbooks I would have done if I had the energy to search through 20 boxes of books to do so (my bookcases overflowed a very long time ago) besides those texts are decades out of date. The term Kyriarchy isn't even in them! http://feministphilosophers.wordpres...day-kyriarchy/
Oh and while discussing academic notions related to this subject and gender the australian governemnts human rights community consultation had a great post to it yesterday linking to this good article on Kohlbergs theories on moral development some may find interesting, including it's criticisms http://faculty.plts.edu/gpence/html/kohlberg.htm which go into an interesting conflict on moral reasoning and gender!
Now if no-one has any further objections for a few hours i need enough sleep to ensure that Transgender Australians actually get more equality under the law and australia actually gets some valid human rights protections incluidng the right to gender expression (we have NO federal bill or charter or statute of rights!).. cause I'm not just talking about this stuff, I'm actually doing something about it!
Further edit: I almost forgot this on unconcious racism http://www.nytimes.com/2008/04/06/op...06kristof.html
My other half took a long time before she told me she'd had a lump removed from her breast - and an awful lot longer before she brought up the fact that she'd had an abortion, when she was sixteen...Quote:
Originally Posted by Berinthia
There are lots of things people are ashamed of, and hide. Much of it isn't logical, either. :sad:
Ashamed, now there a word to play with .Quote:
Originally Posted by Nicki B
This thread may be idealistic and has got a lot of people going but it has a certain amount of sense to it ( when you look past all the negatives).
But it has caused a spin off thread that at first made me feel very ASHAMED of what i am and what i have done in the past .
If it is felt that you need to hide things from you children and family then surely you are saying that there is something wrong with what you are doing .
Just from the words i will support you could mean that you are saying " i will support you because you are doing something wrong" but it will be our secret .
If Sheila hadn't been aware of my c/ding before we met and if i hadn't told her before proposing marriage to her, i believe the risk on her discovery afterwards would been far higher :eek::eek:Quote:
Originally Posted by battybattybats
That would mean half the people on this forum have attempted suicide over trans issues.....Possible, but i find it very hard to believe....My own previous suicide attempts were not trans related, they were actually related to other issues from my past......Would the fact that i am trans have made them trans related....In some peoples eyes..YES, but in actuallity a definate NO!!!Quote:
if transphobia causes a 50% suicide attempt rate
it could also be saying " I support you because I believe what you do is not wrong ,nor anything to be ashamed off":)Quote:
Originally Posted by joanne f
First I note that most of Batty's provocative concepts are usually followed by a question mark; she is asking questions, not making judgements. There are also statements that are staged, if you accept the first, then the second and so on, you will eventually arrive at the same conclusion as Batty has. We need to look for assumptions that may be the weak links in that chain of logic if we want to deter her in any way.
For instance;
She says "I'm saying that IF honesty about CDing is an obligation in one relationship THEN isn't it also one in other relationships?"
The assumption embedded there is that all relationships are equal in regard to the need for honesty and full disclosure. I don't know if I can accept that assumption. While it is appropriate in my relationship with my wife to be fully honest about my CDing, that relationship is not based on the same thing as my relationship with my boss or the neighbor. Are we looking at Full Disclosure as being the same as Honesty? While it is critical to be Honest, Full Disclosure at work or in the neighborhood has never been expected while it is within the confines of marriage. I just can't see the need to tell my neighbor about my CDing when our relationship is based on landscaping.
However, if my co-workers or neighbors have misconceptions about gender that I can address and clarify, I see my obligation to deal with them. I am advocating situational ethics based on the need for a consistent definition of Honesty in regard to gender issues. However, is Full Disclosure necessary for an Honest discussion of gender issues outside the question of how it impacts our offspring? Is Full Disclosure necessary for most action addressing these same issues?
If we become involved in this type of discussion and/or action, it may be encumbant on us to be ready to reveal information about ourselves that would both lend credibiltiy to our arguements, but endanger something we have wanted to protect.
The difference between telling your spouse and telling other family, coworkers, etc. is that you live with your spouse. There is a degree of trust and intimacy in cohabitation that surpasses any of those other relationships - and if there isn't, you're doing it wrong. I am totally, 100% honest with my wife because everything I have is hers, and I expect her to do the same. The guy who works next to me, my boss, those are people who might not even be there a week from now and won't remember my name after they're gone. My brother, my mom... they only see me every few years and we talk maybe once a week, but there are other issues involved - telling them would cause more harm than good to our relationship.
Now having said that, I would not actively lie to anyone in my immediate family; if they flat-out asked me if I crossdress, I would tell them yes. But there are things about myself that I simply don't bring up because it's none of their business. I would no more tell my mom what I wear around the house than I would tell her about sex with my wife.
HTH.
ralph
<<But doesn't the gene found suggest that there is need to make the world more TG friendly for the sake of children and childrens children? Doesn't it make overcoming transphobia part of protecting our own familes (mine too, I still have cousins!)>>
I don't know Batty, that seems to be a stretch.
And then I consider the evidence that there is a genetic aspect to being transsexual and that the scientists behind many of these discoveries think this will be true for all forms of transgender.
Your comment peaked my interest since I manage a multi-million dollar NIH funded research study. I'm fascinated by research being done on this topic or any topic, however I have yet to see any conslusive evidence that there's validity or significance to your statement. I'd appreciate you sharing w/the group multiple citations of conclusive evidential research that's been published in scholarly journals that support your statement.
Best,
sarahm
Go ahead Sarah, you can say "gotcha". My previous reference to this discussion belonging on a metaphysics forum stands. In layman's terms, my response to Batty could be stated as "are you friggin' for real?". :DQuote:
Originally Posted by sarahm
P.S. Don't be mad Batty, I actually like you. :)
I agree. That was my own personal conclusion with my last romantic relationship too.Quote:
Originally Posted by deborah jane
Of course telling someone on the first date means you wont know at all if you can trust them, that takes a long time to learn but waiting till you know you can trust them means increasing constantly the risk of them feelling upset they didn't know it from the first date.
Does that mean the only virtuous course of action is to be upfront from the first date no matter that risk?
If so then doesn't that mean you'd have to already be prepared to be publicly outed before you could ever date sensibly?
If so then wouldn't the most sensible course of virtuous action be to 'bite the bullet' and be out publicly from the start? Thereby being honest from the outset, no longer having the complicating risk of being outted? Even though there would be intitial cost of risk of loss of relationships and the medium-to-long-term cost of discrimination? Yet also by being out publicly adding to the net reduction of that discrimination?
And again there's the point that IF a GG considers that CDs should be honest and confess their CDing from the outset despite all the risks that entails and the overcoming internalised oppression and the natural human instinct to avoid judgement THEN is it not hypocritical of them IF they are unwilling to suffer those same risks?
Well by all means check the studies and question their methodology. When published in peer-review journals or the like you or I or others here could write to those journals requesting a further review.Quote:
That would mean half the people on this forum have attempted suicide over trans issues.....Possible, but i find it very hard to believe
Also it's entirely possible that different groups of people are more susceptible. Like the murder risk being mostly suffered by non-white MtF CDs and TSs intersections of discrimination may dramatically vary the risks and most CDs being closeted compared to TS means that many TG people will be under-represented in most studies.
However if the same genes cover CD as well as TS, perhaps as a result of combinations of genes or double-expressions of genes etc as seems likely then it's still our problem.
There will always be situations where TG people have the same reasons for suicide as non-TGs, but where the rate is higher then there is more obviously. And don't forget co-morbidities! Where issues that would normally be more easilly coped with become harder to cope with because of the strains and pressures of internalised oppression or living with repression or under oppression etc. This was noted as a key point in the removal of homosexuality from the DSM in the 70's because the suicide risk etc wasn't caused by being gay but by being gay in a homophobic society. I'm having trouble finding the study I'm after (i'm sure there was a latrobe uni study with the TG suicide stats for Australia) but these comparisons of GLB youth suicide in Australia might help the point: http://www.acys.info/youth_facts_and...nsgender_youthQuote:
....My own previous suicide attempts were not trans related, they were actually related to other issues from my past......Would the fact that i am trans have made them trans related....In some peoples eyes..YES, but in actuallity a definate NO!!!
ok, here's a source for a 53% attempt rate of TSs http://www.outproud.org/article_suicide.htmlQuote:
Suicide risks:
A national study by Jonathan Nicholas and John Howard presented at the Suicide Prevention Australia national conference revealed the following figures around suicide attempts:
Gay male: 20.8% had attempted suicide
Heterosexual male: 5.4%
Bi/undecided male: 29.4%
Lesbian female: 28%
Heterosexual female: 8.3%
Bi/undecided female: 34.9%
The study included same sex attracted young men and women up to 30 years of age with an average age of 21. It also documented when the first suicide attempt occurred.
For gay males, this was on average:
5.7 years after becoming sexually interested in men
3.5 years after self identifying as gay
0.4 years before another person found out they were gay
0.3 years before they had their first same gender sexual experience.
For lesbians, this was on average:
1.9 years after becoming sexually interested in women
0.2 years after self identifying as same sex attracted
0.8 years before another person found out they were lesbian
2 years before they had had their first same gender experience.
Quote:
Transsexuals may be at higher risk than homosexuals and much higher risk than the general population to suicidal behavior. (13) Fifty-three percent of transsexuals surveyed had made suicide attempts. (14)
Like most things CDs are likely not studied, so the result could be lower, or even higher.Quote:
13. Harry, J., "Adolescent Suicide and Sexual Identity Issues," submitted to the National Institute of Mental Health for the Secretary's Conference on Adolescent Suicide, Washington, DC, May 8-9, 1986.
14. Huxdly, J., and Brandon, S., "Partnership in Transsexualism, Part 1: Paired and Non-paired Groups," Archives of Sexual Behavior, 10, pp. 133-141, 1981.
Thankyou for comprehending that! All the vitriol really gets upsetting when I'm falsely cast as the villain. I have feellings too after all.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sarah Charles
Sure. But what makes the operative difference? What about the difference makes one thing right and not the other?Quote:
For instance;
She says "I'm saying that IF honesty about CDing is an obligation in one relationship THEN isn't it also one in other relationships?"
The assumption embedded there is that all relationships are equal in regard to the need for honesty and full disclosure. I don't know if I can accept that assumption. While it is appropriate in my relationship with my wife to be fully honest about my CDing, that relationship is not based on the same thing as my relationship with my boss or the neighbor.
Are, careful there, thats a recent notion of ones obligation to ones neighbours your using there. It has in the past been considered that everything is the communities bussiness, such as being allegedly a witch or having the plague. And some things we consider today in some places go that far by law such as former already-punished sex-offenders being outted to their neighbours by law in some places. Meanwhile the right to keep things secret from your partner has also been legally recognised and was a key piece fought for by feminism.Quote:
Are we looking at Full Disclosure as being the same as Honesty? While it is critical to be Honest, Full Disclosure at work or in the neighborhood has never been expected while it is within the confines of marriage. I just can't see the need to tell my neighbor about my CDing when our relationship is based on landscaping.
Good point.Quote:
However, if my co-workers or neighbors have misconceptions about gender that I can address and clarify, I see my obligation to deal with them. I am advocating situational ethics based on the need for a consistent definition of Honesty in regard to gender issues.
Good questions!Quote:
However, is Full Disclosure necessary for an Honest discussion of gender issues outside the question of how it impacts our offspring? Is Full Disclosure necessary for most action addressing these same issues?
I'd argue personally that at present the risk to career of full disclosure when someone has family responsibilities is too great when there are not employment protections and that instead work to ensure such workplace protections would be for those people the most important action, and one which, being about to go before US federal legilative bodies soon, would justify (or even demand) taking substantial risk far more so than the advances of full public disclosure!
True but short-term risk may well be a neccessity because of the obligation to the long-term risks.Quote:
If we become involved in this type of discussion and/or action, it may be encumbant on us to be ready to reveal information about ourselves that would both lend credibiltiy to our arguements, but endanger something we have wanted to protect.
Why so?Quote:
Originally Posted by AmandaM
We consider that true for breast cancer.
If a parent knows there is a family history of breast cancer or learns they carry the gene that increases the risk of breast cancer don't we consider it neccessary to tell their children?
Didn't Women determine they had an obligation to make the world less sexist for their daughters whe they fought for equality?
Didn't African Americans do the same?
Where do you consider the stretch?
Am I the only one who was digging out earwax out of my ears with a q-tip and playing with my cell phone wile reading the origina post?
Being so well situated (seing as the gene study was co-funded by NIH, the people funding your own study) you could find the sources faster than I (and seriously, most of my time is busy on that little human-rights for Australia deally) so here's the mass-media piece to get you going http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au...-12377,00.htmlQuote:
Originally Posted by sarahm
Zoe's been collecting much of the research on transgender neurology together and discussing it's implications on her blog (currently considered of enough significance that it's being archived by the Australian National Library iirc) so cast your eyes over her blog posts with her frequent citations of studies :D http://aebrain.blogspot.com/Quote:
THE nature versus nurture debate rages on but a new study of transsexuals has shown genetics plays a key role in determining our sense of gender.
In the largest genetic study of its kind, 112 male-to-female transsexuals took part in a study involving several Melbourne research bodies and the University of California, Los Angeles.
Researchers measured the variation in the androgen receptor gene, which is involved in the functioning of the sex hormone testosterone.
DNA samples from the transsexuals were compared with the samples from 250 typical men.
Researchers discovered the transsexuals were more likely than non-transsexuals to have a longer form of the gene.
"We think these genetic differences might reduce testosterone action and under-masculinise the brain during foetal development," Prince Henry's Institute researcher Lauren Hare said.
Lead researcher, Associate Professor Vincent Harley, head of molecular genetics at Prince Henry's Institute, said there had long been debate about the causes of transsexuality.
"There is a social stigma that transsexualism is simply a lifestyle choice. However, our findings support a biological basis of how gender identity develops," he said.
He said researchers were recruiting transsexual people for another study and hoped to double the sample size and examine other genes.
Assoc Prof Harley said it was important to replicate the findings in other populations.
Researcher Trudy Kennedy, director of the Monash Gender Dysphoria Clinic, said the study supported other evidence that genetics and brain gender were important in transsexuality.
"This is something that people are born with and it's certainly not a lifestyle choice as some have suggested," she said.
Julie Peters, a transgender person, said she knew from as young as three or four years old she did not fit into being a boy.
"I have always had the personality of a girl, I suppose is the way I perceive it and even from a very young age, three or four, I was really mad at people for making me a boy," she said.
"I personally think it (gender) is a combination of both (nature and nurture).
"You are born with a predisposition to have a certain personality and then depending on the culture you are brought up in your personal situation it becomes active in a particular way."
The study research was jointly funded by the National Health and Medical Research Council and the US National Institutes of Health.