Page 7 of 15 FirstFirst ... 56789 ... LastLast
Results 151 to 175 of 356

Thread: Bathroom bills and other laws , discussion thread

  1. #151
    GG ReineD's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Samsara
    Posts
    21,062
    Quote Originally Posted by Sue View Post
    I didn't say they shouldn't use what they identify. I did say that there aren't gender neutral restrooms restrooms. So what do you allow for those that have mixed identity?
    There are no gender neutral restrooms? My small town (out in the middle of nowhere), does have single-user bathrooms. This means, there will be no one else in the bathroom who will object to anyone being there, no matter how they look or dress.

    Here’s an app that maps out some of the single-user/gender-neutral spaces throughout the US, although they only map out one small search area at a time, and they do not have all of them in their database (they missed quite a few in my own town): http://www.refugerestrooms.org/. We cannot say there are no safe (free of potential controversy) bathrooms.

    If however, your argument is that everyone should use all bathrooms, then as stated before, I agree. But, it will not happen in this generation.


    That aside, this discussion seems circular because of the nebulous "mixed-gender identity" category or people. Right?

    If we all agree there is no issue with people using the bathroom according to their gender identity (and for the vast majority of people this is either male or female), then we all agree on most of it: the people with a female ID (natal women & transwomen) should use the women’s bathrooms. The people with a male identity (the male-identified crossdressers who do form a huge part of this forum … and this is, after all, where we are having this discussion), should not; instead they can opt for the neutral spaces if they happen to be in a part of the country where the bathroom issue is contested. Or, as mentioned earlier, they can continue to do what they’ve always done (since there is no gender police in this country's bathrooms), which is to use their spidey senses to determine which bathrooms they feel comfortable using while they are dressed out in public ... which for most states in the US is not an issue. I think that likely, most CDers would avoid a busy mall bathroom on a Saturday afternoon (especially if they know they are read as men). And realistically, they can avoid these bathrooms because they do pick and choose where and when they go out dressed.

    So now we are left with what has thus far been ill-defined in this discussion and which now appears is a group of people that we are mostly talking about: the people who are mixed-gender identity (and not the transsexuals or male-identified crossdressers). If so, then who exactly is a person with a mixed identity and how do they present - like this, or this, or this? (these are all people who do not attempt to mask the characteristics of their natal sex). And if they do identify as mixed-gender (which means not one or the other), then why would they particularly lean towards the women’s bathrooms and not the men’s. And why would they reject the neutral bathrooms.

    So until we discover who exactly we are talking about, it will be difficult to conclude this discussion?

    I’ve started a new thread asking folks about mixed-gender, so as not to derail this thread:

    http://www.crossdressers.com/forums/...70#post3964570



    EDIT
    Quote Originally Posted by Lorileah View Post
    ID like driver's license? Um...NC wants a birth cert (which brings up another matter so hold on) MOST states won't change it until after surgery, some will AMEND it after surgery and several won't change it at all (even if if was mistyped).
    Yes, and this absolutely needs to change. States need to modernize their definition of male and female. They should follow what the more progressive states are doing:

    http://www.lambdalegal.org/know-your...x-designations
    There are a few states that do this, but click on California as an example. "Clinically appropriate" treatment I gather is counseling, hormones or other non-SRS surgeries. And certainly most of the people who take it this far are full-time, since it would be awkward to have "F" on a birth certificate or state ID when the person is not out to anyone?

    So maybe this fight does need to also focus on state level basic definitions ... to focus on modernizing state laws about the requirements to change from "M" to "F" on a birth certificate or state ID. If a state recognizes that 75% of transwomen don't have SRS, this would surely improve the situation? All the transwomen who do live full-time would be recognized as the women they are and there would be no issues with using the facility of their choice.
    Last edited by ReineD; 07-05-2016 at 02:45 PM. Reason: added "and there would be no issues ..." to my last sentence.
    Reine

  2. #152
    Member MonctonGirl's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Posts
    462
    The two sides each pose solid arguments.

    Some argue that birth sex genitals should dictate where you have the right to go, and it is as a courtesy for the others within the washroom, be it concern for safety, dignity or tradition.
    Mind you, that discriminates those who were born with neither or both. (Yes there are folks like that)

    The solution is simple:

    Those who are POST-OP SRS/GC should be able to use the washroom in accordance with their post-op genitals, in any area of the country. I don't think that's unreasonable.
    Publicly funded places should implement enough single-toilet all-purpose ( special needs / handicap / gender identity ) washroom facilities in accordance with expected volume of persons to accommodate those transgendered folks who have not had SRS/GC and I don't think that's unreasonable either for PRE-OP/NON-OP transgendered persons to comply, just to end the problems.

    Privately owned businesses can do it optionally if they want business from transgendered ( and I guess crossdressing ) folks.
    This would include universities, restaurants, theaters, ....even transportation which does not receive public funding.
    Last edited by MonctonGirl; 07-03-2016 at 09:27 PM.

  3. #153
    Banned Read only
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Cathedral City, CA
    Posts
    4,640
    Quote Originally Posted by ReineD View Post
    So maybe this fight does need to also focus on state level basic definitions ... to focus on modernizing state laws about the requirements to change from "M" to "F" on a birth certificate or state ID. If a state recognizes that 75% of transwomen don't have SRS, this would surely improve the situation? All the transwomen who do live full-time would be recognized as the women they are.
    Someone will always be screwed until Idaho, Kansas, Ohio and Tennessee change their posture about revising gender markers. Evidently a lot of documents reference the data from the birth certificate. As I understand it, you couldn't have a driver's license with F if your birth certificate read M.

    DeeAnn

  4. #154
    Woman first, Trans second
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    SF Bay Area
    Posts
    877
    In my opinion, the solution is even simpler than that.

    The federal government already has a standard in place for recognizing legal gender changes. That standard should be consistently applied at the state level as well (it's not, currently), and your legal gender according to that standard should be recognized everywhere that gender is a factor.

    That standard does not require surgery, FYI, but it does require medical transition (e.g. HRT). Personally, I think we should be using California's standard, which also allows for a mental health professional to sign off in cases where they feel it's appropriate. In all cases, it does require a full-time gender transition.
    Last edited by Zooey; 07-04-2016 at 01:34 AM.
    Coming out is like discovering that you've been drowning your whole life after actually breathing air for the first time.

  5. #155
    GG ReineD's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Samsara
    Posts
    21,062
    Quote Originally Posted by flatlander_48 View Post
    Someone will always be screwed until Idaho, Kansas, Ohio and Tennessee change their posture about revising gender markers.
    I don't understand enough about the balance of political power in the US to know if federally, it could be recognized that all people who live full time in their target gender should be able to get state ID that reflects their true gender. Certainly they were able to make same-sex marriage legal in all states. And NO ONE should have to put up with something that says, "Used to be male but changed to female".

    So if all the transitioners were legally women, then much of the bathroom issue would disappear.


    Edit
    Zooey, I just saw your post. Yes, everyone should follow California's lead. I think Washington has the same too, but I didn't click down all the other states to see how many more are progressive.
    Last edited by ReineD; 07-04-2016 at 12:29 AM.
    Reine

  6. #156
    Banned Read only
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Cathedral City, CA
    Posts
    4,640
    Sometime in the last few months I saw a document that listed, state by state, what the requirements are for gender marker change. It was a patchwork at the state level, much like marriage equality was.

    DeeAnn

  7. #157
    Aspiring Member MissDanielle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2015
    Location
    Chicago!!!
    Posts
    840
    it needs to be universal...heck, all the feds require is a document from a medical provider that one is undergoing HRT.
    I'm a nice Jewish girl.

    I'm not a girl, Not yet a woman.

  8. #158
    Ice queen Lorileah's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Denver
    Posts
    11,805
    Quote Originally Posted by Zooey View Post

    The federal government already has a standard in place for recognizing legal gender changes. That standard should be consistently applied at the state level as well (it's not, currently), and your legal gender according to that standard should be recognized everywhere that gender is a factor.
    Unfortunately there is a document called the Constitution that actually makes it a point that unless it is something that is really important to the country, the states have the right to do what they please. Sorta why the Civil War was fought. So until the US Gov't makes it a law (i.e. Amendment) you will have states making different rules. In the case of HB2 the feds couldn't say they couldn't pass that law they could only say "We'll make your life harder when you need federal money". Thus the law still stands. Getting 50 states on the same page would be tedious and time consuming. Even getting amendments through is almost impossible (thus ERA is still a mirage). Of course you don't NEED all 50 you need 2/3 but you can expect a fight to get that many. It only took 202 years to get the last amendment passed.

    So now you have to make the argument to the country that less than 1% of the population needs this and that 99% of the them should stand behind it. I will assume you noted that gay marriage, although stated to be legal by the SCOTUS isn't really federally able to be enforced. Even Loving v VA took 30 years to finally be recognized by all 50 states. Up until that time interracial marriages were not seen as legal in Alabama.

    I would think before we start on gender marker conformity, we need to get definitions set (hell we can't even agree here where we are all in the same boat...Oh sorry you don't like that analogy). Define what is needed to be transsexual... a simple declaration? If not what are your standards? A mental health letter? Being on hormones? Living 6 months -2 yrs as the gender? You need something that you can hang your hat on. You, yourself, have issues with what is trans and what isn't. Can a person change their mind? Hey today I'm a woman, tomorrow, not so much but now I can get my marker changed.

    You only need to convince 230 million people.
    The earth is the mother of all people and all people should have equal rights upon it.
    Chief Joseph
    Nez Perce



    “Love isn't a state of perfect caring. It is an active noun like struggle. To love someone is to strive to accept that person exactly the way he or she is, right here and now.” - Fred Rogers,

  9. #159
    GG ReineD's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Samsara
    Posts
    21,062
    Quote Originally Posted by flatlander_48 View Post
    Sometime in the last few months I saw a document that listed, state by state, what the requirements are for gender marker change. It was a patchwork at the state level, much like marriage equality was.
    Look above you at the Lambda Legal link in my post #151.
    Reine

  10. #160
    Woman first, Trans second
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    SF Bay Area
    Posts
    877
    Quote Originally Posted by Lorileah View Post
    Unfortunately there is a document called the Constitution that actually makes it a point that unless it is something that is really important to the country, the states have the right to do what they please. Sorta why the Civil War was fought. So until the US Gov't makes it a law (i.e. Amendment) you will have states making different rules. In the case of HB2 the feds couldn't say they couldn't pass that law they could only say "We'll make your life harder when you need federal money". Thus the law still stands. Getting 50 states on the same page would be tedious and time consuming. Even getting amendments through is almost impossible (thus ERA is still a mirage). Of course you don't NEED all 50 you need 2/3 but you can expect a fight to get that many. It only took 202 years to get the last amendment passed.
    Except for that whole thing where any laws that DO exist at the federal level supercede any state laws. The federal government has a standard for legal identification changes on social security and passport registrations. The social security database is used as the verification engine for most state id issuers (e.g. DMVs). The fact that, in this case, states are attempting to overrule existing federal standards for identification is pretty dubious constitutionally, IMO. A US passport is ALWAYS considered legal identification within the US.

    If you have a legal identity that counts you as female/woman, your legal treatment needs to align with that consistently. If you are able to change your US passport, that change should be consistently respected at the state level.

    Quote Originally Posted by Lorileah View Post
    I would think before we start on gender marker conformity, we need to get definitions set (hell we can't even agree here where we are all in the same boat...Oh sorry you don't like that analogy). Define what is needed to be transsexual... a simple declaration? If not what are your standards? A mental health letter? Being on hormones? Living 6 months -2 yrs as the gender? You need something that you can hang your hat on.
    As I have said many times, I believe that the federal standard (with the one relatively minor extension California has made) is the correct answer. If a licensed medical or mental health professional provides - under penalty of perjury - documentation stating that an individual is undergoing "appropriate clinical treatment" to support a gender transition, then said transition is recognized.

    BTW, I have no problem with the boat analogy. I just don't agree that we're all actually on the same boat.

    Quote Originally Posted by Lorileah View Post
    You, yourself, have issues with what is trans and what isn't. Can a person change their mind? Hey today I'm a woman, tomorrow, not so much but now I can get my marker changed.
    What issues do I have with what is trans and what isn't? I think everybody here on this forum is transgender, at least according to the umbrella definition, although I could argue that some of the CDs here are in fact effectively cis men in dresses. I think a small fraction of the people here are women. I believe in the de-gendering of bathrooms, because I believe it is the path to providing safer bathroom access for everybody. I do NOT believe that the solution is to declare that people who are not women are still entitled to access women's spaces, because I do not believe in the devaluation of gender as a rule.

    Also... No, there are no easy backsies on legal identity changes. It's a big deal, as it damn well should be.

    If non-binary people (and I would include CDs in that) want more recognition, they should be fighting for legal recognition of that as a distinct identity - not trying to devalue the meaning of "man" and "woman" by simply declaring that they should be entitled to anything they want while cisgender and binary folks aren't. If there's a class of gendered space that they feel should not be gendered, then campaign for that.

    People don't like it when you erase their identity and/or devalue their concerns. I think most transgender folks have experience with that, and especially non-binary people. Doing that to 99% of the population is not a great strategy.
    Last edited by Zooey; 07-05-2016 at 04:44 PM.
    Coming out is like discovering that you've been drowning your whole life after actually breathing air for the first time.

  11. #161
    Banned Read only
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Cathedral City, CA
    Posts
    4,640
    Quote Originally Posted by Zooey View Post
    If non-binary people (and I would include CDs in that) want more recognition, they should be fighting for legal recognition of that as a distinct identity - not trying to devalue the meaning of "man" and "woman" by simply declaring that they should be entitled to anything they want while cisgender and binary folks aren't. If there's a class of gendered space that they feel should not be gendered, then campaign for that.
    That sounds exactly like one of the arguments used against marriage equality. The statement was that allowing same sex couples to marry diminished the marriage of opposite sex couples. The definition broadened, but the fundamental one did not change. As applied here, the definition would be broadened, not devalued.

    DeeAnn

  12. #162
    Woman first, Trans second
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    SF Bay Area
    Posts
    877
    I disagree.

    That logic DOES apply to trans men and trans women - we are asking for (and at the federal level and in many states have received, at least from my perspective) an expanded definition for what legally constitutes being a "man" or a "woman".

    In the case of non-binary people, part-time people, etc., it is a rather very different situation. You are not saying "we are women" or "we are men" and asking for the according rights. You are saying, rather specifically, "we are something else, but we want access to e.g. women's bathrooms too (in addition to the men's)."

    There is a problem. The problem is that we have facilities that are (mostly) unnecessarily gender segregated along the binary. The correct solution is not to give you legal recognition as women whenever you're "dressed". The solution is to remove the gender segregation in cases where it's unnecessary.

    When same sex marriage was legalized at the federal level, it wasn't because e.g. one man is now considered a woman for the purpose of becoming a wife. We just removed gender from it entirely, because it wasn't necessary.
    Last edited by Zooey; 07-05-2016 at 11:45 PM.
    Coming out is like discovering that you've been drowning your whole life after actually breathing air for the first time.

  13. #163
    Ice queen Lorileah's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Denver
    Posts
    11,805
    The issue, Zooey, is HOW at any given time without having to show documentation, do you declare that the CDs here who scream from the highest tower are "men" when they need to use the facilities? I see what you say as actually discrimination. So do we wear something or get chips or tattoos? And I agree we all (including every nuance of the definition ) need to work to get things changed, but honestly unless it actually gores your ox you're not going to stand up. Fear and learned discomfort are hard to change. And adding fear or making something harder won't get you the support you need to change those laws. And NO the Federal Government laws don't supercede states otherwise HB2 would have already been gone. I will again refer you to Loving v VA and interracial marriage and how long it too many states to align with the Federal Government mandate. All the Feds can do is withhold support and funding. Nothing has changed in regard to the Constitution as to states rights (there are still dry areas of the US even though alcohol is legal in the US).

    The founding Fathers were adamant about sovereign states. Federal Gov't would like a set speed limit...Montana doesn't have one on some roads. The would like helmet laws, Colorado doesn't have any. The non-discrimination acts of the Feds are for federal areas ONLY...those areas controlled by the Federal Govt or those contracts and jobs that are associated in some manner with the Feds (in my lifetime legal drinking age on military posts was 18...but you step out of the gate it was 21). In most cases states have to abide and respect what other states law say (i.e. now gay marriage). We saw that with marriages that were allowed for Federal reasons (taxes and such) but were non-binding in certain states. Colorado has still on the books a Constitutional amendment prohibiting marriage of same sex couples (we got around that with Civil Unions...good old separate but equal sorta thing) We still see this with voter laws and how some states are making laws to make being a voter harder. Wouldn't be marvelous if no matter where you went in the US the same laws applied? But they don't. Gee here in Colorado we legalized something that is illegal as far as the US Govt is concerned so your argument that states have to follow Federal mandates is wrong...even when it comes to laws
    The earth is the mother of all people and all people should have equal rights upon it.
    Chief Joseph
    Nez Perce



    “Love isn't a state of perfect caring. It is an active noun like struggle. To love someone is to strive to accept that person exactly the way he or she is, right here and now.” - Fred Rogers,

  14. #164
    Woman first, Trans second
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    SF Bay Area
    Posts
    877
    Lorileah, I don't want CDs getting arrested for using the women's room. Even HB2, which is a vile vile thing, leaves it as a non-convictable offense with no punishment on its own. Other safety issues involve things that are already crimes. I don't want people having to show ID to enter bathrooms.

    There's a legal standard for recognition of gender, however, and it's what needs to be used consistently when resolving disputes over gendered spaces. When a situation arises, and you're in the ladies room as currently defined, then guess what? If you're legally a woman, you're in the legal right. If you're not, well, you're not.

    I just don't want to go down the rather slippery slope of conferring people who do not even identify as women partial legal recognition as women. I want to resolve the issues that make non-binary people feel like they need that, chiefly removing gender as a factor when it's unnecessary.
    Last edited by Zooey; 07-06-2016 at 12:23 AM.
    Coming out is like discovering that you've been drowning your whole life after actually breathing air for the first time.

  15. #165
    Banned Read only
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Cathedral City, CA
    Posts
    4,640
    Quote Originally Posted by Zooey View Post
    In the case of non-binary people, part-time people, etc., it is a rather very different situation. You are not saying "we are women" or "we are men" and asking for the according rights. You are saying, rather specifically, "we are something else, but we want access to e.g. women's bathrooms too (in addition to the men's)."
    Quote Originally Posted by Zooey View Post
    I just don't want to go down the rather slippery slope of conferring people who do not even identify as women partial legal recognition as women.
    From this one might conclude that the men's restroom would also not be appropriate.

    DeeAnn

  16. #166
    Woman first, Trans second
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    SF Bay Area
    Posts
    877
    And I would agree, insofar as I think binary gendered bathrooms are inappropriate for non-binary gendered people. That's why we should de-gender bathrooms.

    In the meantime, the one listed on your ID is probably a good (legal) bet.
    Coming out is like discovering that you've been drowning your whole life after actually breathing air for the first time.

  17. #167
    Member jasminepp's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2015
    Location
    British Columbia
    Posts
    329
    Just something I want to point out Zooey, often in your posts you state that non binary folks are "niether men or women" when infact many if not most are BOTH men AND women and being man and woman does not devalue the binary gender of man or the binary gender of woman. Someone who has dual US/CANADA citezenship is not niether American or Canadian, they are BOTH American AND Canadian and them having access to both Canadian and American rights etc does not make an exclusively American citezen any less of an American citezen or an exclusively Canadian citezen any less Canadian. Also, a cross between a rottweiler and a pitbull isn't "niether" rottweiler or pitbull, it is BOTH rottweiler AND pitbull.

  18. #168
    Woman first, Trans second
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    SF Bay Area
    Posts
    877
    I'll agree with you about dual citizenship (though that's a different concept IMO), but not your rottweiler/pit mix example.

    In the case of non-binary identities, I would agree wholeheartedly that you are both masculine and feminine, but not both men and women.
    Coming out is like discovering that you've been drowning your whole life after actually breathing air for the first time.

  19. #169
    GG ReineD's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Samsara
    Posts
    21,062
    Quote Originally Posted by jasminepp View Post
    Someone who has dual US/CANADA citezenship is not niether American or Canadian, they are BOTH American AND Canadian and them having access to both Canadian and American rights etc does not make an exclusively American citezen any less of an American citezen or an exclusively Canadian citezen any less Canadian.
    Except when it comes to crossing the border. My kids are dual citizens. I'm a Canadian citizen and a Permanent Resident in the US. When we go to Canada we show our Canadian passports ... else the Canadian customs officials get confused. When we come back to the US, my kids show their US passports and I show my green card, else the US customs officials get confused. We can only be one citizenship-status at a time. And we only pay taxes in one country, which is the country where we earn income.

    The point is, it's difficult to understand "both" in a world that is biologically binary. If you can find a way to get 320 million people in the US to agree there is indeed a third gender-state ("both") that is equally entitled to use the women's and the men's facilities, then you'll win the prize. And after you do that, how will you convince the other 7 billion inhabitants of this planet, should you wish to travel. Which gender will be on your passport.

    It's difficult enough to get the voting public to understand that transitioning TSs who unwaveringly and permanently identify as the gender opposite their birth sex are indeed that gender and not inherently the gender matching their birth sex, let alone convince them that a birth male can be a female while dressed as one, and a male while not dressed as one, especially if this person has made no effort to transition, has employment records as a male and not as a female, pays taxes as a male, and if he isn't out to his wife, is surely not out to the rest of the people in his life. That won't work. The voting public will see this person as a male because he lives as one.

    The most important issue right now is the need to change how this nation legally defines males and females - should it continue to be based on genitals (birth or post-op), or should it also include people who live and work full-time as their target gender. The Courts do need to define this because during the last decade or two and for the first time in this country's history, transsexuals have come out en masse. They ARE transitioning and living publicly in their target gender, they demand to stop being treated as the gender they are not and to be in the same places as the cispeople who identify as the same gender. And they deserve to be there with an absence of hate crimes. Legally redefining what is "F" and "M" in our country to include the people who have transitioned, will then grant TSs protection against hate crimes and the right to be in the correct bathrooms.

    The next issue is to decide who should be legally defined as "F" or "M" (other than cispeople). Well, the proof is in the pudding. MtF transitioners go through multiple steps in order to transition, all of which are documented (electrolysis, hormones, therapy, name change, changing employment records and other gender markers, and some have FFS, BAs, plus additional therapy before potentially SRS). Crossdressers have nothing on record.
    Last edited by ReineD; 07-06-2016 at 03:17 AM.
    Reine

  20. #170
    Member jasminepp's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2015
    Location
    British Columbia
    Posts
    329
    In Webster's Dictionary, the definition of 'man' is an adult male. The definition of 'male' is someone who can produce usually mobile gametes (sperm) that can fertilize a female egg. The definition of 'woman' is an adult female. The definition of 'female' is someone who bears young or produces usually immobile gametes (as eggs). With these definitions, MTF TS's also would not be considered women, they would fall under the 'man' category. Likewise, FTM TS's would not be considered men, they would fall under the 'woman' category. However, I do consider MTF TS's to be women and FTM TS's to be men because I understand that internally as well as possibly physically (but not genetically) that is who they are. Under the same logic, someone who is a non binary GM may not technically be a woman or a female (same as MTF TS's according to the dictionary) but internally, we are a mix of both man and woman and can consider and identify as such just as a MTF TS can consider and identify themself as a woman. To suggest that a non GG can be a woman but a non binary person cannot be 'part woman' along with being 'part man' (which essentially means being both) demonstrates a lack in understanding of gender as a 'spectrum'.

    Respectfully, Jasmine

    Many great points Reine, I guess thats the dillema isn't it. I respect TS's as a group for being out in the open pushing for the rights and respect they deserve and I agree with those who say that us non binary folks as well as CDers need to stand out and push for our needs if we want the rights and respect that we seek. I have come out to a few people and I feel that this is something that will build momentum over time, and I educate and promote through discussion when oppertunity arises and I proactively teach my children about the diversity of gender and sexuality, however I recognize that I have the potential to do more and I encourage myself to live up to that potential at the pace that I am meant to.
    Last edited by jasminepp; 07-06-2016 at 03:57 AM.

  21. #171
    Woman first, Trans second
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    SF Bay Area
    Posts
    877
    Hormones are funny things, insofar as how deeply they can change things. I'm a woman, but I didn't start feeling it was appropriate to refer to myself as female in certain situations (and they're still rare) until my doctors did. If you do medical tests on my body and expect male results, you get lab reports that look pretty scary and physical examinations that don't really go as planned.

    I respectfully disagree with your interpretation of the gender spectrum. As I understand it, the spectrum runs from masculine to feminine, not from Man to Woman. Man and Woman are gender identities generally located near the very ends of the spectrum (the binary), each covering a range considered normative. Non-binary identities are "non-conventional" combinations of masculine and feminine characteristics that fall somewhere in the middle. They live between Man and Woman, but are not part-Man and part-Woman, except to say that they share characteristics with each.
    Last edited by Zooey; 07-06-2016 at 04:04 AM.
    Coming out is like discovering that you've been drowning your whole life after actually breathing air for the first time.

  22. #172
    Ice queen Lorileah's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Denver
    Posts
    11,805
    I wouldn't hang my hat on those definitions. Lots of females don't reproduce, some don't make eggs (esp after menopause) and many mals are infertile and even can make sperm but are not active.
    The earth is the mother of all people and all people should have equal rights upon it.
    Chief Joseph
    Nez Perce



    “Love isn't a state of perfect caring. It is an active noun like struggle. To love someone is to strive to accept that person exactly the way he or she is, right here and now.” - Fred Rogers,

  23. #173
    GG ReineD's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Samsara
    Posts
    21,062
    Quote Originally Posted by jasminepp View Post
    However, I do consider MTF TS's to be women and FTM TS's to be men because I understand that internally as well as possibly physically (but not genetically) that is who they are. Under the same logic, someone who is a non binary GM may not technically be a woman or a female (same as MTF TS's according to the dictionary) but internally, we are a mix of both man and woman and can consider and identify as such just as a MTF TS can consider and identify themself as a woman. To suggest that a non GG can be a woman but a non binary person cannot be 'part woman' along with being 'part man' (which essentially means being both) demonstrates a lack in understanding of gender as a 'spectrum'.
    This is all very logical, but a side note is that dictionary definitions change over time. For example, the word "gay" now pretty much means "homosexual". In my grandparent's day it meant "happy". That said, in a practical sense how will your point translate to the definition of sex on birth certificates or passports for example. The questions below deserve your serious consideration:

    • Do we replace "M" & "F" (male/female sex) with "M" & "W" (man/woman gender) to more accurately include transitioned individuals and add to these choices "PM" (part man), "PW" (part woman), or "PM&W" (for both), for people who do not transition. It might be best to simply use "O" (other) or "NB" (non-binary) for people who are not "M" or "W" (see Jamie Shupe, last point below). And if we change the designations according to gender (and not sex), would this require cispeople to no longer recognize themselves as male or female (see the third point below). And how do we convince everyone that a sex designation on birth certificates is not important. Birth certificates do form the basis for future identity documents and we cannot designate gender on birth certificates because we do not yet know how some children will identify.

    • Maybe we should dispense with noting sex or gender on any ID altogether (no matter how someone identifies) beginning with not noting sex on birth records. A growing sentiment is indeed that gender is no longer relevant to do all the things we need to do in our society (apply for school, get jobs, get bank accounts, pay taxes, get married, get social security, etc). Except for sports. How would we determine which sports team someone should compete on in order to keep things fair if we do not know their sex. Should we only test sports participants for hormone levels or chromosomes. Also, medical research. How do we accumulate data to conduct research for things that specifically benefit either the male or female sex, like drugs or medical procedures that affect sexual characteristics.

    • Whether we eliminate sex designations and focus on gender-based ID, or eliminate both entirely, how would we stop children from naturally identifying themselves as the male or female sex in their process of gender differentiation. From an early age, kids place themselves in either the male or female camp as a precursor to eventually mating, because there is a biological difference between the two. Even if kids were not socialized as "male" or "female", or "girl" or "boy", even if we stopped assigning sex on birth certificates and if we could get everyone to make a concerted effort to dress all kids the same, would there be any kids who would think of themselves as neither boy nor girl, or both. And if there were such children, would they still feel separate from those who do solidly think of themselves as either male or female. And while growing up, would they still be looked upon differently by their peers.

    • However, eliminating sex is not what The National Center for Transgender Equality is doing. They're working on allowing trans-people to change their sex designation (within the existing "M" or "F") without needing SRS. Should they stop doing this and instead work on getting the federal and state governments to use a gender-based designation (including part woman/part man) on documents instead of sex-based. And if so, how would we determine gender-based designation for everyone ... by say-so only and if so, at what age and at what cost if this cannot be accomplished at birth. Also, how would this make the trans-persons feel who do not feel whole unless they do have SRS or mastectomies and are recognized as the opposite sex. Or, should the organization instead begin to advocate for the elimination of any sex or gender designation on all identify documents (birth certificates, passports, state-issued photo IDs). And if so, how would this affect any TS for whom the opposite-gender binary designation is important enough to risk losing everything when they transition, even if they don't have SRS.

    • On another note and back to having sex or gender designation on documents, interestingly for the first time in the US (as far as I know), an Oregon Judge last month allowed Jamie Shupe to change gender identity - not to "female", but to "non-binary". See, Neither Male Nor Female: Oregon Resident Legally Recognized As Third Gender. This might be the best and fairest possible solution rather than eliminate gender designation altogether.

      But here's where we get back into the bathroom discussion: Until such time as we do desegregate all existing gendered bathrooms, should a person like Jamie be recognized as a female in order to use the women's bathroom. Jamie does not identify as a woman nor did Jamie want a Female or Woman designation. Or should Jamie use the men's bathroom, since Jamie does not identify as a male or man either. Or should Jamie use both bathrooms according to how Jamie feels on any given day but again, Jamie is quite clear that Jamie is neither M or F and some of our bathrooms are currently gender-segregated. Or should Jamie use the neutral bathrooms.
    Last edited by ReineD; 07-06-2016 at 12:50 PM.
    Reine

  24. #174
    Member jasminepp's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2015
    Location
    British Columbia
    Posts
    329
    In the Oregon article Shupe says that they "still don't feel fully female", which indicates that Shupe does feel part female. As far as gender markers, I'm not saying that we need to have PM&PF or anything else complicated like that because NB (Non Binary) covers the wide range of gender mixtures between the binary poles. Zooey, while you consider man and woman to be exclusively the poles of the binary, I consider exclusively man and exclusively woman to be the poles, non binary generally being any kind of mix between the two or neither if thats how someone identifies. I'm not saying that we should stop also having M or F as gender markers, I'm just saying that if a MTF TS can use the term female/woman whether the dictionary definitions are up to speed or not, then there is no reason that a non binary person shouldn't be able to declare themselves part woman and part man. Again NB as a gender marker would cover this. I consider myself to be non binary and when I tell someone what this means I say that I am not 'exclusively' man or woman, but rather a mix of both.

  25. #175
    Woman first, Trans second
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    SF Bay Area
    Posts
    877
    Okay, if that's the terminology you want to use, let's go with that for a second.

    Do you then feel that as somebody who is "part-man/part-woman" that you should be entitled to 100% of the (ordinarily mutually exclusive) spaces currently associated with both binary genders? That is to say, do you believe you should have more entitlements than binary-gendered people by way of addition?

    As another example with a bit more levity...

    I'm 36 years old (true), which puts me about halfway between being a little kid and being retirement-age, so I identify as 50% child and 50% retiree.

    Am I entitled to the children's and senior discounts at restaurants? Am I entitled to both of them at the same time? Maybe I can only use one at a time, but I can choose which one to be based on which one is a better deal that day? Do I get half of each discount, and then add them together?

    Or do I get no discount at all, because I'm not a child and I'm not a senior, even though I still play videogames and sometimes my joints get stiff?
    Last edited by Zooey; 07-06-2016 at 06:20 PM.
    Coming out is like discovering that you've been drowning your whole life after actually breathing air for the first time.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  


Check out these other hot web properties:
Catholic Personals | Jewish Personals | Millionaire Personals | Unsigned Artists | Crossdressing Relationship
BBW Personals | Latino Personals | Black Personals | Crossdresser Chat | Crossdressing QA
Biker Personals | CD Relationship | Crossdressing Dating | FTM Relationship | Dating | TG Relationship


The crossdressing community is one that needs to stick together and continue to be there for each other for whatever one needs.
We are always trying to improve the forum to better serve the crossdresser in all of us.

Browse Crossdressers By State