Are you TS?

[Pat]

However, I'm unable to see them as a transsexual because the very word itself denotes someone who is sexually (i.e. anatomically) female.

Mirya -- Oh dear. OK, I see a problem with our ability to communicate because we have different definitions. To me the term 'transsexual' is an artifact of the days when people didn't know that there was a difference between sex and gender. They talked about people having "sex changes" which I think we all understand cannot happen. All we can do is change the appearance of our bodies to relieve dysphoria. So when you say transsexual, you mean people who have changed the appearance of their bodies in a very specific way. When I say transsexual I mean a transgender person with a strong sense of the binary whose internal sense of gender is that of a woman - full stop. To me, you don't have to do anything to be a TS -- you just have to have that internal gender.

It's interesting. I've never really run into anyone who viewed it that way, but since you do, I understand why we might talk at crossed purposes. I'm sorry I didn't understand before.

[LeaP]

Meh - pick your shorthand ... because that's what we are all doing here.

For me there are two great divides: binary cross-sexed identity, and sufficient pain to do something about it. The reasons for the latter (or lack of it) are many and complex, but one thing I keep in mind is that the type and intensity of the pain doesn't necessarily track with the firmness of the identity OR any actions taken. Clear as mud. But I'm really mostly concerned with those who share the basic condition, which is cross-sexed identity.

The shorthand? I have my own terms for various and sundry combinations of identity, pain, and actions - and some of them depend on the audience and circumstances. I even use some terms on occasion that I detest (like "transgender"). None of it means a lot. A few of them have very specific meanings in narrow contexts. But the only thing that REALLY resonates with me is credibility.

BTW - anyone who thinks Rianna isn't TS is nuts. Just my not so Humble (sic) opinion ... She's gone through a very public, personal hell and has more than enough credibility for me.

[Patty B.]

Love the post Nigella, well done.

[Nikki.]

Lea, how does "always wished to be" vs "always identified as" fit within your paradigm?

[LeaP]

Nikki, it depends entirely on the individual. Sometimes it's because the reality hasn't sunk in. It might be a form of repression or self-correction. Or it might indeed "just" be a wish, though if so, it probably indicates other issues.

Wishing can be quite unconscious, too. I wanted to be a nun(!) for many years - and the fact that I was male never occurred to me until a therapy session in my 50s, at which I suddenly broke out laughing at myself over the unrealized dichotomy. Undercurrents sometimes run unnoticed.

[Kaitlyn Michele]

all the talk about definitions ends up being what exactly??

i know that TS dogma of 70s and after hurt me... filled me with shame and emptiness... i was a transsexual who didint know it...how could i based on what people thought of transsexuals then?

finally i accept it..move on...destroy everything to build up...

and now my quaint binary notions are just a thing of the past!!

i support nb people completely...my dearest friend struggles with this... but i also have to say simply as a matter of form..

coming to ts forum and saying the term is an "artifact"
and in another post saying you are non binary TS...

the first sounds kind of sneaky nasty(coming from a person that uses the new up and coming trend NONBINARY!!)
and the second sounds kind of incoherent given the other statement..

[AmandaM]

For myself, I need definitions. It's something I use to try to figure myself out. Anything else is kinda nebulous and I always had the constant question, "what am I?". I've been defining TS and transgendered related but different. I consider transgendered to be more than a CDer. I consider a TS someone who desires the surgery. I'm only doing this to place myself. What do I know? I now know I'm not a CDer. I am transgendered. I don't know if I'm a TS yet. Working through therapy.

[Dana44]

I think we all know that we cannot change sex biologically. Surgery and other factors weigh in and the end of the day, we are still men. Body dysphoria make some seek surgery and it seems to put a chip on your shoulder that you and only you can be transsexual. But some are rightfully in their proper places and say they are TS. IF you are full time and have legally changed your sex to be who you are, isn't that enough. Pat is a woman in mind body and spirit. She is our TS in the non binary area and we have accepted her. We even have a GG girl that has joined us. She has her own struggles. I think this post by Nigella is nice and I think we should have opinions but not tear anybody down with a different opinion because you are too opinionated.

[Megan G]

I think we all know that we cannot change sex biologically. Surgery and other factors weigh in and the end of the day, we are still men. .

I am going to keep my mouth shut on this one but I am EXTREMELY FAR from still being a man..... and will leave it at that....

Pat is a woman in mind body and spirit. She is our TS in the non binary area and we have accepted her.

Actually Pat is not a woman, *they* do not identify as female, or male.... Pat identifies as NB so that excludes *them* from being a woman in their "Mind body or Soul".... and Pat, when you read this the *they* & *Them* is to attempt to use the proper pronouns.....

[LeaP]

Terms and definitions help for a while. You need to be able to articulate a concept to grasp it, to question yourself against it. Eventually the essence of what you are comes home and then the terms don't matter so much - as least as applied to yourself. You have to deal with the terminology to help others, however. Their specific usage doesn't matter as much as your understanding of what they're trying to convey.

[jentay1367]

Regardless of any of our self identification tags, we're all "sisters" and share the struggle of making ourselves understood by the "muggles". Threads like these are just infighting and parsing words. Kind of a futile and fruitless endeavor.

[Georgette_USA]

Just throwing my 2 cents worth.

Back in the 70s TS was the accepted name, made popular from Harry Benjamin's 1966 book (The Transsexual Phenomenon), and for all that I knew the path was full Transition. The name TS had not made it into the DSM II, it only listed TV.

The term TG had been named but was not really in much use.
Someone who was pushing for that was Virginia Prince, A Hetero Transvestite or Crossdresser. She felt that TG was good for people like her, That wanted to live as a women but wanted NO part of HRT and SRS.

I (and my partner) left the LGBT crowds behind in 1983, and we were just living our lives as two women.

Somewhere over time TS and TV/CD came under TG as an umbrella term. I guess to remove the idea that TS was a "sex change". Unfortunately to most non T people TG = TS. That plays into their whole questioning on surgeries, I and we know that those are personal choices and (other than potential sexual partners) no ones business.

Since I came back to the LGBT community in 2015, I have had to play catch up with all the new ideas. To me the idea of a Non-Op TS was weird.
So I can understand Mirya's viewpoint as far as what may be a TS or not. So I guess that leaves us with (Pre- Post- Non - Op) TS.
I have accepted that the whole TG identity can encompass many different people. I know some that don't think it refers to them as they have NO Gender Identity problem.

As a Binary person, the Non-Binary or other terms confuse me. And from some "they" do not identify as TS, but do put themselves in the TG.

Not sure why we here in this small community are debating what or who is a TS. I know some TG that do full transition and do not accept the name TS for them.
To me that is the most confusing, the T community constant arguing over all these terms / labels / identities.
Just like the arguing of the sexual terms of LGB and how they relate to the T world.

Some days I almost wish I could go back to my isolation of my world of just being another woman, and to the outside world, as that is just what I am.
And to my family I am just their Daughter and Sister and Aunt or Niece.

[Mirya]

I think we should have opinions but not tear anybody down with a different opinion because you are too opinionated.

...the end of the day, we are still men.

okay... lol

[Nikki.]

I think that was a Devo song (i'm dating myself )

[kimdl93]

The label debates go on and on. Many of us, myself included, try to walk the tightrope between acknowledging that we are TS or something other.

The truth is unique to each of us. Am I TS? Seems a simple question.

[Rianna Humble]

Surgery and other factors weigh in and the end of the day, we are still men.

Unless you are using the royal "we" that statement is insulting when used in the Transsexual Forum.

People don't transition because they are men born with a man's body. They transition either because they are women born with an apparently male body or because they are men born with an apparently female body.

Your espoused theory smacks of the rhetoric of Trans Exclusionary RadFems - people who set out to do harm to Trans people or to put them in harm's way. That I have suffered at the hands of TERFs is a matter of public record. This is why I can never support such an egregious slur.

Mirya,

It seems that your position is evolving from

I'm of the belief that someone who is really a TS will have had or is planning on surgery. Now that could be either SRS or FFS or both,

towards

I will always, always respect and regard a female-identified person as a woman, regardless of physical traits.[/i] However, I'm unable to see them as a transsexual because the very word itself denotes someone who is sexually (i.e. anatomically) female.

Which is even more hardline since you now exclude anyone who has only had FFS because the face is not a sexual organ.

Incidentally, where do either of your positions leave the transmen?

Both Dana and Myria, as Voltaire never said, I disagree with your opinion(s), but I will defend to the death your right to express it(them).

[Pat]

i support nb people completely...my dearest friend struggles with this... but i also have to say simply as a matter of form..

coming to ts forum and saying the term is an "artifact"
and in another post saying you are non binary TS...

the first sounds kind of sneaky nasty(coming from a person that uses the new up and coming trend NONBINARY!!)
and the second sounds kind of incoherent given the other statement..

Kaitlyn, sorry I wasn't clear. I didn't mean to offend. What I was trying to say is that the "sex" in transsexual was an artifact of the times the term was coined. It was later that we understood that gender and sex were different.

She is our TS in the non binary area and we have accepted her.

Actually Pat is not a woman, *they* do not identify as female, or male.... Pat identifies as NB so that excludes *them* from being a woman in their "Mind body or Soul".... and Pat, when you read this the *they* & *Them* is to attempt to use the proper pronouns.....

First, Dana -- Thank-you. The acceptance is more important than the pronoun.

Megan -- And thank you for the pronouns. Yes, nonbinary folks do not identify as women or men, which makes the whole pronoun thing difficult for everyone around them. I feel bad about it but it's all still in flux. I pretty much accept any pronoun that's used with respect, though I prefer "they." If "they" is difficult, I prefer "she" to "he" but I try not to let such things distract.

And to all, I didn't really come into your forum to cause trouble. The question was asked, "Are you TS?" and I felt it was fair to chime in to say that yes (in my mind) I am; I have many commonalities with you including full-time presentation in real life, irreversible physical changes and legal document changes. The place I fail the classic test is that I'm not a woman. (Admittedly, not a small difference.) Because my understanding of the term TS was gender-centric I viewed the completion of a full transition away from a false cis-male identity to a true non-binary one was comparable to a full transition from a false cis-male identity to a true transgender woman.

It's been an interesting discussion and I hope it has been interesting to everyone and not a problem. Part of the reason I floated the idea of a non-binary TS -- whether it ever catches on or not -- was that I have immense respect for the strength and commitment that TS people show. Most of my role-models are TS. So I hope you understand my posts are submitted with pure intentions.

[Georgette_USA]

Pat, still not sure on your re-definition of the term TS.

I understand the new thinking that sex and gender are not the same, and why TG is preferred by many.
You said "When I say transsexual I mean a transgender person with a strong sense of the binary whose internal sense of gender is that of a woman - full stop." So why than did you call yourself a NB TS, since you say you are NB wouldn't it be more accurate to say NB TG person.

I have a strong binary sense of gender, which is why I still use my past as a Post-Op TS.

I have an issue with your idea of " irreversible physical changes and legal document changes" as that of "My medical interventions are non-invasive - electrolysis, hormones and I suppose voice training,...and Therapy". Those are all reversible with maybe a small amount of body changes from HRT.

Kaitlyn you said
"i know that TS dogma of 70s and after hurt me... filled me with shame and emptiness... i was a transsexual who didint know it...how could i based on what people thought of transsexuals then?"
As a TS of the 70s, Not sure of the TS dogma of the 70s meant to you, and what was it that people thought of TS back than that filled you with shame and emptiness. My family and work thought nothing wrong in my being TS and my doing something about it.

And Thank You Rianna, did not catch that Dana had said "we are still men", will not add anything else to that.

[Pat]

You said "When I say transsexual I mean a transgender person with a strong sense of the binary whose internal sense of gender is that of a woman - full stop." So why than did you call yourself a NB TS, since you say you are NB wouldn't it be more accurate to say NB TG person.

Hi Georgette -- that's my usual inability to express things clearly, I suppose. My understanding of TS is what I said. Taking that definition, I tried to pitch the idea of expanding it to include the non-binary concept of "third gender" people who follow the same path but are not women. Correct or not, that's how I model myself as I try to understand my journey. I know I'm not the only one like me. Maybe someone will find better words for it in the future.

I have an issue with your idea of " irreversible physical changes and legal document changes" as that of "My medical interventions are non-invasive - electrolysis, hormones and I suppose voice training,...and Therapy". Those are all reversible with maybe a small amount of body changes from HRT.

Electrolysis is irreversible, right? At least I hope so. And the changes from HRT may be small to you (they're large to me) but part of the warnings when you start is that they leave an indelible mark. Sure, those things aren't as permanent as having your brow ridge ground down by a surgeon or having your genitals reconfigured, but it seems a little weird to have a discussion of if changes are "permanent enough" to qualify. Permanent is permanent, right?

Yes, you can reverse the effects of therapy and voice training, I could probably get my name changed back and have another spin at my documents. I wasn't intending to suggest those were permanent for any of us, just that they were commonalities I share with this community. The fact that I'll never have your experience of being a woman and you'll never have my experience of feeling like a third gender doesn't mean we can't understand each other.

And Thank You Rianna, did not catch that Dana had said "we are still men", will not add anything else to that.

I know the words as words are painful. But I think Dana's thought wasn't addressing identity but simple genetics. These day we know gender cannot be changed -- that's why the medical community stopped listing our condition as a mental illness. But we also know that sex, in the biological/genetic sense cannot be changed either. I can't speak for her, but my reading of Dana is that she totally accepts your identity and was not trying to trigger anyone's dysphoria with her words.

[LeaP]

I use "male bodied" all the time, but only as a convenience (I NEVER use "man"). But even male bodied is problematic. Based on research over the last decade or so in particular, I understand the condition to be a form of physical intersexuality. Chromosomes are only one aspect of the sexual dimorphism ... and this isn't the same as genetics, by the way.

Nigella's OP is more about celebrating life than definitions per se.

[Georgette_USA]

Electrolysis is irreversible, right? At least I hope so. And the changes from HRT may be small to you (they're large to me) but part of the warnings when you start is that they leave an indelible mark. Sure, those things aren't as permanent as having your brow ridge ground down by a surgeon or having your genitals reconfigured, but it seems a little weird to have a discussion of if changes are "permanent enough" to qualify. Permanent is permanent, right?

Pat, I bear you no ill will, but I tend to be very literal at times, If we have names/terms/labels, we can't be changing them all the time, it only muddles the water.

I still don't see why the usage of NB TS, rather than NB TG. You said TS is a Binary definition, But you say you are "Non Binary" or "Third Gender", so these are not Binary. You can call yourself whatever you want, the trick is to get others to accept your re-definitions.

Actually if one stops HRT the effects on T may reverse to some degree. And if not than can take T to change some secondary characteristics. Not sure how much facial hair would start again, but male pattern baldness would start up again.
Depending on how much breast and other body effects may reverse some. One can have breast reduction if so inclined.

You talked about Permanent or Irreversible, so there maybe some changes. People that de-transition do reverse all that they can.

FFS and SRS/GRS/GCS are much more permanent. They can be reversed some, but not to the original specifications. I didn't bring in the idea of permanent changes.

Dana's remark did not trigger any Dysphoria with me, been at this too long to worry about that anymore.
But that is what many in the non-trans world (like TERFs) use with all their arguments. That all TS or TG are "still men", so therefore they can discriminate all they want, because to them Gender Identity is just a made up thing.
I would hope that in this forum that we ALL do not harbor the same ideas. Maybe that is why we still get into these arguments of CD vs TS and NB.

[Marcelle]

I'm sure I'll get a lot of criticism for this, but I'm of the belief that someone who is really a TS will have had or is planning on surgery. Now that could be either SRS or FFS or both, but I just don't understand how someone can claim to be a TS and at the same time be mostly content with their body such that they have no need to surgically alter it.

I went to a transgender support group meeting last night, and the vast majority of the attendees were CDs or NBs. As always, I enjoyed my time there and am happy to count many of them as friends, but there is still a difference between me (a TS) and them. Yes we are all transgender people, but the severe dysphoria that TS women experience can only be resolved through surgical intervention. And if someone doesn't experience that level of distress, that's ok, maybe even better since you don't have to put yourself through the emotional and physical trauma of invasive surgery, but in my mind I'm just unable to regard a completely non-op woman as a TS.

Sorry, but that's my opinion and I hope you can respect my point of view even if you don't agree.

Mirya,



Your opinion is yours which is one I doubt I will change. However, it is one I don’t agree with.

To be honest, I don’t consider myself trans “anything”. Legally I am female right down to my birth certificate. I am a woman now but then again, I always have been a woman. Unfortunately, I was just dealt a very bad hand in the genetic card game of life, and one I have actively chosen (for my own reasons) not to correct. Why you may ask? Simply put, my body and facial feature do not define me as a person and they sure as heck do not define me as a woman. Yup, the kid’s not pretty and she may be sporting the wrong plumbing but she is still all woman. However, if I have to wedge myself into a category in response to your posted reply . . . I am TS.

I understand your POV. You believe that unless you are going to change your sex (or facial features) then you are not transsexual. While I understand that stance in theory (trans = crossing over ergo transsexual is crossing over to another sex), IMO, you are applying a draconian interpretation to a term which I think we can all agree has evolved over time. Yes, a literal translation of the word would imply you want to change your sex and that was the basis of Benjamin’s levels back in the day. However, a more liberal approach would be that aligning your gender with who you are and living as that gender is by definition . . . crossing over to the other sex. IMO, you are getting hung up on the word “sex” as the defining characteristic for gender (i.e., vagina = woman / penis = man). If we follow this logic, you seem to imply that unless you change your sex, you can never truly be a man or a woman irrespective of you gender identity. As such, your very statement seems to invalidate those who identify as a woman or a man but do not undergo surgical procedure ergo, they are not truly men or women.

I know, you are going to say that you weren’t trying to invalidate me as a woman you just don’t see me as TS. However, when you start to differentiate between “them” and “us” within a category, IMHO, you are implying that the “them” are somehow fundamentally different and as such, don’t belong or have nothing of worth to add to the discussion. I am very saddened by this “us/them” mentality which seems to land in this section from time to time and one of the reasons why I stopped posting here. While this may not have been your intention and if I am wrong I apologize in advance . . . when you set yourself above others (I am TS because I have had surgical procedures and you are not TS because you have not done what I have done), you in essence invalidate my existence in the community. If I am not TS then what am I? A man who thinks he is a woman but can’t commit? The reason I find this stance maddening is that somehow you believe that by virtue of the fact that I have not undergone surgery, I haven’t shed enough blood or suffered enough to be considered a woman. Each day I leave the house, I wonder if this is the day someone is going to take exception to my existence and attack me (verbally or physically) because I am not pretty enough. I potentially blew up my entire life by coming out, it worked out in the end but there was a price. So yes, I do get defensive when someone implies I am not trans enough. Believe me, I have suffered and I have lost.

I will admit, your use of the term “non-op woman” did irritate me. Again, it may not have been your intention but it does imply that somehow a post-op woman is more of a woman than someone you refer to as a “non-op woman” (is that even a thing?). It boggles my mind that we feel obliged to invent categories within categories. Is it to justify some pecking order of who has more street cred? Does a post-op TS woman have more street cred than a pre-op TS or a “non-op woman? IMO this belief that one is more credible than the other as a woman because they have done/completed XY and Z and the other has not is very elitist.

My final grievance with your post was the assertion that only those who undergo surgery suffer from a severe dysphoria that those who do not undertake surgery can never fathom. I hate to be a naysayer, but dysphoria is dysphoria and when I experienced mine it brought me to a very dark place if you know what I mean (if you doubt my voracity on this point, PM me and I will provide the details). IMO, that assertion was very callous as it implies that somehow my dysphoria was a cakewalk , which I can assure was not the case.

So in the end, I don’t agree. If someone has taken the steps to live their life authentically as their target gender, they are as TS as anyone who undergoes surgical procedures. The only difference is level of comfort with one’s own body and how that defines them as a person. For some, surgery is a requirement and a potential lifesaving procedure and nobody here would argue that point. For others it is not required and I would expect the same level of consideration when deciding who is TS and who is not.

[LeaP]

Not everyone has dysphoria, at least as understood by most.

[donnalee]

It comes down to definitions, which change with time, circumstance and experience. As of yet, nothing has been written in stone and until the terms can be defined the same for everyone, these arguments are inevitable as no one has a clear idea of what another is saying.
The good part of this conflict is that this is how definitions are born; it's a necessary process, and no one should get too upset by it

[LeaP]

... as no one has a clear idea of what another is saying. ...

It's usually quite clear what people mean. Unfortunately, the discussion (or argumentation) over terms is more a matter of community politics. One view of that is inclusion vs exclusion. A countervailing concern is erasure. There are other competing facets as well, of course, but no-one should accept that this is "just" semantics.