Eliminating pathology of Gender & C/Ding from the DSM-IV-TR

[Rachel Ann]

How did it help gays and lesbians?

I will defer to what a gay or lesbian person says, but I saw it seem to help in two ways:

1. It removed an official "blessing" of prevailing attitudes.
2. Treatment focus shifted from homosexuality itself to the difficulties of living in a world that persecutes same

I try to imagine walking into the boss's office and saying, "I am a transsexual." Then getting fired for having an emotional problem. Then suing because it's not an emotional problem.

It's a catch-22 for sure. But usually they fire people for reasons other than those stated, and it's hard to prove. For example, they might fear having the medical costs of transitioning and SRS driving up their premiums.

... would the rest of the world even care? Would this change how we are viewed in their eyes?

Over time, it might. People would not have official support for negative viewpoints. I think that a good place to start would be lots of public educationo about TG and what it is/means. Too many people, even many doctors still believe that TG = TS = gay = pedophile.

It's a numbers game. We will never win them all over, but as the public gets used to us, attitudes will evolve.

I guess where I'm going with this is if we don't get ourselves out of the closet and into the streets we will forever be seen as crazy even if gender identity and CDing are removed from the DSM-IV-TR.

I think you're right. I'm a little hypocrite though. I am in no way ready to be up-front-visible in many spheres of life, especially the political. Usually the younger ones in any movement take the lead in political action.

And, of course, we will always be seen as crazy or evil by some, but at least this can make it possible to live without fear or persecution. Or, for those who follow us. Remember, it took gays decades and blacks over 100 years to get anywhere with freedom and rights issues.

But, we must start somewhere.

[Rachel Ann]

I was playing Devil's Advocate.

I wondered if that might not be the case. But from the number of replies, I think that Kew and you made a successful thread!

And since Kew pointed out there are other emotional problems related to TGism (depression, anxiety, etc.) that could be covered by insurance, I see no reason to keep them in the DSM.

Yeah, it sort of worked out that way for gays and lesbians who were still dealing with issues like being disowned by family, employment and housing discrimination etc. etc..

The problem is if we aren't seen in numbers, no one will pay any attention to us. That means anonymity gets tossed out the window which would result in almost no one coming forth. A true Catch-22.

How true. That is why it's likely to take the younger generation to lead the way in this. They always have more passion and less fear of repercussions!

Unfortunately in the GLBT "rainbow", there is still a tendency for some Gs and Ls to snipe at each other, both of them to snipe at the Bs and all three to snipe at us. There are even TSs who snipe at other TGs.

Splintering in to factions has always been the bane of progressive movements. We'll never get anywhere without some unity.

==================================================

I got to be involved in a hilarious incident in 1964, when I was still working with the Velvet Underground and for Andy Warhol. That year, the American Psychiatric Association had its annual conference in New York, and it was the first year that there was a proposal to remove homosexuality from the DSM (or whatever they called it back then). The proposal failed, but not without lively and acrimonious debate featured in the press.

At the end of the week came the banquet. For some reason, Andy (who had many connections in high society) was tapped to organize the entertainment. I guess they thought he was going to do some sort of "pop art" thing. But, he put on the Velvet Underground, doing their most sexually degenerate, outrageous tunes. It was like a Mel Brooks movie, the whole crowd just sitting there with bug eyes and their mouths hanging out. And, it made the front section of the New York Times the next day!

[Since12]

Crossdressing is wearing a Cross around your neck, dressing in a costume of a Cross or generally putting a cross some where on your body.

I am not a CDer at all because I am ME. I am no more a Crossdresser then a Girl who wears mens clothes is. That is just how I feel.