CD vs TG

[CatAttack]

Stephanie, a baby when born does not know what it is, male, female TG, gay, lesbian, happy nor sad. They are born with a physical body that represents what they appear to be, but not always what they are. That old saying, "Looks can be deceiving" seems to apply very well here. That is why I said in my post above that they (TS's) may need therapy to realize it. I am not talking about physical aspects, but what a person's being/self is. Sometimes it takes work to discover and accept that. Ask gays or lesbians and they will tell you that they only realized that they were that later in life, some fairly young and many a bit older. But, until medical science (i.e. doctor's, psychologists, scientists, etc.) unanimously proves something different, in my belief, they were gay or lesbian from birth, not from external factors after birth. The external factors may help to bring it to the surface sooner, but they do not define these natal true self characteristics. Having something and knowing that you have it are two distinct things. Some know right away and some do not. Some people are mistaken in what they think too. But that does not change in any way who or what they are. Again, that is why counseling is needed to help clarify their "beliefs" and what is the truth as far as being defined. And even counseling can can result in errors. You stated that your recent sources are your top doctors for your own medical problems. Even if they are top doctors in gender related issues such as we are talking about here, they could be wrong in their opinions, just like me. Specialists in the TG area don't even always agree on definitions, causes, treatments, etc.

The understanding of what different definitions and labels are used in other parts of the world should be considered here in serious conversations, because it helps all of us understand and not just dismiss what others have to say, even though they may not be from the USA. We here, like everyone else all over the world, need each others input to totally understand the very complicated transgendered world. What we are talking about is not unique to only the USA.

You keep referring to the body. If I was talking about what body someone had, I would agree with you that someone with a penis has a male body, unless, of course, if they are inter-sexed. But, that male penis does not define what they are inside. We could probably guess and be right most of the time.

And lastly, it is nice to see that we are very similar in many ways. Both are MtF CD's, know some TS's, don't really care what the other person calls themselves(accepting of diversity, as I like to refer to it), love and rarely judge others.

This! Wow, I don't think anyone could've said it better. Very thoughtful and well written.. nice!

[Tina B.]

Does it really matter what you call yourself, as long as you know inside what you are?
Tina B.

[NicoleScott]

Stephanie, I have to disagree with you on two issues:
1) Rianna IS a woman. She was not born female, and you can make the case that she will never be female (even if the hardware is changed, the genetics isn't). But she has always been a girl/woman, because her brain says so!
2) your distinction between crossdresser/transvestite is OLD and OUTDATED. They mean the same. You just don't like it that way.

Labels are useful, but only if we are in agreement on what words mean. I have posted a few objections to the hijacking of the word "transgendered" from the umbrella term to specifically those crossdressers who identify internally as feminine. I have always used the word as the umbrella term, but I think I'm losing the argument. As a pleasure dresser, I am very much different than an identity dresser, but we're both just crossdressers without further disctinction. It still peeves me that some people here who should know better still think we all dress for the same reason, because we feel all femmy inside. We don't. Some dress for pleasure, some for comfort, and some for identity, and maybe some for other reasons (entertainment...). So if the word "transgendered" changes over time, as people use it more to mean something other than the umbrella term, I can adapt. You should, too, Stephanie, and get with the majority of people who use crossdresser/transvestite interchangibly.

[PretzelGirl]

I have posted a few objections to the hijacking of the word "transgendered" from the umbrella term to specifically those crossdressers who identify internally as feminine. I have always used the word as the umbrella term, but I think I'm losing the argument. As a pleasure dresser, I am very much different than an identity dresser, but we're both just crossdressers without further disctinction.

You will always have my backing on your definitions Nicole. Heck, when we say GLBT or LGBT, there is only one "T". There isn't a division on what is the most common identification, so why should we create one. I also like your terms identity dresser and pleasure dresser. There can be many more, but I think that is a good start to two common distinctions.

[NyssaF]

I love to crossdress. I do not want to become a female, I simply enjoy wearing female clothes. I support those
who wish to become a female.

Hey, no fair stealing my answer! I like being a man. I don't want to be a woman. But I love to wear women's clothes. I say that should fall under the Cross Dresser category.

[sometimes_miss]

CatAttack wrote:The difference between CD and TS [mtf] is that the CD wishes to APPEAR female, while the TS feels that they should BE female?

More like they already ARE female, just with the wrong physical parts. Having male 'equipment' is just a constant reminder that they aren't what they were suppossed to be.

Jamie TG wrote: "Also, some pre op TS's stay that way for whatever reason."

Not being a true TS, I'd say it's because for them, self image of gender doesn't depend on sex, more social identity which comes from behavior and appearance.

Wanting to be female and actually having the mental characteristics of one are very different things. I have a strong TS pull but it's more because that's what I feel like I was supposed to be, rather than my actually thinking as women do. Becoming female would resolve a lot of incongruencies in my life, but would simply add another set.

TGMarla wrote: I've always felt that the term "transgender" was an umbrella term that included everyone from casual crossdressers to full blown transexuals. We all exist in the transgender spectrum along a bell curve somewhere. There is no one set line that seperates CD people from TG or TS people. Rather, there is a whole lot of gray area in between. I'm a crossdresser. I'm not transexual. However, I wish I was female. I am not going to transition and have surgery to make that happen, though. But I'm something more than simply a crossdresser. So I exist in that gray area between crossdresser and transexual.

I feel that says it best.

Lorileah wrote: Has it been a month already? This whole thing has been hashed and rehashed and over cooked for the life of this whole site.

and

StarrOfDelite wrote: I am gratified to see that someone besides me thinks that threads on the subject of labels serve no useful purpose.

Yes, but the older threads get locked here so anyone new wishing to discuss it has to open another thread. After all, discussing things in detail to no particular end IS a very feminine thing to do! While I don't particularly enjoy it, there are plenty of guys who embrace the behaviors so who am I to say it's wrong. If it makes them feel better, well, then that's what this site is for.

Raynefall wrote: What is considered "feeling like a woman on the inside"?

It took a long time to figure out; and there are too many professional psychologists' materials that I've read over the years to remember to credit them all; but women think and see the world differently than men do. While lots of us like to think we can know what it feels like to be a woman, the vast majority do not. Barbara and Allan Pease have written many books that are easy reads; Leil Lowndes too. And if you really want to get into it deaper, they provide lengthy bibliographies which will send you to the more technical articles and studies so you can understand the different mindsets of so called 'normal' men and women.
Dressing in overly feminine attire (which most of us love so much) is not a mandatory feminine thing to do; 'real' women feel just as female in a pair of old sweats with a ratty bra and grandma panties underneath, as they do in a wedding gown with their hair in a very non sexy bun (or so they've told me). It's because they ARE female. We for the most part need the extra illusion of female attire to hide the obvious male body underneath. Not to mention that it feels so good to wear pretty stuff; because we get to enjoy the distraction of all the female behaviors on a limited basis, not as a constant which women usually feel is more of an annoyance; during several vacations when I can stay in female mode 100% of the time I have gained the knowledge that hair, make up care, and clothing maintainence does take up a significant amount of time that could easily be enjoyed doing other things. Example: Brushing my very long hair and combing it into a particular style, and taking the tangles out a few times feels like fun; doing it several times a day, every day, becomes a chore (I used to think long straight hair was pretty much care-free, and that the curly styles were the only ones that required care; boy was I wrong). Same with the clothes; high heels are fun for a short time. All day?? No thanks. I'm thankful that my female fashion desires for outfits lean more to sneakers (cheerleader) and penny loafers (adolescent student).