If by identifying as transgender, you could make a positive difference in the world, would you go ahead and accept the label?Originally Posted by NathalieX66
If by identifying as transgender, you could make a positive difference in the world, would you go ahead and accept the label?
The definition is pretty clear but the bolded part is not part of the definition. It is simply explaining that some who are transgendered do not identify as such. Doesn't change the fact they are.
and Nathalie ...yes you do.
All I ever wanted was to be a girl. Is that really asking too much?
No, the entire paragraph is part of the definition. You could read it as two separate definitions ( It may not read as easily here as it does on the original site, but there are two separate paragraphs) but you can't read a subjective element into the first paragraph (gender identity) and not into the second. Bottom line as I see it is if you identify with the LGBTQ movement, you're a part of it. If you don't, you're not.
I think the problem here is the broadness of that one letter...T. We have a lot of trouble just defining ourselves, so how are we to define our place in the LGBT community? I know that the term "transgender" refers to those of us who have been born in the wrong type of body, but when I think of the word, I think "trans" + "gender." That is, anyone who transcends traditional gender roles or breaks the rules, so to speak, should be included. But that's semantics. Define T however you like. It is different for everyone (though there are common characteristics we all share).
In any case, it's not just LGBT anymore. The latest form I know of (it's hard to keep track of all those letters! haha) is LGBTQQIAAP: lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer, questioning, intersex, asexual, allies, and pansexual. Whew. I think all of us probably fall under at least two of these, with many of us belonging to more. I think Queer is all-encompassing though. Be proud!
Peace and love, - Christy
sure, no problem. I embrace it.
Am I gender non-conformist? Absolutely. Am I transsexual?.....not really .
One is transsexual, not A transsexual......does that make sense?
Yes. Luckily transgender doesn't imply transsexual, no matter what the stereotypes the muggles may use.
I feel like the fundamental question in this thread is one of rights, and how best to approach claiming ours as crossdressers in particular. We need societal acceptance, if only so we can go out dressed up and not passing and be treated with respect and dignity, and not beat up.
So, to me, it's a political question. I don't identify as transgender either, but I'll proudly claim the label as my own for the sake of all my sisters and brothers that feel they live in some form of bondage. If I can make it easier for them to come out and be who they are, I will do it.
That's why I'm the mix-gender freak at the grocery store. Well that and it feels really interesting to have freshly shaved legs and a skirt in the frozen food aisle. That was weird. Cool, well, downright cold, but new to me.
Gay, lesbian, and bisexual Americans have been thrown under the bus by straight people throughout history. What what finally turned things around for our brothers and sisters was coming out and refusing to be invisibile. The transgender community is decades behind in this struggle. We should be upset about being treated poorly, but we should also be the first ones to make waves about it. For too long we've been content to stay in the closet or live a life of stealth. We are finally making headway by being visible and our allies do notice. Organizations like HRC that have a poor history of trans inclusion have a bad reputation with LGBT activists as a result.
During my lifetime we've come a very long way. Growing up I didn't even know trans folk existed and gay folk were invariably shunned. Now I'm able to live a proud, productive life married to another woman. That's thanks in large part to the work of activists who have allied with the transgender community.
~ Kimberly
“To escape criticism do nothing, say nothing, be nothing." - Elbert Hubbard
No it is not. The part you placed in bold is a note about the definition.
All I ever wanted was to be a girl. Is that really asking too much?
Hmm, if they had used the word note or "for example" like they did in the first paragraph that would be fair conclusion, but they didn't, thus the fair reading is to include all the language. But I really don't want to argue about interpreting a definition. I respect everyone's right to freedom of association, thus if you believe you're part of the group, that's good enough for me.
What that suggests is a willingness to sacrifice those who are or will be negatively impacted "in the long run", however long that is (measured in years, but more likely decades I would think). I think that has the effect of compounding the original injustice to the point that the lost ground can never be made up.
It's very easy to offer the original opinion (and I've not heard of this particular book) if one is not negatively impacted by the lack of policy. It still remains true that justice delayed is justice denied.
Whats all the bru-haa-haa. I hate labels. Just put on a dress and go for it. Daviolin
[SIZE="6"]
[/SIZE]
A CD AND HIS WARDROBE, ITS A BEAUTIFUL THING.
In this day and age when people can't tell the difference between to, too and two, or there, their and they're, is it any wonder that they have no idea what the difference is between sex and gender, or what the word transgender really means? Gender is a noun, and transgender can be either an adjective or a noun depending upon the application. i.e. a transgender law (adj) or he is a transgender (noun). Crossdress is a verb, and depending on the suffix can become an adjective or a noun, or its tense can be past or present. Transgender tends to describe what a person is because of its basic origin as a noun, whereas crossdresser tends to describe what a person does because of its origin as a verb. Most definitions of transgender relate the meaning to the subjective self-identification of one's "gender" as being other than their assigned birth "sex", or that their "gender expression" would lead others to make that assumption about their gender identity.
Much of the opposition by some crossdressers to the use of transgender stems from this definition and the fact that it does not apply to them or to what they do. They identify as male (sex) and masculine (gender) regardless of how they are dressed. How they express themselves does not change that, as it is simply clothing. Being a woman, or feeling that you are a woman, at least in part, is much more and far deeper than simply how you are dressed. Notwithstanding all the attempts to make TG an "umbrella" term, a male identifying crossdresser is not being true to himself by self-identifying with that term.
There are fundamental human rights in most advanced civilizations, that are either enshrined in their constitutions or a part of their legislated or common laws. I agree with those who feel that enacting rights for specific groups does little to advance their cause, since their rights already exist. More can be achieved through education which does not create hostilities. Every right that is given to one group, often impinges upon the rights of others in some way. For example, it is often argued that all TG people have a right to use the women's restroom, because of how they are presenting. However, if you are including CD's in the TG umbrella, then all CD's are also entitled to use the same facility. But what about the discomfort of the genetic females who are having their privacy invaded? All CD's and TG's are not necessarily completely passable, and even if they are it would be somewhat discomforting for many women to later find out they had been duped. Co-ed washrooms are not everybody's cup of tea. My wife, who is accepting of my crossdressing and has attended a number of CD events with me, is never-the-less somewhat offended at the idea of a crossdressed man entering the ladies facility when she is in there. It is an intensely personal thing.
When you align yourself with a group that is primarily LGB, then by association the public perception is that you are also of that persuasion, both individually and as a group. If you add a T, and the public concept of T is primarily TS or very nearly TS, then by association you will also be seen as being their definition of T. It has nothing to do with homophobia or transphobia on the part of anyone. While I ultimately have no control over what others may think of me, I don't go out of my way to mislead them, and such misunderstandings can have a negative impact on my personal relatonships.
Veronica
Last edited by Veronica27; 07-07-2013 at 03:42 PM.
Hi Becky, We are the Red headed stepchild !!
Having my ears triple pierced is AWESOME, ~~......
I can explain it to you, But I can't comprehend it for you !
If at first you don't succeed, Then Skydiving isn't for you.
Be careful what you wish for, Once you ring a bell , you just can't Un-Ring it !! !!
That has happened in the past, but it usually wasn't a community action, it was done by a small group of activists and/or rights organizations. I remember some of my gay and lesbian acquaintances being quite angry when that happened. At times, part of the larger gay community has expressed dislike for gay guys who occasionally do drag, so it isn't surprising that they would also be willing to use the "T" as a bargaining chip, especially several years back when the LGBT movement didn't have much support from the straight/cisgendered community. More recently, they've been less likely to throw us out when they want to get legislation for LGBT rights passed. Things are improving in that regard, in my opinion.
Carol
My name is Carol.
Exactly right! One of us meets and interacts with a "normal" person as someone who is polite, well behaved, decent and thoroughly ordinary. That person will not be "recruited," but likely will mention to a few others that he/she met a CD who was a pleasant, interesting and like able person, unusual attire notwithstanding. Those 2 or 3 repeat the story when the topic comes up. The downside, of course, is that unfortunate behavior attracts a lot more notice and attention, and pretty much guarantees breathless, proactive gossip, by definition negative. Akin to "100 attaboys are wiped out by just one "aws**t."
If you are to be out as a "T",you just have to have a thick skin...There really is no damage from gossip that isn't overcome by truth..
It SURE is my hair ! I have the receipt and the box it came in !
I think it is a case of being able to separate fiction from reality. A number of people in the community often get upset by drag queens because they believe that it doesn't give the "proper" image and that it draws a lot of negative attention. Unfortunately society at large doesn't understand that most of what drag queens do is for show, whether they entertain or not. It really isn't to be taken seriously and it isn't really representative of anything EXCEPT drag queens. However, it's very easy for society to point fingers and use them as a reason (however weak) to discount the whole community.
I don't disagree. I just thought it was an interesting take on the larger struggle for equality, one that hadn't occurred to me before reading the book (I think it was called The Invention of Heterosexuality, or something like that). I'm for nondiscrimination policies and statutes, as necessary remedies, but I saw that the arc of history on this subject was vindicating that author's premise, that marriage and military equality was outpacing nondiscrimination law, and that it might make such law less crucial than it would otherwise have been. There has always been the the tragedy of being the last one to die in a war that's nearly over...
I can't understand that because marriage and military equality have come about due to changes in laws (perhaps stated policy in terms of the military). That's not making sense.
Things get changed because people actively advocate for them. I can't think of any situation where that wasn't true. In order for the original premise to be true, you would have to belive that things change faster if you don't do anything. To me, that's like saying you heal faster from a broken leg if you don't do anything. I don't see how that would work.
Last edited by Rianna Humble; 07-23-2013 at 01:06 AM. Reason: No reason to quote immediately preceding post
Posting Permissions
