Hi
Sally Silverwood
Hi,
I have been CDing for quite some time. I have no desire
to be a woman, and believe me I have thought about it a lot.
I have a girl friend, have a good job and am generally happy
with my life. If I had SRS I think it would destroy my life
because I would most likely loose the ones who really matter,
I would not be able to do all the things I like to do now,
like building things in the garage, drinking beer with the
guys. I think I am mostly fascinated by the fact that it is
possible for me to 'pass', but that is my own impression since
I have never gone public (almost a couple of times).
I see no value in letting others know what I do sometimes
since it would change my life with respect to the relationships
around me as things are just fine as they are. Maybe next
halloween I could get my girlfriend to dress me up or something,
but its mostly a way to relieve stress for me.
As my life develops (I am in my 20s) I feel less and less
inclined to CD. I used to be very shy, but I met my girlfriend
and have learned a lot...I think that being shy of asking girls
out at bars and the like and not having many girls as friends
sheltered me from them. I believe that CDing was a way for me
to relate to them and it may have helped me become more sensitive
to them. I am interrested in females only and actually may
end up 2 timing my girlfriend soon (but that's another matter
which I don't feel so great about), but I am learning that my
life is really what matters.
I will post soon since my time is up. I don't want to start
any great debates (since there seems to be a lot of bickering here)
I am just telling it like it is for me. Nice to hear from all
of you.
Sally ;-)
Sally Silverwood
continued...
Ya and my real name is not Sally, but I thought it appropriate
for this forum. And as I said I'd rather not tell.
I have some experiences I would like to share. I will start with
the day I was home alone and decided to CD again...many years ago
when I was in high school. I was all dressed up. Saw a TV talk
show on CDers. I wondered what it felt like to be a real woman.
My mother in her older age takes estogen. I took one of her pills.
I noticed that after a while (hour or two) my testicles had a stange
sensation to them and I could not have an erection, but mt penis
was larger than normal (resting mode) and was very soft and flexible.
That was a very exciting experience, but I didn't repeat it dare
I do some damage to my body. Has anyone else experienced that sort of
sensation Sally
Tim Walsh
Hi Sally,
SRS won't prevent you from building things in the garage, or
drinking beer with the guys. Only your own attitude will do
that. I have every intention of keeping my power tools, and using
them when I remodel the various rooms in this house. My wife has
always been willing and I must admit quite capable in use of my
power tools. Nothing says a girl can't putz around in the garage,
or fix cars, or build rockets, or what ever.
Now that I blasted you, I know what you were trying to say, I
think, and your right. SRS isn't for everyone, it probably isn't
for me either, but therapy will help me determine if it is.
Tina Renee
--
Denise Hudson
In a previous article, am...@Freenet.carleton.ca (Sally Silverwood) says:
>
>continued...
> Ya and my real name is not Sally, but I thought it appropriate
>for this forum. And as I said I'd rather not tell.
>
I am on the same freenet as Sally. Sally really is the name that
am335 is registered as. All those of you who persist in using the Finish
anonymous service, would it not be just as easy to pay a few dollars to
get a second ID in your feminine name and then you would have more
credibility when you post. Even if you have to pay money to an expensive
net like Compuserve would it not be worth it to avoid the stigma of the
closet and we still would not know your male identity.
Just a suggestion,
Denise
Gisle Benediktsson
: > Ya and my real name is not Sally, but I thought it appropriate
: >for this forum. And as I said I'd rather not tell.
: >
: I am on the same freenet as Sally. Sally really is the name that
: am335 is registered as.
I take it you took it upon yourself to check Sally's addreess. It is
because of that sort of thing that so many people use the anonyous
service anyway. They don't want their privacy invaded.
: All those of you who persist in using the Finish
: anonymous service, would it not be just as easy to pay a few dollars to
: get a second ID in your feminine name and then you would have more
: credibility when you post.
I would think that the intellectual consistency of a person's post
is what would lend it credibility -- not what one chooses to call
oneself.
: Even if you have to pay money to an expensive
: net like Compuserve would it not be worth it to avoid the stigma of the
: closet and we still would not know your male identity.
Maybe Sally can't afford it. At any rate, she owes us no explanations.
: Just a suggestion,
You would perhapos be well-advised to pay more attention to your
own business and less to other people's.
Just a suggestion.
: Denise
//gisle
Ed Matz
You know, I really don't understand why some people here manage to
get themselves so hot-and-bothered about some other people using
the Finnish anonymous service. It really doesn't make a difference
**to me** whether someone is using the anonymous service or not.
I guess maybe I come to this newsgroup *expecting* confidentiality,
among both contributors and lurkers.
I CAN understand how people here might get upset by someone using
the anonymous service commenting critically about someone else's
closeted status. But that's a horse of a different color, I think.
>Denise
--Ed Matz
Kira Triea
(Denise Hudson) writes:
+------
+------
Anonymity is a personal choice and should not be influenced by any
self-appointed arbiters of 'credibility'. I also don't see how credibility
*is* affected by using an anonymous server... unless of course one is
spouting off about the value of being out of the closet.
I would imagine that posting anonymously would be a benefit to some
folks during the initial stages of learning to communicate about
something which is stigmatized and misunderstood. I certainly don't *like*
the fact that we live in a world where this is sometimes neccessary and
it would be better if anonymity were used as a stepping stone, rather than
a rostrum for one's fantasy life.. we have IRC and mud for that, after all.
But it's strictly a personal decision.
______________________________________________________________________
_______________ Kira D. Triea
____________________________tr...@midget.towson.edu
_________________________________________.... . . . . . . .
.
.
*
--
______________________________________________________________________
_______________ Denise Tree
____________________________tr...@midget.towson.edu
_________________________________________.... . . . . . . .
Amy Matthews
>In a previous article, am...@Freenet.carleton.ca (Sally Silverwood) says:
>>
>> Ya and my real name is not Sally, but I thought it appropriate
>>for this forum. And as I said I'd rather not tell.
>>
>am335 is registered as. All those of you who persist in using the Finish
>anonymous service, would it not be just as easy to pay a few dollars to
>get a second ID in your feminine name and then you would have more
>credibility when you post. Even if you have to pay money to an expensive
>net like Compuserve would it not be worth it to avoid the stigma of the
>closet and we still would not know your male identity.
>
Why should I pay for a service I can get for free? I make $5/hr at a
part-time job, when I have the motivation to go to it. I don't have spare
bucks to spend to remove a stigma that certain people unfairly attach to
use of the anon server (and I won't post from my own account until I go
full-time).
Amy!
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
To find out more about the anon service, send mail to he...@anon.penet.fi.
Due to the double-blind, any mail replies to this message will be anonymized,
and an anonymous id will be allocated automatically. You have been warned.
Please report any problems, inappropriate use etc. to ad...@anon.penet.fi.
Denise Hudson
In a previous article, an5...@anon.penet.fi (Amy Matthews) says:
>
>Why should I pay for a service I can get for free? I make $5/hr at a
>part-time job, when I have the motivation to go to it. I don't have spare
>bucks to spend to remove a stigma that certain people unfairly attach to
>use of the anon server (and I won't post from my own account until I go
>full-time).
>
If you are that strapped for cash then you won't. But I think
that several of the anon-users are remaining anonymous because they have
well-paid jobs. A full transition to female costs $10,000 - $20,000, and
to male much more. Most TSs and many TVs acquire all kinds of female (if
MTF) id. An easy piece of id that many acquire is a credit card. Why
would one acquire a credit card in a female name but not a net id.
If you cannot afford a female net id, how can you afford a male
one? After buying a computer and modem surely a net id is a small
increment. Or are you lucky enough to live in a city were the public
library provides free terminals to access the net (as Ottawa does)?
Where people are using anonymity to make an introductory post, ask
questions etc. then there is no problem. But when anonmymous posters put
down others for being in the closet (LUCY), preach that transies should
hate themselves(Ellen), argue without evidence that the Conservative Party
has does something for us(Lynette) then their anonymity does undermine
their credibility.
I was merely suggesting a way that these people could help themselves.
Denise
Lynette
anonymity again. I really didn't. But I have noticed a pronounced
decrease in the number of posts on this net that come from anon
servers, and I _know_ this isn't because a lot of people are bravely
deciding to post from their own accounts -- it's because people feel
that anon postings are no longer welcome on this net.
I am also unclear as to why Denise has no trouble with a name that
comes from a freenet, but thinks that a name that comes from Finland
is bad.
In article <CH4Hv...@freenet.carleton.ca> Denise writes:
>Even if you have to pay money to an expensive
>net like Compuserve would it not be worth it to avoid the stigma of the
>closet and we still would not know your male identity.
It's like this, Denise. Before you said there was a stigma, there
wasn't one. People felt comfortable posting anonymously, and for a
lot of people, anon posting to alt.transgendered has been the closest
we have come to being out. I know that for me, it is as close as I
want to get just now.
Please let _me_ decide how much of myself I want to project to the net
and how.
Lynette
Ed Matz
Lynette <an6...@anon.penet.fi> wrote:
>I really didn't want to get involved in a spat with Denise about
>anonymity again. I really didn't. But I have noticed a pronounced
>decrease in the number of posts on this net that come from anon
>servers, and I _know_ this isn't because a lot of people are bravely
>deciding to post from their own accounts -- it's because people feel
>that anon postings are no longer welcome on this net.
I sometimes wonder at the amount of "air time" grousing about people
using the anon server gets. What, exactly is the gripe? I really
don't understand why people have this need to be concerned about what
other people do. You'd think that in this community, there'd be less
of this concern for other peoples' business.
>In article <CH4Hv...@freenet.carleton.ca> Denise writes:
>
>>Even if you have to pay money to an expensive
>>net like Compuserve would it not be worth it to avoid the stigma of the
>>closet and we still would not know your male identity.
>
>It's like this, Denise. Before you said there was a stigma, there
There is no stigma of the closet, except that which we put there. We
are all closeted in some way, except those of us (myself EXCLUDED) who
dress the way we wish when we wish and where we wish without concealing
our identity. (That is: I don't do what I just said keeps one out
of the closet.)
>wasn't one. People felt comfortable posting anonymously, and for a
>lot of people, anon posting to alt.transgendered has been the closest
>we have come to being out. I know that for me, it is as close as I
>want to get just now.
A lot of people also went away for this past l-o-n-g weekend in the U.S. ;-)
>
>Please let _me_ decide how much of myself I want to project to the net
>and how.
If you haven't guessed by now, Lynette, I'm on your side, here.
>
>Lynette
>
--Ed Matz
Denise Hudson
In a previous article, an6...@anon.penet.fi (Lynette) says:
>I really didn't want to get involved in a spat with Denise about
>anonymity again. I really didn't. But I have noticed a pronounced
>decrease in the number of posts on this net that come from anon
>servers, and I _know_ this isn't because a lot of people are bravely
>deciding to post from their own accounts -- it's because people feel
>that anon postings are no longer welcome on this net.
>
>I am also unclear as to why Denise has no trouble with a name that
>comes from a freenet, but thinks that a name that comes from Finland
>is bad.
>
>It's like this, Denise. Before you said there was a stigma, there
>wasn't one. People felt comfortable posting anonymously, and for a
>lot of people, anon posting to alt.transgendered has been the closest
>we have come to being out. I know that for me, it is as close as I
>want to get just now.
>
>Please let _me_ decide how much of myself I want to project to the net
>and how.
>
Each time I have mentioned the issue, I have carefully excluded
postings about personal matters, questions etc. The issue is that you are
going to post political opinions, as I have done, and as you, Lynette,
have done, you should have the courage to sign them with your own name.
Furthermore if you are going to insult people, to call them 'smug
and ignorant' etc, it is sheer cowardice to hide behind a pseudonym. I
have received email saying that I am being a bit emotional on this issue.
Well okay. I do feel resentment against cowards who call me names and
won't say who they are. To repeat again: the cowardice is not in using
the anonymity service, it is using it and then calling names.
P.S. So why is freenet on the same level. Is it because as a
declared Conservative you don't like a system that provides free access
for the poor? One of the thing that I love about about the US is that in
all its contradictions, good things like Freenet come out of it. Yes on
Freenet I could take out 3 or 4 or more different ids, but I could also do
that through Compuserv.
PPS. I am in no way telling you whether or not you can post, what
opinions you can post or how you post them. The fact that I hit a nerve
says something about you. However you have the right to comment on what I
say and how, and I have the right to comment on what you say and how.
Denise
Alan Hamilton
> The issue is that you are going to post political opinions, as I have
> done, and as you, Lynette, have done, you should have the courage to
> sign them with your own name.
>
> Furthermore if you are going to insult people, to call them 'smug and
> ignorant' etc, it is sheer cowardice to hide behind a pseudonym. I
> have received email saying that I am being a bit emotional on this
> issue. Well okay. I do feel resentment against cowards who call me
> names and won't say who they are. To repeat again: the cowardice is
> not in using the anonymity service, it is using it and then calling
> names.
I don't see the difference between someone using one username or
another, especially if the writer uses a personal name, so that I can
tell people apart without having to memorize numbers.
Unless one plans to hunt down one's critics and threaten them (or
worse) with bodily harm, I see no need to know a poster's name or to
impute cowardice to them for posting with an anonymous id. I can get
to know someone from their posts (whether I like them or not) just as
well if they are posted from an anonid as from a
First.Last_Name@address.
Just my $.02.
-Alan
Lynette
responding to Denise is just not worth the trouble; and that nobody
else needs to read what is, after all, a quarrel. Then I sat down to
read news, and I was so angry that I felt I had to reply.
As I wrote the reply I considered not sending it. I do that
sometimes: it makes me feel better to write the reply; but nobody
has to read it if I'm just making myself feel better. Then I decided
that I was not just replying to make myself feel better: Denise is
a contributing member of this newsgroup and deserved a proper (if
angry) reply.
In article <CH9n7...@freenet.carleton.ca> ah...@Freenet.carleton.ca (Denise Hudson) writes:
I had said this:
>>I am also unclear as to why Denise has no trouble with a name that
>>comes from a freenet, but thinks that a name that comes from Finland
>>is bad.
And I had said this:
>>It's like this, Denise. Before you said there was a stigma, there
>>wasn't one. People felt comfortable posting anonymously, and for a
>>lot of people, anon posting to alt.transgendered has been the closest
>>we have come to being out. I know that for me, it is as close as I
>>want to get just now.
And asked this:
>>Please let _me_ decide how much of myself I want to project to the net
>>and how.
Denise replied:
> Each time I have mentioned the issue, I have carefully excluded
>postings about personal matters, questions etc. The issue is that you are
>going to post political opinions, as I have done, and as you, Lynette,
>have done, you should have the courage to sign them with your own name.
I guess I should. I suppose by my "own" name, you mean the name my
parents gave me, rather than the one I choose to use myself. I will
do my best to recall that those who use names other than those their
parents gave them are cowards.
Of course, as you've said, if I pony up some proportion of my welfare
cheque and send it to Ottawa Freenet (the one in Toronto doesn't exist
yet), then I am magically no longer a coward.
I am tempted to ask for a copy of the list of topics that may be
addressed from an anon server, from a freenet under a pseudonym, and
only under one's birth name or name changed by deed poll.
> Furthermore if you are going to insult people, to call them 'smug
>and ignorant' etc, it is sheer cowardice to hide behind a pseudonym.
Right. And did I call you "smug and ignorant" as you here imply? It's
hard for me to remember as I wallow in cowardice, but I don't recall
those words crossing my keyboard.
>I have received email saying that I am being a bit emotional on this issue.
>Well okay. I do feel resentment against cowards who call me names and
>won't say who they are. To repeat again: the cowardice is not in using
>the anonymity service, it is using it and then calling names.
Or using it and expressing opinions. Or using it without being as
courageous as Denise Hudson -- if I may call you that.
You attacked me for posting anonymously when I had merely expressed an
opinion.
> P.S. So why is freenet on the same level. Is it because as a
>declared Conservative you don't like a system that provides free access
>for the poor?
Like penet, you mean? Free access regardless of economic condition,
nationality, gender, choice of holidays, language ...
As a human being I like being able to communicate with my fellow
humans. I like freenets. I like anon servers. I like the Internet.
Regardless of my personal politics.
As a poor Tory I have all sorts of interesting opinions; but they do
not belong on this newsgroup.
> I am in no way telling you whether or not you can post, what
>opinions you can post or how you post them. The fact that I hit a nerve
>says something about you.
That I do not like being disrespected, for one thing.
>However you have the right to comment on what I
>say and how, and I have the right to comment on what you say and how.
Gosh, thanks, Denise.
What I find hardest to fathom is the vehemence with which you express
yourself. I appreciate a lot of the work you do on this group, and I
appreciate having you contribute to discussions; but sometimes your
tone of writing seems more to wound than to enlighten. And that
doesn't help anybody.
Yours sincerely,
Stephanie Mitchell
>In article <161302Z...@anon.penet.fi>,
>Lynette <an6...@anon.penet.fi> wrote:
>>that anon postings are no longer welcome on this net.
>
>I sometimes wonder at the amount of "air time" grousing about people
>using the anon server gets. What, exactly is the gripe? I really
>don't understand why people have this need to be concerned about what
>other people do. You'd think that in this community, there'd be less
>of this concern for other peoples' business.
Well, perhaps in the alt.transgendered community this is true. To be fair,
I don't particularly care whether you regular posters and readers know my
real identity. In fact, I'd like nothing better than to be able to join in
freely and confidently with the caring, trusting group of people I found
here. Posting from my real name would let me join in threads (I still can't
make penet do this right :-( ) and get rid of a bunch of other technical
difficulties.
The problem is all those lurkers who might know me in real life. Harassing
e-mail I can trash; threatening or abusive e-mail I can turn over to my
sysop. I'm not out to anyone except immediate family and I'm not ready to
handle snide comments and looks from co-workers who have nothing better to
do than read this group.
Blowing it out of proportion, you say? Maybe so, but it's a pretty real
concern to me. So for now I remain,
Sincerely yet anonymously (go figure :-) )
Stephanie
Denise Hudson
I have been thinking about about *I* said. I am coming on a bit
too heavy re the anonymity issue. The posting I made last week was
supposed to to be an ironical observation that I thought it quite easy to
get a second id and therefore why don't some of the people I have sparred
with do so and undercut one of the criticisms that I have made.
Various people have sent me email re their access availability to
the net etc. I am going to admit that my phrasing on this issue was not
the best. I would like to withdraw my comments where they were widespread
in their implication.
There are of course much more important issues to talk about.
Sorry for starting this thread.
Denise
Denise Hudson
In a previous article, an6...@anon.penet.fi (Lynette) says:
>
>What I find hardest to fathom is the vehemence with which you express
>yourself. I appreciate a lot of the work you do on this group, and I
>appreciate having you contribute to discussions; but sometimes your
>tone of writing seems more to wound than to enlighten. And that
>doesn't help anybody.
>
Glad that you appreciate some of what I do. When I posted my
movie lists I thought: are there many who really have put me in their kill
file and won't therefore see my lists.
Vehemence is in the eye of the beholder. I will admit to being
blunt and calling a spade as I perceive it. This is stereotyped virtue of
the north of England where I grew up. I perceive myself as a messenger of
truths that some do not want to receive. It is apparent from some replies
to me that while I am saying things that have been said before, they are
brand new to some.
PS. If and when you should wish to change your name, deed polls are long
gone in Ontario. Since about 1985 there has been a provincial registry
which issues a fancy certificate giving one's old and new name, which is
quite useful when dealing with bureaucracies etc.
Denise
Russ Williams
Denise Hudson <ah...@Freenet.carleton.ca> wrote:
>I perceive myself as a messenger of
>truths that some do not want to receive.
I think that's the problem. That's a pretty annoying attitude to have,
when you get down to it. No one has a monopoly on the truth.
You've been wrong before and you'll be wrong again, so exuding
the above perception probably turns people off.
Personally, I'm interested enough in the content of what you say
(usually) that I filter out that attitude of "This is the Truth",
but I can see why it bugs a lot of people. I seem to have higher
tolerance than average for that sort of thing; since I've got some
longtime reallife friends who always say "This is so" instead of
"In my experience" or "I wonder if", I try to regard it
as a charming eccentricity. :-)
Russ
MajorBBS: Kymmer
Regarding the question of the anonymous double-blind from Finland:
>I have noticed a pronounced
>decrease in the number of posts on this net that come from anon
>servers, and I _know_ this isn't because a lot of people are bravely
>deciding to post from their own accounts -- it's because people feel
>that anon postings are no longer welcome on this net.
I, for one, care not one little bit _where_ a post comes from. One of the
reasons I wanted our BBS to link into the Internet was so that I could
interact with more people and get their opinions and views.
As a publisher in the gender community, I find it not only healthy but
_necessary_ to have as many voices as possible contributing to my personal
thought process. If a person needs the anonymous double-blind to protect
his or her own security, then we should _not_ be trying to drag them,
kicking and screaming, out of their personal closets.
I vote to encourage anonymous posts, not discourage them.
Kymberleigh Richards
kym...@xconn.com
---
ž OLX 2.1 TD ž Proofread carefully to see if you any words out.
Kristin Rachael Hayward
:In a previous article, an6...@anon.penet.fi (Lynette) says:
:
(edited)
:>
:>It's like this, Denise. Before you said there was a stigma, there
:>wasn't one. People felt comfortable posting anonymously, and for a
:>lot of people, anon posting to alt.transgendered has been the closest
:>we have come to being out. I know that for me, it is as close as I
:>want to get just now.
: Each time I have mentioned the issue, I have carefully excluded
:postings about personal matters, questions etc. The issue is that you are
:going to post political opinions, as I have done, and as you, Lynette,
:have done, you should have the courage to sign them with your own name.
:
: Furthermore if you are going to insult people, to call them 'smug
:and ignorant' etc, it is sheer cowardice to hide behind a pseudonym. I
:have received email saying that I am being a bit emotional on this issue.
:Well okay. I do feel resentment against cowards who call me names and
:won't say who they are. To repeat again: the cowardice is not in using
:the anonymity service, it is using it and then calling names.
And earlier . . .
In article <082303Z...@anon.penet.fi> an4...@anon.penet.fi writes:
:
(edited)
:
:One of the things I learned early on was that there a few
:_unwritten_ rules of social engagement in the transgendered
:community. One of which is a CARDINAL rule. The rule I speak of
:is that anyone who enters the group is in a identity sanctuary.
:Asking a person to reveal their true name, occupation and other
:such identity information is permissible but the person can say
:no without being criticized. BUT, requiring a person to reveal
:their identity information otherwise the person will be
:criticized was/is considered BAD FORM and down right rude.
:
:Why do I bring this up? In a recent thread here on
:alt.transgendered I was criticized heavily for not revealing my
:place of work and other identity information. When did the rules
:of transgendered social engagement change?
:
:Lucy J.,
No, Lucy, the rules haven't changed.
People of difference, whatever that difference is, need safe spaces.
Some of those people are moving through safe spaces towards "unsafe"
spaces, some of those people will stay in the safe space as long
as they wish.
By offering people of difference a safe space, we should honor their
wishes. We should never ask them their names, regardless of whether
the have posted personal information or insults.
By entering alt.*, readers should honor these conventions.
However, it must be acknowledged that having this group, even as an
alt.* group brings both good and bad to our community.
Good, in that it has thrown a life line to many who have been hurting
for years; good, in that it helps people to remain anonymous; good, in
that it helps others learn of local support groups and of mailing
lists such as transgen and cdform; and good, in that it helps others
learn.
And "bad" in that, like any newgroup, it can bring out the worst in some
people.
Reading and writing via computer is very different from attending a
support group or a gender meeting. Social behavior, the oil of life,
is enforced by convention; there are few conventions in cyber-space.
And that is a shame. It is just too easy to shoot off an email
message or a post without thinking; it is just too easy to believe
that cyber-space is real life and assume that others will bring into
that space proper social conventions.
No, there is never, *ever*, any reason for people here to be
criticized for wishing to remain their anonymity.
Kristin
--
Dr. Kristin Rachael Hayward
Director of Business Services
University of Maine
Lucy J.
>Dr. Kristin Rachael Hayward (Wrote)
>
>No, Lucy, the rules haven't changed.
>
>People of difference, whatever that difference is, need safe spaces.
>Some of those people are moving through safe spaces towards "unsafe"
>spaces, some of those people will stay in the safe space as long
>as they wish.
>
safe space.
>By offering people of difference a safe space, we should honor their
>wishes. We should never ask them their names, regardless of whether
>the have posted personal information or insults.
>
The MAGIC word honor... Honoring these wishes is the glue that helps
hold the transgendered community together. Its an element in the
fuel that powers the public conventions and this news group.
>By entering alt.*, readers should honor these conventions.
>
>However, it must be acknowledged that having this group, even as an
>alt.* group brings both good and bad to our community.
>
Yes! Tolerance is another MAGIC word in our community.
>Good, in that it has thrown a life line to many who have been hurting
>for years; good, in that it helps people to remain anonymous; good, in
>that it helps others learn of local support groups and of mailing
>lists such as transgen and cdform; and good, in that it helps others
>learn.
>
Wisdom...
>And "bad" in that, like any newgroup, it can bring out the worst in some
>people.
>
>Reading and writing via computer is very different from attending a
>support group or a gender meeting. Social behavior, the oil of life,
>is enforced by convention; there are few conventions in cyber-space.
>And that is a shame. It is just too easy to shoot off an email
>message or a post without thinking; it is just too easy to believe
>that cyber-space is real life and assume that others will bring into
>that space proper social conventions.
>
It does take a while to get use to the cyber-disease that can infect
humans at the keyboard. Not being able to see into the eyes of the
person you are writing to can be cyber-dysphoric.
>No, there is never, *ever*, any reason for people here to be
>criticized for wishing to remain their anonymity.
>
> Kristin
>--
>Dr. Kristin Rachael Hayward
>Director of Business Services
>University of Maine
Thanks again for the recognition. I honor the wisdom within you.
Lucy J.
Pat Winstanley
" No, there is never, *ever*, any reason for people here to be
" criticized for wishing to remain their anonymity.
If I've followed this thread correctly, I get the impression that two
different aspects of anonymity are being lumped together in a "chalk
and cheese" manner. Forget personalities for a moment - I can't
remember who said what anyway.
First there is the matter of not revealing personal details about
onesself. A necessary evil to some for financial purposes, while for
others perhaps through guilt, embarrassment or whatever.
This should't be confused with the role-playing anonymity practiced on
the net by many, many people - not just the TG community. For instance
I can use whatever "handle" or "Real Name" I so desire, because I can
set the software up to do so. It will still reflect my site, but won't
identify *me* except to those who know who uses the site.
The problem in this case came (I understand) because someone taking
advantage of the quite normal anonymity of the net was at the same
time expressing their feelings about people who use anonymity (or
hiding of their real nature) in real life.
There is or can be a confusion of the two, say when someone is posting
here from a works account rather than a privately paid-for one - but
the issues are still different in aspect.
Another newsgroup which people here might like to look at is
alt.recovery, which deals with people in or around the various
*Anonymous groups. See how alkies and sex-addicts and overeaters etc
handle things in real life and on the net.
Meanwhile, I don't think it is unreasonable to ask people what they do
for a living, or whereabouts they live, or whether they are married,
have kids etc - such background can be given in a very general way,
insufficient to identify a particular person, but sufficient to get a
more rounded picture of a personality.
Pat
--
pee...@f113.n250.z2.fidonet.org
pee...@friend.demon.co.uk
Deborah Parks
In a previous article, an6...@anon.penet.fi (Lynette) says:
>I am also unclear as to why Denise has no trouble with a name that
>comes from a freenet, but thinks that a name that comes from Finland
>is bad.
P.S. So why is freenet on the same level. Is it because as a
declared Conservative you don't like a system that provides free access
for the poor? One of the thing that I love about about the US is that in
all its contradictions, good things like Freenet come out of it. Yes on
Freenet I could take out 3 or 4 or more different ids, but I could also do
that through Compuserv.
Freenet is on the same level because it is just as anonymous as the
anonymous services, Denise. It's that simple.
If I want to mail to you, I can mail to ah...@Freenet.carleton.ca.
If I want to mail to Lynette, I can mail to an6...@anon.penet.fi.
Beyond that, it's extremely difficult for anyone to find out anything more
about either of you (unless they administer the site you're on).
Therefore, when you use Freenet and insult people for being anonymous,
you are violating your own stated standards.
Poof.
-Deb
Deborah Parks (RP90) (SotM 7/91) (RnF91) DoD #0034 d...@ellery.esi.com ------
"It's being both that's a bitch." --\--- /
"I wanted to take my brain to hell and back and see what I had left." \ \ //
"There's something wrong with a society that says 'Sex is dirty, \ \/
save it for someone you love.'" \/
Denise Hudson
In a previous article, de...@benji.Colorado.EDU (Deborah Parks) says:
>
>Freenet is on the same level because it is just as anonymous as the
>anonymous services, Denise. It's that simple.
>
>If I want to mail to you, I can mail to ah...@Freenet.carleton.ca.
>
>If I want to mail to Lynette, I can mail to an6...@anon.penet.fi.
>
>Beyond that, it's extremely difficult for anyone to find out anything more
>about either of you (unless they administer the site you're on).
>
>Therefore, when you use Freenet and insult people for being anonymous,
>you are violating your own stated standards.
>
>Poof.
>
> -Deb
>
Before posting this nonsense why did you not make the simple test
of calling directory enquiries and seeing if I am listed. I am the only
Denise Hudson in the Ottawa phonebook. It is the only name that I have
used for many years. I was previously 'Dennis Hudson'.