TS/IS dynamics
Nikki
Kiira Triea <tr...@eclipse.qis.net> wrote in message
news:2jTq4.2375$m5.17...@news-read1.qis.net...
> x-no-archive: yes
>
> (please honor the x-no-archive header)
>
<SINP!>
To be honest, I tend to get a bit disdainful when someone
> throws a hissy fit, calls me an "exclusionistic, elitist boundry
> enforcer" who "needs to do her homework" because I have told them
> politely that they cannot have an XXXY karyotype, father 2 children
> and have a period (true story - I kid you not).
As well you should. I'm afraid the behavior of a few thoughtless trannies is
all it takes to ruin things for the rest of us, and this is yet another
example. You have every right...hell, maybe even a duty...to be outraged by
this.
> Being intersexed is not some club which alleviates the pain of being
> transsexual because it provides biological and cultural legitimacy -
<SNIP!>
Imagine how ludicrous it would seem if hundreds of intersex
> people wrote to the TS activists who have web sites claiming to be TS
> and presenting outlandish, nonsensical narratives of their histories
> and biology - all easily recognized by an actual TS person as caca.
This doesn't happen with IS people, but it DOES happen with transvestites
who try to claim legitimacy by colonizing the experience of transsexuals,
and secondary transsexuals who colonize the experience of primaries. It
strikes me as a sign of profound immaturity. Our personal identities just
ARE...they're not part of some heirarchy where one is somehow superior to
another.
>
> Claudia puts it very well - this behavior puts a stake through the
> heart of communication and it is a communication which would be
> beneficial to all. Sincere T* folks suffer from this rift as does the
> political dynamic which would benefit from coalition.
Yep. I've seen very similar dynamics in the coalitions between Native
Americans and non-Natives who romanticised Native culture and saw fit to
colonize and distort it for their own purposes. Potentially useful alliances
had to be broken over this for the sake of cultural intrgrity.
It would be ok
> if it were just a few people but unfortunately it is the rule rather
> than the exception.
Please explain. Do you mean to say that this is the bulk of the
communication IS people are getting from T* people? I would hate to think
that this behavior is the norm for the T* community at large.
<SNIP!>
Be aware that my definition of intersex is
> cultural/political - it's someone for whom the Gender Team Red Phone
> was activated as a child. It's not about biology.
Would you care to expand on this? I've only recently become aware of IS
people and their issues, mostly by reading what Heike and Tryke Sister have
written in other groups. I'd gathered (or perhaps just assumed) that IS was
primarily defined by biology. Have I misunderstood?
It also strikes me that the sentence "It's not about biology" could easily
be twisted to rationalize yet more T* colonization of the IS experience.
Could you please clarify your meaning?
-Nikki
>
> Thanks to Claudia and Julie (and others) for their insightful replys
> in this thread.
>
> vilpitomasti,
>
> Kiira Triea
> CISAE
> http://www.sonic.net/~cisae
>
> "I have no mercy or compassion in me for a society that will crush
> people, and then penalize them for not being able to stand up under
> the weight."
> Malcolm X
>
>
Heike Boedeker
> > x-no-archive: yes
> >
> > (please honor the x-no-archive header)
<taking hat off> <--- uh, was that what you've meant? :-)
> > To be honest, I tend to get a bit disdainful when someone
> > throws a hissy fit, calls me an "exclusionistic, elitist boundry
> > enforcer" who "needs to do her homework" because I have told them
> > politely that they cannot have an XXXY karyotype, father 2 children
> > and have a period (true story - I kid you not).
I guess the cissie/trannie or endo/inter distinctions ultimately are
pretty meaningless to people affected by some *severe* psychiatric
condition that leads them to believe something like this.
> As well you should. I'm afraid the behavior of a few thoughtless
trannies is
> all it takes to ruin things for the rest of us, and this is yet
another
> example.
(see above) You can't be *reasonably* held responsible for what you
*can't* be responsible.
> This doesn't happen with IS people, but it DOES happen with
transvestites
> who try to claim legitimacy by colonizing the experience of
transsexuals,
> and secondary transsexuals who colonize the experience of primaries.
It
> strikes me as a sign of profound immaturity. Our personal identities
just
> ARE...they're not part of some heirarchy where one is somehow superior
to
> another.
Most people just do try to understand their own experience in terms of
others' experience. They try to compare themselves to others, as if this
could tell them more about who they really are. This is not a TS (TV,
"STS") privilege and an IS ("PTS") curse. That's what most have been
"encouraged" to do by "socialization". Of course, this can be *terribly*
confusing... Really understanding that the way to understanding others
has to lead through understanding yourself probably either requires a
lot of experience of life, or as a shortcut a thorough psychoanalysis.
And even then, how that looks in day to day life is still more a matter
of degree rather than once experiencing a flash of enlightenment and
then being redeemed. Especially, the closer relationships are, the more
difficult it seems to be.
> Yep. I've seen very similar dynamics in the coalitions between Native
> Americans and non-Natives who romanticised Native culture and saw fit
to
> colonize and distort it for their own purposes.
"Colonialization" here seems to be a metonymy (displacement) for having
been "socialized" in an "intrusive" manner. Say Rousseau'an or Reich'ian
paradises are not based on prehistoric and ethnographic findings but the
neediness for a sense of preserved intactness, at least somewhere,
someplace in this world. As long as they don't get this neediness
fulfilled at the very spot they're inhabiting, though, they have no way
of knowing what colonialization "really is like".
By "teaching" people that all that was "politically incorrect" nothing
is won. They'll just move on to perform the same play with
different players. Replace PC with "ideologically impeccable" and see
how the realexisting socialism has fostered the growth of humankind :-\
> Please explain. Do you mean to say that this is the bulk of the
> communication IS people are getting from T* people? I would hate to
think
> that this behavior is the norm for the T* community at large.
It, of course, is not!!
What I think is understandable, and what should not be confused with
this, is if TS are anxious about their bodies. But this again is
something that does not exclusively occur in TS.
> Would you care to expand on this? I've only recently become aware of
IS
> people and their issues, mostly by reading what Heike and Tryke Sister
have
> written in other groups. I'd gathered (or perhaps just assumed) that
IS was
> primarily defined by biology. Have I misunderstood?
It's more about people's interpretation of biology... Which at times can
be totally irrational.
Consider a case like the following: I've only recently talked to an Arab
woman who has a child diagnosed AIS and assigned female, which really
was no question for clinicians, also no surgery involved, but still she
wanted to have the kid reassigned male, because in her culture "it"
would have it easier as a guy... (One only could guess that she was
alluding to the fact that a female unexploitable for reproductive
purposes was considered "worthless" there).
I felt some temptation for a knee-jerk repsonse like she equally well
could tell her hubby she had decided as a guy she had it easier, too,
and he surely wouldn't mind being gay from now on!!!! Of course, I had
to bite my tongue, because if I provoke her she will make the child
suffer for it... At times I feel like I was negotiating with hijackers,
and if anyone makes a mistake they will start to cut off the abducted
kids' ears and fingers to somewhen finally possibly even kill them. But
actually it's still more nuts than that. Almost everyone believes such
people to be upright citizens and loving & caring parents. If adults
dared to behave towards other adults like they think they could get away
with behaving towards children I guess 75% of the population would be
imprisoned. It is like society was a giantic self-help group for
sociopaths!!
But what might she have thought the life of a gay "man" without a penis,
without balls, and still worse, a vagina, in her culture would look
like... If she had wasted any thought on that at all... And, still
worse, for the child's safety it probably even might be better she
didn't waste too much thoughts on that...
@+
Heike
"Anyone who wants to know the human psyche will learn next to nothing
from experimental psychology." (CG Jung, CW 7, 409)
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
KarenA1013
>When do you become a transsexual? It is when you define yourself
>thusly and take the steps to change your body. This is the exact
>opposite of IS experience - someone else labels you and changes your
>body without your consent.
The way you phrased that implies that being transsexual is a choice.
For the TS you are focusing too much on the external physical. That is
understandable considering your experience.
In my experience, one does not chose to become a transsexual, but as an IS, one
is born one. For us, the difference is always there - just not visible. When
we are born, as far as anyone knows we are "normal".
That is what gives us the choice on what we wish to do *about* being
transsexual. IS's should have the same choice.
- Karen A.
KarenA1013
>Yes, you are correct it is a very inter-centric POV. But isn't it a
>choice... doesn't a person present to a therapist and say "I am a
>transsexual?"
Yes because there exists no physical way to determine if someone is TS at this
time. That does not mean being TS is a choice.
> You are not required to have vaginoplasty or
>clitorectomy or penile extirpation.
Actually I was - but not by an external agency. I *required* it to feel more
comfortable with my body.
In the case of IS your sex is decided by someone who has no knowledge of your
gender. That IMO, is the most significant difference IMO between being TS and
IS.
If the medical establishment stopped doing that to infants, I suspect some IS
would have SRS in one direction or another and some not to match their sense of
self. That would be much more similar to the TS experience.
>Doesn't transsexuality come into being by the expression of that
>choice?
Does one chose to be paranoid or manic depressive?
One could say that those individuals chose to have the thoughts and perform the
actions that cause them to be labeled as such...
For a non disease anology, does a homosexual chose to *be* homosexual.
Certainly they chose their sexual partners but do they chose the sex they are
attracted to even if unexpressed?
>If you did not want to have a female body and had not taken
>steps to acquire one, would you be a TS person? Or would you be an
>"unexpressed" TS?
IMO a TS always wants to have a female body but may not always act on it.
>Ok I'm an outsider on this but what is the problem
>with defining TS-ism as wanting the body and genitals of the opposite
>sex?
That sounds almost like autogynophilia. For some that may be part of the reason
but for most TS's IMO it is not. Thise TS's I've met wh seem to be *primarily*
driven by autogynophilia seem to be something different altogether.
For most TS's It is more than just wanting actually. It is a profound
unease/discomfort with the physically being the wong sex. That is how it was
for me. It was something I was born with and I knew from my earliest memories
that i was physically the wrong sex.
That is something many who are not TS have a *very* hard time understanding.
-Karen a.
Jannelle Johnson
say that even with ruler's inch marks as the
defining factor in who is IS and who is not, it
could be missleading to think a person who does
not feine themselves as IS for what ever reasons
did not fit the definition. I know of a person
who did identify and share much in common with
TS;s who very well net the inch ruler definition
of IS, but does not like to call themselves IS.
They lived with a terrible long ragged
discolored scar for decades because of what the
doctors did, and later denighed doing when as a
child of under 2 there was surgery done down
there. This person was rased and defined male by
society. This person has no "y" chromosome.
Thepost surgical result of the babies surgery
even decades and decades later still would have
fit the inch mare definition of IS. But that
person does not call themselves IS.
So, what is that person???? TS, IS, whaT??? why
do we separate the world into black and
white???? when the beauty and truth of the world
is a rainbow? If i am missing something here
please, i would welcome the education.
When ever discussion like these start i always
end up up feeling very hurt and confussed. But,
to some TS and IS people the exchange of ideas
and experiences have actually saved lives. So i
do get involved a little, even though it hurts.
If a TS suspects they are IS, don't argue over
the web, go see your doctor, because if you
really are IS and have been treated as a
"normal" (what ever that means) Ts, then you may
be unaware of some serious health problems with
liver or other endrocrin system organs. To me
this is a serious subject of a medical nature
not political or psycological. Again, if i am in
error here please educate me. Careing and with
sincereity, Jannelle.
Helen Smith
<tr...@eclipse.qis.net> writes
>x-no-archive: yes
>(please honor the x-no-archive header)
>When do you become a transsexual? It is when you define yourself
>thusly and take the steps to change your body. This is the exact
>opposite of IS experience - someone else labels you and changes your
>body without your consent.
>
>Kiira Triea
>CISAE
>http://www.sonic.net/~cisae
>
Below is an excerpt transcript from - Transsexualism : The Current
Medical Viewpoint. (Dated: 18-01-96).
*
Aetiology
Dr. Harry Benjamin, who introduced the syndrome to the general medical
community in the early 1950s, favoured a biological explanation of the
syndrome, believing that the genetic and endocrine systems must provide
a "fertile soil" for environmental influences. The weight of current
scientific evidence suggests a biologically-based, multifactoral
aetiology for transsexualism. Most recently , for example , a study
identified a region in the hypothalamus of the brain which is markedly
smaller in women than in men. The brains of transsexual women examined
in this study show a similar brain development to that of other women.
*
Kiira, it has long been recognised by the medical profession that
transsexualism is linked with, but distinct from intersex conditions
that are apparent and/or noticeable naturally at birth. Being born TS,
with no signs of anatomical abnormality, dose not make it any easier to
deal with later in life, notably when gender dysphoria sets in.
--
Helen Smith
Nikki
<ci...@bolt.sonic.net> wrote in message
news:dtVr4.23$lU2...@typhoon.sonic.net...
> x-no-archive: yes
> (please honor the x-no-archive header)
>
>
> : <taking hat off> <--- uh, was that what you've meant? :-)
>
>
> Damn smartass. No I meant how about honoring the x-no-archive: header
> - you know the spam problem and all
O.K., so what does "honor the x-no-archive header" mean? Just is an
"x-no-archive header", and how does one go about honoring it?
Honest question from a confused newsgroup newbie named
-Nikki
>
> +------
> | Nikki wrote in response to Kiira:
> |
> | :> > To be honest, I tend to get a bit disdainful when someone
> | :> > throws a hissy fit, calls me an "exclusionistic, elitist boundry
> | :> > enforcer" who "needs to do her homework" because I have told them
> | :> > politely that they cannot have an XXXY karyotype, father 2 children
> | :> > and have a period (true story - I kid you not).
> |
> | I guess the cissie/trannie or endo/inter distinctions ultimately are
> | pretty meaningless to people affected by some *severe* psychiatric
> | condition that leads them to believe something like this.
> +------
>
> Well sure this is an extreme case, though by no means that
> unusual. Look at the last six months here on a.s.s. and the
> nonsensical narratives. Also remember the behavior of some very well
> known TS activists toward me.
>
> +------
> | :> As well you should. I'm afraid the behavior of a few thoughtless
> | trannies is
> | :> all it takes to ruin things for the rest of us, and this is yet
> | another
> | :> example.
> |
> | (see above) You can't be *reasonably* held responsible for what you
> | *can't* be responsible.
> +------
>
> No... there are thoughtless people of every stripe. Rather i am
> impressed and priveleged to know the TS people I've met who have shown
> integrity and courage.
Heike Boedeker
Kiira a écrit:
> When do you become a transsexual? It is when you define yourself
> thusly and take the steps to change your body. This is the exact
> opposite of IS experience - someone else labels you and changes your
> body without your consent.
<disapprovingly shaking head in bewilderment>
>> Yes, you are correct it is a very inter-centric POV.
Please speak for yourself.
>> But isn't it a choice... doesn't a person present to a therapist and
say "I am a
>> transsexual?"
Are you really using the fact that someone is seeking help against her?
This is just unbelievably dégoûtant...
I also can't believe the endosexed trannies on ASSRS seemingly are so
intimidated by you they let you get away with *that*!!!!
Karen A wrote in response to Kiira:
>> Doesn't transsexuality come into being by the expression of that
>> choice?
>
> Does one chose to be paranoid or manic depressive?
Technically speaking, there are psychoanalytic terminologies like
"choice of neurosis" and "object choice", which, however, are not meant
to imply that one was picking one, but simply that there were
alternatives *thinkable*.
Jannelle Johnson katabat:
> May i add something to this dicussion? I want to
> say that even with ruler's inch marks as the
> defining factor in who is IS and who is not,
It is *not* the defining criterion. Diagnosing an intersexed condition
can be a very complicated procedure. It also isn't done with karyotyping
as another popular belief obviously goes.
I think the success of "the ruler principle" in the scene lies more of
in its appeal as such a neat caricature. Maybe also because it allows
for the illusion of at least some rational considerations being made
over one's fate.
But it doesn't answer questions like why some "escape", some are treated
against the standard protocol, etc. etc. After all, measuring genital
appendages is not a standard practise performed on all newborns, like is
measuring body height and weighing. Before someone grabs at your crotch
to hold a ruler against it already quite a lot has happened... Merciless
rationality may be cruel, but cruelty born out of abysmal irrationality
is still harder to endure.
> it could be missleading to think a person who does
> not feine themselves as IS for what ever reasons
> did not fit the definition.
D'accord.
> I know of a person who did identify and share much
> in common with TS;s who very well net the inch ruler
> definition of IS, but does not like to call themselves
> IS.
Understandable I guess.
> So, what is that person???? TS, IS, whaT??? why
> do we separate the world into black and
> white???? when the beauty and truth of the world
> is a rainbow? If i am missing something here
> please, i would welcome the education.
Maybe like, some things also for IS hit a bit too close home -?
> When ever discussion like these start i always
> end up up feeling very hurt and confussed.
:-((((
> If a TS suspects they are IS, don't argue over
> the web, go see your doctor, because if you
> really are IS and have been treated as a
> "normal" (what ever that means) Ts, then you may
> be unaware of some serious health problems with
> liver or other endrocrin system organs.
Well, one also should see that the greatest risks are gondal tumors and
bone density problems, which, if you're ITS, are addressed by HRT and
SRS anyway.
> To me this is a serious subject of a medical nature
> not political or psycological.
I think it also is a psychological issue, because if you're IS and
treated as if you were not, this in *most* cases won't be because your
parents were exceptionally progressive... So you're likely to have been
severely neglected and left alone with many of your perfectly legitimate
concerns.
All the best,
Heike
te...@cx159572-a.elcjn1.sdca.home.com
> O.K., so what does "honor the x-no-archive header" mean? Just is an
> "x-no-archive header", and how does one go about honoring it?
> Honest question from a confused newsgroup newbie named
> -Nikki
Nikki,
A field stating "X-No-Archive: YES" invokes a convention some online
retrieval services such as Deja-News honor by not storing the message for
people to pull and read years from now. Those who use that header do
not want their posts archived, for whatever reason.
As to validity of reasons, the crunch of spam, advertising, and an
unforseen and credible threat to personal security seem valid ones.
The desire to post to a public forum and not have ones words on the
record so one can avoid having to stand by them, or the more infantile
have-and-eat desire to post public notices while trying to make others
jump to ones wishes in the handling of that public text do not.
One response to X-No-Archive is to add the header to your own posts when
you reply. If this doesn't bother you, then the problem is solved.
If you decide that you don't wish to consign your replies to library
obliviion, you can delete the header and quote their message in its
entirety, and when your post is archived, so will theirs be as it
is included in your message. A middle ground seems to be to quote
their words to the extent you wish, while munging some or all of their
electronic address.
If you are offended by the whole thing, and wish to make your feelings
known, using "X-No-Archive: NO" when you reply to "X-No-Archive: YES"
users is a stylistic choice, on a par with accurate spitting, or
the studied abdominal scratch during conversation.
Those who shun archiving on the grounds of personal safety, while desiring
to post regularly to many newsgroups, raise serious questions about the
consistency of their brain functioning. Adoption of a 'blind' account
on Yahoo or Deja for purposes of posting news and having a recognizable
personna with an email address costs nothing. If someone wants to be
known, but doesn't want to be known, it is generally indicative of a
condition which transcends the problems this group attempts to address.
Theoni
--
=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=
Use old words: feed the racial memory.
http://www.geocities.com/SiliconValley/Foothills/7462
=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=
Karen A.
> Kiira a écrit:
>
> > When do you become a transsexual? It is when you define yourself
> > thusly and take the steps to change your body. This is the exact
> > opposite of IS experience - someone else labels you and changes your
> > body without your consent.
>
> <disapprovingly shaking head in bewilderment>
>
> >> Yes, you are correct it is a very inter-centric POV.
>
> Please speak for yourself.
>
> >> But isn't it a choice... doesn't a person present to a therapist and
> say "I am a
> >> transsexual?"
>
> Are you really using the fact that someone is seeking help against her?
>
> This is just unbelievably dégoûtant...
My take on all of this is that she still has not processed all the anger
about what was done for her and can not concieve of similarities between
herself and someone who seeks out sex reassignment.
That's OK... as long as lines of communication stay open.
I personally belive that, at least for some TS's, the origin of the
drive to become whole by matching gender and sex as closely as possible
is biological in origin (which is why I mentioned I had these feelings
from my earliest memories). Technically TS may eventually be classified
as an IS condition of the brain. But that is really not important. IMO
that would not make being TS more legitimate.
In any care, again IMO, the most significant difference between TS and
IS is how the medical establishment has been treating IS infants. Other
than that, I would hazard a guess that there are a lot of similiarities.
> I also can't believe the endosexed trannies on ASSRS seemingly are so
> intimidated by you they let you get away with *that*!!!!
Ther was just a short but very intense flame war recently abd this is
the lull afterwards.
>
> Karen A wrote in response to Kiira:
> >> Doesn't transsexuality come into being by the expression of that
> >> choice?
> >
> > Does one chose to be paranoid or manic depressive?
>
> Technically speaking, there are psychoanalytic terminologies like
> "choice of neurosis" and "object choice", which, however, are not meant
> to imply that one was picking one, but simply that there were
> alternatives *thinkable*.
Perhaps not the best analogy but these paranoid schizophrenia and manic
depression have had biological links established, which is why I used
them.
> > I know of a person who did identify and share much
> > in common with TS;s who very well net the inch ruler
> > definition of IS, but does not like to call themselves
> > IS.
>
> Understandable I guess.
There is a poster on these newsgroups who after SRS, when she went to
get her birth certificate changed, found out that she had been
originally classified as female!!!
Heike Boedeker
A.) wrote:
> My take on all of this is that she still has not processed all the
anger
> about what was done for her and can not concieve of similarities
between
> herself and someone who seeks out sex reassignment.
Well, one could waste a few meditational rounds on whether it is exactly
these similarities she does conceive which freak her..., but neither
consideration put forth into the Akasha (here: Cyberian ether) will be
able to effectively change anything.
> I personally belive that, at least for some TS's, the origin of the
> drive to become whole by matching gender and sex as closely as
possible
> is biological in origin (which is why I mentioned I had these feelings
> from my earliest memories). Technically TS may eventually be
classified
> as an IS condition of the brain.
Guess you'll share that belief with most sexuologists (though it's far
from being a proven fact). I for one more of bet on cissexuals and
transsexuals displaying parallels...
(BTW, sorry for being so nitpicking about this, but one should avoid
labeling that a drive. The pathetic irony with e.g. the autogyno hype is
that it doesn't match the psychoanalytic definition of paraphilia,
because one can search for a corresponding fixated partial drive till
one is blue in the face...)
> In any care, again IMO, the most significant difference between TS and
> IS is how the medical establishment has been treating IS infants.
> Other than that, I would hazard a guess that there are a lot of
> similiarities.
D'accord. I think especially psychodynamics in IS is blatantly ignored
because (a) of the progressive folks most feel so bad for them they
don't dare to write anything that might be misunderstood as critical,
(b) most IS obviously are so impeded in their ability to relate it is
difficult to establish a therapeutic relationship.
> There is a poster on these newsgroups who after SRS, when she went to
> get her birth certificate changed, found out that she had been
> originally classified as female!!!
That makes at least 3 then :-((
fofol
day less. Which makes the whole matter still more ambiguous.
fofol
--
Goddess shave the queens
http://surf.to/fofol Member of the Intergendered Webring
Paulinev01
>
>> Ok I'm an outsider on this but what is the problem
>> with defining TS-ism as wanting the body and genitals of the opposite
>> sex?
I had the bodyand genitals of the opposete sex and that was the problem. I
wanted one that matched my sex.
we do not envy or want the others body, We just want ours to be ours.
WHEN ITS TIME ITS TIME
the hardest step of any journey is the first, the most satisfying is the last.
Now go take on the day
PAULINE/Paula
Paulinev01
at birth,
> It is when you define yourself
>> > thusly and take the steps to change your body.
that is usuall at about 3-4 and your parents correct you, often.
>> > opposite of IS experience - someone else labels you and changes your
or just doesnt know and the parent or the doctor decides whih they should be.
>> > body without your consent
I would hope that with all the study in the last 50 years that this would never
happen again. We should be allowed to grow up to puberty and let our body or
our mind deecid who and what we are. and this should be supported by the loving
parent.
Heike Boedeker
pauli...@cs.com (Paulinev01) wrote:
> >Kiira wrote:
> >
> >> Ok I'm an outsider on this but what is the problem
> >> with defining TS-ism as wanting the body and genitals of the
opposite
> >> sex?
> we do not envy or want the others body, We just want ours to be ours.
Makes me think of a wonderful tit for tat: IS'ism is if someone who has
power over you wants you to have a body and genitals different from
yours.
-h
Leigh H
Kiira Triea wrote
> ... snip ...
> A biologist named Teresa Binstock
> actually has found what may be the
> actual biological reason for
> transsexuality or a very strong piece
> of the puzzle. The TS people I've told
> of her work seem uninterested though
> perhaps because it seems not to have
> any "essentialist" appeal.
> ... snip ...
I'd be interested in a URL to a exposition of Teresa's work, and/or a brief
quoted abstract of her findings. Can Kiira or anyone else on the group
provide either of these?
Always happy to learn.
Smiles ...
___________________________________________
~ Leigh H
~ le...@radioshop.co.nNOSPAMz
~ remove NOSPAM to reply
___________________________________________
Leigh H
Kiira wrote
> ... snip ...
> Also keep in mind that most IS
> children are kept in the dark as much
> as possible about their histories and
> the details of their biology. No doctor
> ever sat down with me and said "Kiira,
> you're a Hermaphrodite". Instead I was
> simply told that I was "a girl like
> other girls" and I just needed this
> little surgery to make everything
> groovy so I could go out and get
> married and have three children. What
> IS children are told and how they are
> treated are two different things
> however and that is the cause of so
> much confusion.
Yes - you're =so= right! And even now it makes me =so= angry.
I was born with undescended testes, gross hypospadia, no skin on the shaft
of my penis (the glans was between my legs). Early childhood photographs
(which have mysteriously "disappeared" from the family photo albums) of me
without clothes on show what you'd swear was a little girl.
Surgery didn't start until I was four and, because one of the series of
graft operations failed twice, didn't finish until I was five and a half.
And I =never= ... =never= to this day ... have had any explanation of what
they were planning to do or why they were changing me in this way. Ever.
Recently I sat my father down (mum died four years ago but had been more
forthcoming about the facts) and tried to get some information from him.
Although he appeared to respond in a reasonable way, it was clear he didn't
want to talk about it. The closest thing to an explanation was akin to
Kiira's comment above that "I was a boy like any other little boy, but
there were just a couple of wee things that needed doing to make sure I
looked completely normal".
So the shaft of my penis is graft skin from my thighs; my entire perineal
area is a mass of scars and grafts. I don't know what this will mean in
terms of successful GRS (it won't be penile inversion unless I seriously
imagine a 1.5" vagina is adequate).
I hated the results of the operation at the time and was totally confused
the first time I saw a female child without any clothes on: "Ummm ...
that's what I used to look like ... that's what I'm =supposed= to look like
... that's what I =want= to look like ... why don't I look like that any
more?".
I don't identify as IS (should I? could I?), but I've always been damn sure
I want to undo what they did to me back then. It sucks.
Now, I'll just breathe deeply for a few minutes and try to bring my pulse
rate back down.
KarenA1013
>It also doesn't mean that one just gets to hop on the next
>most convenient explanation.
It fits my experience and there is reseach indicating it is likely.
>this includes by people like you who openly criticise people
>who refuse to have vaginoplasty as not being "women",
How can a woman feel confortable with a penis?
That is what I feel on the matter
>I'd like
>to understand how you can justify running off and claiming
>"intersexed" as an identity.
I don't identify as intersexed even tough eventually TSism may eventually be
classified as a subcatagory as IS.
>> Actually I was - but not by an external agency. I *required* it to
>feel more
>> comfortable with my body.
>
>Actually you =weren't=.
Actually i wish you would stop telling me what I feel.
>THAT is the difference. You
>paid your money, you signed the forms, you granted consent.
And I said as much. The requiremt came from with not from without,
>> In the case of IS your sex is decided by someone who has no knowledge
>of your
>> gender. That IMO, is the most significant difference IMO between being
>TS and
>> IS.
>
>I suspect that the complete lack of choice in the matter is what
>defines the greatest difference.
That is what I said, is it not? And yet there are still IMO a lot of
similiarities,
>Again, you chose your surgeon, you caused funds to be sent to your
>surgeon, you signed consent forms. You exercised free-will, something
>that is completely lacking in the experience of intersexed children.
I did not dispute that and pointed it out as the princiole difference.
Free will is interesting topic BTW in this case.
>> That sounds almost like autogynophilia. For some that may be part of
>the reason
>> but for most TS's IMO it is not. Thise TS's I've met wh seem to be
>*primarily*
>> driven by autogynophilia seem to be something different altogether.
>
>This only clouds an otherwise very clear difference -
No her statement show a misunderstanding of the basic nature of TS'ism.
>> That is something many who are not TS have a *very* hard time
>understanding.
>
>Likewise, until someone has carved on your crotch against your
>wishes you'll have zero understanding of what intersexed people
>experience.
You think there is no analogy at all to knowing your genitals are wrong?
-Karen A.
Jannelle Johnson
www.fc.net/~zarathus/science/sex_diff2.txt
Jannelle
Jannelle Johnson
http://numbat.murdoch.edu.au/spermatology/sexdiff.html
Jannelle
Jannelle Johnson
for IS vs TS.
IS= chromosomally not XX or XY, and or
anatomical physically not of the healthy
plurality of male or female internal and or
external physiological anatomy, and or
significant medical health risk arising from
sexual hormones that would in the plurality of
healthy males and females not cause serious
health risk.
TS= having a sex identity that contrasts to
legal assigned sex identity.
Please note that neither definition is exclusive
of the other, no is either definition inclusive
of the other.
Thanks, Jannelle.
Suzan Cooke
header. If you wish to no archive feel free to cite but not respond
directly.
Aaahh but you are very wrong.
Jannelle Johnson wrote:
> Just for consideration here ar my definitions
> for IS vs TS.
>
> IS= chromosomally not XX or XY, and or
> anatomical physically not of the healthy
> plurality of male or female internal and or
> external physiological anatomy, and or
> significant medical health risk arising from
> sexual hormones that would in the plurality of
> healthy males and females not cause serious
> health risk.
Androgen insensitive women have normal xy male chromosome pattern
but because of something else they do not process testosterone at all.
They are women with nondecended testes instead of ovaries. They need
estrogens to develop berasts and femaly body fat distribution. Because
they do not process testerone at all they never develop pubic or
underarm hair.
OTH many with chomosomal abnormalities other than X0 are never
detected.
What pisses Kiira and others off is that many of the infant SRS
procedures off is that they are done because the clit is too big or the
penis too small.
What transsexuals have which many IS people lack, what Kiira calls
choice is actually agency. Agency is control over our own destinies
rather than the oppressive hand of the powers that be deciding the
configuration of our genitals.
It may well be that TSism is a product of fetal processing of sex
hormones and as such could be seen as an IS condition. Transfolk need
to be wary of this rather than jumping in and claiming IS. The price
could be our agency.
Kitchen sink IS sucks. You are noe nor was I IS because of
nondecended testes or a small dick. Unless they cut you as an infant
and reassigned you then. You are not an IS female if you fathered
children.
Here I concur
> TS= having a sex identity that contrasts to
> legal assigned sex identity.
I would more argue for a core gender identity. I'm not such a
dismisser of a degree of essentialism Joan/John/Brenda/David really
messes with the it is all enviromental theory.
> Please note that neither definition is exclusive
> of the other, no is either definition inclusive
> of the other.
>
> Thanks, Jannelle.
Please respect my wish to archive.
TranZGrrlla
Suzy
Heike Boedeker
karen...@aol.com (KarenA1013) wrote:
> Julie wrote:
...
> >Likewise, until someone has carved on your crotch against your
> >wishes you'll have zero understanding of what intersexed people
> >experience.
Perhaps one should differentiate being subject to unconsented
medicalization and being IS, though.
> You think there is no analogy at all to knowing your genitals are
wrong?
Let's just face it, it indeed might play more of a role than widely
acknowledged. If less virilized IS call more virilized IS, esp. major
CAH types, apes who need to lick salt stones, and/or recommend to them
they'd be better off living as guys, this not just makes me loose my
belief in peer support. Perhaps one also should look at how many IS
assigned male aren't exactly cisvestites...
@+
Heike
Heike Boedeker
sco...@pacbell.net wrote:
> Androgen insensitive women have normal xy male chromosome pattern
> but because of something else they do not process testosterone at all.
That something else is a defect in androgen-dependent target tissues.
> They are women with nondecended testes instead of ovaries.
This is not quite correct as even in many cases of "CAIS" I know one
or mostly even both testes were descended into the labia... also
otherwise the C rarely rightfully stands for what "complete" would
suggest to the innocent beginner...
> They need estrogens to develop berasts and femaly body fat
distribution.
Nope. If not gonadectomized the estrogens levels produced by testes and
adrenal glands are completely sufficient as testo levels, even if
astronomically high (!!), can't compete.
> Because they do not process testerone at all they never develop pubic
> or underarm hair.
See above. It is a matter of which tissues are affected. It's not evenly
distributed throughout one's body.
> What transsexuals have which many IS people lack, what Kiira calls
> choice is actually agency. Agency is control over our own destinies
> rather than the oppressive hand of the powers that be deciding the
> configuration of our genitals.
I doubt that a 3 YO CGD kid would believe you. Zie was just as helpless
as any IS kid, or *any* other kid for that matter. Why TS should grow
that out to match Anglo Middleclass Values (AMCV for lovers of acronyms)
why IS shouldn't remains a mystery to me. But then, I'm not a member of
this cult.
> Kitchen sink IS sucks. You are noe nor was I IS because of
> nondecended testes or a small dick. Unless they cut you as an infant
> and reassigned you then.
This is unbelievable... Do you really think a micropenis makes you IS
only if amputated? or (an) undescended testi/es only if you were subject
to orchidopexy? What about your vulnerability to rejection on parts of
family and peers? What about concerns about sexual and reproductive
functioning? All generously swept aside so you can maintain clear cut
and simply to handle (also "politically") demarcation lines?
Bewildered,
carolin...@rocketmail.com
boed...@netcologne.de wrote:
> In article <38B1F02B...@postoffice.pacbell.net>,
> sco...@pacbell.net wrote:
>
> > Androgen insensitive women have normal xy male chromosome
pattern
> > but because of something else they do not process testosterone at
all.
>
> That something else is a defect in androgen-dependent target tissues.
>
> > They are women with nondecended testes instead of ovaries.
>
> This is not quite correct as even in many cases of "CAIS" I know one
> or mostly even both testes were descended into the labia... also
> otherwise the C rarely rightfully stands for what "complete" would
> suggest to the innocent beginner...
>
Henh? Uebersetzen, bitte!
>
> > What transsexuals have which many IS people lack, what Kiira
calls
> > choice is actually agency. Agency is control over our own destinies
> > rather than the oppressive hand of the powers that be deciding the
> > configuration of our genitals.
>
> I doubt that a 3 YO CGD kid would believe you. Zie was just as
helpless
> as any IS kid, or *any* other kid for that matter. Why TS should grow
> that out to match Anglo Middleclass Values (AMCV for lovers of
acronyms)
> why IS shouldn't remains a mystery to me. But then, I'm not a member
of
> this cult.
>
Both you and Kiira made youthful choices similar to those of a
garden-variety primary TS.
You can reject that "cult" because you prefer the 'IS' cult,
but--believe me!--to an outsider it's all the same bag of nuts.
> > Kitchen sink IS sucks. You are noe nor was I IS because of
> > nondecended testes or a small dick. Unless they cut you as an
infant
> > and reassigned you then.
>
> This is unbelievable... Do you really think a micropenis makes you IS
> only if amputated? or (an) undescended testi/es only if you were
subject
> to orchidopexy? What about your vulnerability to rejection on parts of
> family and peers? What about concerns about sexual and reproductive
> functioning? All generously swept aside so you can maintain clear cut
> and simply to handle (also "politically") demarcation lines?
>
I believe Suzan was responding to the ISer who claims that the only
definition of intersex is having body parts removed without your
consent.
Is it my imagination or is it getting terrifically murky in here?? ;-)
KarenA1013
>> It fits my experience and there is reseach indicating it is likely.
>
By that I meant hat there is a biollgical basis for TSism.
> I'd suggest you start spending
>a hell of a lot more time reading about intersexed kids and adults
>before insisting there is the remotest similarity.
Julie, IMO. you are reading with an attitude and not obejectively IMO.
>> How can a woman feel confortable with a penis?
>> That is what I feel on the matter
>
>Then you've really demonstrated you know nothing about intersexed
>females. Most would prefer the sexual sensation of something that
>looks a bit too much like a penis for your comfort level than having
>it completely cut off.
I was refering to TS's for which that is not true. having SRS these days does
not usually result in no feeling.
Also why would that *have* to be the case for intersexed infants that are
operated on (IO am not advocating that they are operated on)?
If a MTF TS can have sensation after SRS why don't they? Are thy wrong surgical
techiques used? Are the structures to small for the techniques at that point?
Or do the sugeons simply not take it into consideration?
BTW, the adult TS's who went to certain doctors 30 years ago got *exctly* that
type of surgery...
>Don't believe me? Ask Kiira.
Again you are misreading what i wrote.
>> >> Actually I was - but not by an external agency. I *required* it to
>> >feel more
>> >> comfortable with my body.
>> >
>> >Actually you =weren't=.
>>
>> Actually i wish you would stop telling me what I feel.
>
>Let me rephrase that -- you had who/what/when/where choice. As
>such, you =had= choice.
Yes.
>> And I said as much. The requiremt came from wiinth not from without,
>
>Yes, and that is =choice=.
as much as eating is a choice.
> Are you actually =listening= to Kiira
>enough to understand the difference between the choice =you= had and
>the lack of choice that IS kids have?
I understand it completely. reguarless of the reason why they got that way,
they have genitals that are different, non functional and felt wrong.
As a TS my geintal were fairly normal (I was small but not that small) but they
still felt wrong and I could not use them for sex/intimacy. I've posted about
that before.
The proof are people who ID as TS because they did not know what was done to
them and chose to do so even after finding out such as Cindy. Remeber she was
adopted and only found out she had been assigned female on her birth
certificate after SRS.
It seems to me there there are similiarities.
>> That is what I said, is it not? And yet there are still IMO a lot of
>> similiarities,
>
>No, you keep bleating on that you had no choice -- you were "required"
>to do what you did. "Required" is life or death, coercion, no-choice.
That is what it felt like for me.
>That is the "required" that intersexed kids speak about.
I pointed out that difference myself. What is your problem besides generally
disliking me?
>> No her statement show a misunderstanding of the basic nature of
>> TS'ism.
>
>Yeah, I know. Kiira is somehow stupid.
>
>NOT!
but she is not TS and truly does not understand what it means. If she did she
would not have defined TS'sm as she did.
>I've known Kiira for three or four years. I'll put my money on
>her being either correct or close enough for horseshoes every time.
Not about TS's. She also, coincidently tends to fit your own political views.
>> You think there is no analogy at all to knowing your genitals are
>> wrong?
>
>There is no analogy. Please, feel free to try and construct a
>valid one. There are several very critical differences in life
>experiences.
I did above IMO.
-Karen A.
Jannelle Johnson
seems to have taken on an entirely different
meaning than i had thought it to have had.
Once this discussion seemed to be of the
differences and similarities between TS and IS,
and how we could understand and help each other.
Now, It seems to be about don't call me one of
those bad TS's. TS's had choice.
And about, don't call me IS, i am not one of
those weird IS's. I'm TS and did something about
my situation.
When one finds themselves in a situation not of
their making whether it be IS or TS (or BOTH);
then after that non choice situation or
experience chooses the method, place, and time
of resolving the problems resulting from the
unchosen situation or experience; that choice to
me is after the fact and all have that in
common.
Just when i feel like cheering for someone of
either side, that someone becomes divisive. You
had choice! Did not! Did too! Did not! Did too!
I had surgery at birth or just after and you
didn't. So it size, no i meant it is political,
opps! no i meant experience. Positions such as
stating that XX male, XY female, XO, xxx, xxy,
xxxy, xyy, etc., and those constantly near death
from ones own sex hormone intolerance or
internal unseen organs and repeated surgeries to
keep one alive as a result don't count because
there was no operation at birth; are highly
suspect and indefensible. It is equally
indefensible to claim to be IS when one is not
due to some internal emotional need.
My purpose in posting the links was to help both
sides understand they are not following the
medical or education definitions on either side.
My purpose in telling about my "friend" (okay it
is me) was to shy the similarities and
differences in IS vs TS. I am TS in that i
resolved my situation of being assigned to a
gender other than my internal gender by the same
route and methods as TS people, and i therefore
claim to have been TS. I do not claim to be IS,
but there was an operation on me at birth where
the solution to my gender was made surgically,
but not by me. I lived with the shame, hiding,
and embarrassment of the scars and odd looking
twisted discolored alien thing on me. I lived
with the teasing and even kind comments and
people trying to sound like they were in the
know hurt me. Breast development in 9th grade
boys PE was a nightmare! Stares at my crotch in
the shower made me angry and ashamed of my
appearance. I had to go several times to
emergency rooms to save my life do to endrocrin
and hormonal threats to my life from my own
body's internal war and inability's to deal with
the problems this condition caused. One one
occasion the doctor nearly killed me when he
misdiagnosed the problem. I was lucky, to have
survived, i was lucky that the work done shortly
after my birth was of such quality that there
was no difficulty with my adult surgery to make
me female to correct the earlier surgery that
made me a boy. I was labeled and altered at
birth to be as normal looking and functioning
male as possible. But i have no "Y" chromosome.
Again, i tell all this to show the differences
and similarities and how we can help each other,
not to divide and create intolerance and
prejudice. When one has to keep redefining their
terms and changing the rules of the game, one is
not dealing fairly. One must ask themselves why
they are doing these things.
There is nothing wrong or bad in being IS and
nothing wrong or bad in being TS. One is not
better or worse than the other. There is no
crown or medal for being either, and certainly
no award for winning the argument.
Please, help each other, don't fight. Jannelle.
Heike Boedeker
>> > They are women with nondecended testes instead of ovaries.
>>
>> This is not quite correct as even in many cases of "CAIS" I know one
>> or mostly even both testes were descended into the labia... also
>> otherwise the C rarely rightfully stands for what "complete" would
>> suggest to the innocent beginner...
>
>Henh? Uebersetzen, bitte!
Äh... weiß zwar nicht, was das bringen soll, aber bitte: "Dies ist nicht
ganz richtig, da in vielen mir bekannten Fällen von CAIS ein oder meist
sogar beide Testes in die Labien descendiert waren... Auch sonst steht
das C selten für das, was 'komplett' dem blutigen Anfänger
suggerierte..."
In other words, as the defect in androgen-dependent target tissues is
not evenly distributed throughout one's body there may be considerable
variation, which blurs the distinction of complete vs. partial variants
of the syndrome. This includes the possibility that testes very well
might be descended in infants who otherwise don't display any remarkable
virilization of their outer genitalia.
Better -?
>Both you and Kiira made youthful choices similar to those of a
>garden-variety primary TS.
Well, *I* did. I'd also say I am TS, not just that I was somehow
similar: after all, I've got a psyche, too... I may at times really be
using my kidneys, but my feelings and thoughts certainly are not reigned
by my immune system. I also was so fed up with this "IS" cr@p I refused
to deal with "it" until 7 years ago it became a sheer necessary because
I had to pay dearly for my denial.
Kiira's life choices you can try to discuss with her herself, but don't
suck me into this.
>You can reject that "cult" because you prefer the 'IS' cult,
>but--believe me!--to an outsider it's all the same bag of nuts.
I was speaking of Angloamerican Middleclass Values!! Which I really
don't share. Otherwise you gave me a hearty laugh. I guess you are not
quite clear about the fact that you are speaking to "the movement's"
notoriously dissident grubby kid :-) Ask Kiira how she had to suffer
from me :-)
>I believe Suzan was responding to the ISer who claims that the only
>definition of intersex is having body parts removed without your
>consent.
>
>Is it my imagination or is it getting terrifically murky in here?? ;-)
FYI, this was a misunderstanding we already have clarified in private
correspondence.
All the best,
Heike
KarenA1013
things said sparked feelng and thoughts I needed to get out.
I guess i have a lot of internal garbage yet to deal with and get processed.
If you don't want to hear anymore about me and my experiences than please just
skip this instead of flamming me.
che...@nowhere.com wrote:
>My father would have beat the crap out of me, as he did most
>everyday anyway, but he especially disliked a sissy bookworm.
Interesting. Sissy bookworm would certainly have described my as a child. My
father was not living with us... My mother took a very different tact. She
teased me unmercifully about my feminine behaviors. she made fun of how I held
drinking glasses, my gental nature and the fact that i did not want to get the
rough and touble with the the boys or my younger brother and numerous other
things.
I was a big kid and she made fun of what she called my delicate manorisms.
Because of that and my lack of desire for rough housing, she said I was a
delicate as a French poodle (think toy poodle with fancy cut and ribbons etc).
Often it was not what she said but the tone of voice she said it in. She tried
to make me ashamed of behaving the way I did - to humiliate me.
She used to wounder out loud why I did not beat the heck out of the kids at
school that were teasing me (I was bigger than they were) ...
Now again this was single parent family. What she managed to do was make me
feel bad about myself and distroy any bit of self confidence I had. Because I
was not aggressive (quite the opposite) she assumed I had no drive or physical
ability.
When i talked to my therapist about all of that, she suggested that my mother
was trying to toughen me up to face the world and was doing it. That in my
mother's eyes it for my own good...
I know she loved me a lot despite all her problems and how she rode me.
The things she appreciated were that i did not get into trouble like my brother
did, that I always told the truth anhd she could count on me to do what i said
i would.
She never payed much attention to my grades as they were good and did not know
I was making the honor roll in school and scoring in the 90+ percentile on
standardized tests. Once she did she became proud of my intellectual ability,
though it took her totally by surprise.
> He didn't know that my mom had taken me to the psychologist, which he
>would have strongly disapproved of.
I wounder what would have happened if my mother had taken me to one (she knew
to some extant about my "secret" crossdressing as well as the outward
behavior) but given out family situation and social status that was unlikely...
I found out later both my mother and brother thought I was gay until I married
at age 29.
> He used to take every occasion to
>tell me that I acted like a girl.
My mother never directly came out and said that but as I said, she strongly
discouraged the behavior.
> I'm glad
>she lived to see my transition. While she didn't approve at first, we
>did come to a special relationship before she died. It was a closure,
>when she did recognize me as her daughter, a return to the place where
>we started.
Both my parents died before i transitioned. In a very real way I feel my mother
never got to know who I am. I think, in her sober moments, she would have
accepted. At least i like to think so...
I guess i still have a lot of unprocessed feelings from that time.
>Oh yes. In the old role, everything had to go through filters, check
>and double-check, that nothing be revealed.
Actually I dealt with it by learning to behave gender neutrally in a lot of
ways. That was safe and it was a lot easier than trying to act like the boys.
That's how i lived my whole life. With my size, neutral was good enough to keep
me out of trouble. That is what became natural for me after doing so for all
those years. Between that and not getting close to many people, while some knew
I was different, they were never sure why.
A friend who has know me for about 4.5 years said that I never did guy
convincingly pre-transition even though I did not come across as the least bit
effeminate. That I still don't understand.
She made a joke in the support group about me having to be the butch to my
spouse's fem. The other person there who has known me for years, burst into
laughter at the thought of be me being butch. I did not see what was so
funny...
The thing is I really do not seem myself as all that feminine. I suspect what
they are reacting to is not manorisms or dress - which are not that feminine -
but to something else that becomes apparent over time when people get to know
me. But i don't really see it.
Pre-transition a friend at work picked up that i was different but she could
not quite put a finger on why (she is a Russian immigrant and had very little
exposure to TSism)
I don't know. Maybe I'm still trying to please my mother in the form of my
spouse or trying to make up for not saving my mother my brother or ... well
things get murky pretty fast.
>Transsexuals are often preternaturally intelligent, and that's part of
>the gift too. The price is the prize.
I have been absolutely amazed at that.
I was always used to being one of the brighter kids in school even though my
grades did not always show it.
I work in a company run by top people in their fields with mutiple degrees from
MIT and Harvard. When i started i was afraid to open my mouth around them for
fear of sounding stupid. Yet I now find they have significant appreciation and
respect for my intellectual ability (that surprised the heck out of me!). As a
matter of fact, that is the biggest reason I still have my job!
Still, when I get among a group of TS's I seem to be *at best* average.
>One in particular I
>was hard pressed to answer. She asked me why I wasn't out and proud,
>like gays and lesbians. I tried to explain that once people know,
>there is a difference.
That is something i have had to try and explain a lot in the context of why I
don't want to be out.
Most people say as long as you are treated well, why should you care?
To put it into specific words has been very difficult, which is why I've talked
about it as the texture and color of life. The tapistry that makes up the
experience is woven from may diferent threads of subtly different colors, but
the overall effect is huge - or at least it feels that way to me.
>I found that I had no way to explain what that
>difference was, so I tried another tack. I said that you wouldn't
>like being perceived as a guy, would you?
Or as neither or something in-between.
>The insular Roman Catholic schools I grew up
>in.
That we share.
> The intolerance by my middle-class peers of anybody appearing
>queer.
Tolerance for such was even less in the working poor Polish immigrant community
in Jersey in the mid 60's.
>I saw what happened to boys who got the label of being queer,
>whose lives became a living hell. I just learned to hide it better.
I got labeled as a sissy and picked on alot in grammer school but no one ever
actually thought me queer outside of my family that I know of.
>I dreaded puberty a year or two before it happened. I knew it was
>coming, but the only solutions I could think of were magical ones.
I had a few of those too...
But I also tried to stop the things i thought I could. I tried pucking the
chest hairs as they appeared... until it was obvious it was a losing cause. My
mother used to say she was suprissed how hairy I was because my father was not.
>I "became
>a transsexual" only when I realized there was a way out through
>surgery. It was a means, not an end.
I agree with that and that how I saw it it, but I've not been able to complete
the journey. It's as if something is lacking in me.
-Karen A
Heike Boedeker
Jannelle Johnson <jane...@uswest.net> wrote:
> Have i missed something? Suddenly this topic
> seems to have taken on an entirely different
> meaning than i had thought it to have had.
Well, that happens. Don't feel bad about it. That's what keeps life
interesting :-)
> And about, don't call me IS, i am not one of
> those weird IS's.
hahahaha... I'm IS, but I'm not one of those weird IS... LOL :-)
[hint for those who didn't get the pun: English can't formally
distinguish generic and specific references]
Otherwise, try to see it as more of an individual thing rather than
being about mysteriously achieved memberships in obscure groups.
> I'm TS and did something about my situation.
See, that's Angloamerican White Middleclass Values, believing one could
take control of one's life, take on responsibility, as soon as one
mentions a possible locus of control outside oneself one is blamed for
daring to blame others, blah...
Should you have understood what *I* had said in terms of that I only can
say you're pretty darn off the mark.
Take care,
Jannelle Johnson
terms of that I only can
say you're pretty darn off the mark.>
Heike, Until the above statement, i thought i
understood your post and you had understood my
post. Now, i am not sure. You seem to be saying,
"If you had understood what I had said in terms
of what only I can say, then you would be darn
off the mark."
I do not understand. This seems to have a simple
sentence structure that results in, "You are off
the mark." all the rest of the sentence seems to
say, "If you understand then... you are off the
mark." a second sentence could then be
constructed from what remains, "What i said was
something only i can say." Putting the two
together then results in, "What i said, only i
can say. If you understood me, then you are off
the mark." Is this was the ideas you were trying
to communicate?
Basically, i am trying to say is that there is
big huge differences between being intersexed,
and being transsexual. I guess i failed in
making that clear with my own story and
expressing how i separate them in my own
experience. I did not say so in so many words,
but i do feel very strongly that doctors and
parents should not choose for the baby through
surgery or any other method. The child should be
allowed to grow up until they can chose to
choose, or choose not to choose for their own
body and by their own desires. This is what i
wish was done for me and would hope could be
done for all others, excepting only what is
necessary for health reasons.
I love this quote from wise person of a decade
long ago. "Forced conformity breeds hypocrisy."
One might also say, forced conformity is
hypocrisy.
peace, jannelle.
Deni
Hi Julie,
I have posted here a very few times and I also know Kiira in
real life. I went to a lecture she gave at a college in 1997 because I
knew from her published writing that she was also at Hopkins (I had
surgery at Hopkins when I was very young in 1977) and I had never met
anyone else who was there.
First though I really want to say how honest and real your previous
post, talking about surgical results and your girlfriend, seemed to
me. I think that you hit the nail on the head. My surgical results are
quite bad, but it is something that I CHOSE to do. Kiira doesn't tell
the half of it, Hopkins is a terrible place, but I could have walked
away and did not. I chose not to. I have the peace that comes from
needing something, going after and paying a certain price and living
with my choices. Kiira and the few other IS people I have met through
her do not have that in their lives at all. From what I have learned,
most of them were not asked anything AT ALL about what they wanted or
needed.
Julie wrote:
:Karen A. wrote:
:> Also why would that *have* to be the case for intersexed infants
:> that are operated on (IO am not advocating that they are
:> operated on)?
I find it appalling that you would even ask such an insensitive
question.
Look at it this way. I'm a surgeon and I don't like the way you look,
or your genitals. I've decided that you should be a man and since it
is 2019 and laws have been passed giving all surgeons UTTER and
COMPLETE control over sexual anatomy, it's off to the OR for surgical
re-reassignment as a male. You will be very pleased because phalloplasty
is VERY effective now!
:> BTW, the adult TS's who went to certain doctors 30 years ago got
:> *exctly* that type of surgery...
: No, they didn't. I know a number of 30+ year post-ops and they
: had SRS that was much better than what those girls get.
I had the same surgeon as Kiira (and also the boy David Reimer who has
been in the news lately). He sucks. But *I* walked into Hopkins and *I*
TOLD THEM I wanted surgery. It doesn't matter whether my surgery is
better or worse than Kiira's (it's better). What matters is that it is
WHAT I WANTED. I determined at a really young age that I was a primary
transsexual, wanted surgery desperately and DECIDED to do whatever was
needed to accomplish my goals. I lied (about my age), broke the law
(was a runaway, obtained hormones without a doctor) and got what I
needed. Not only do I not regret it, I'm proud of it.
Karen A where did you get the idea that being a women means being a
victim? Do you see girls and women in literature or on television
acting like victims? Which women do you admire? Are they victims?
Deni
--
For info about this service, see http://www.twwells.com/anon/ or e-mail:
he...@anon.twwells.com -- for an automatically returned help message
ad...@anon.twwells.com -- for the service's administrator
ano...@anon.twwells.com -- anonymous mail to the administrator
KarenA1013
>> Julie, IMO. you are reading with an attitude and not obejectively IMO.
>
>Free clue: everyone has an attitude and no one reads "objectively".
There is the matter of degree...
>> Also why would that *have* to be the case for intersexed infants that
>are
>> operated on (IO am not advocating that they are operated on)?
>
>I'm not the least bit sure I even understand what you've just
>written.
It is atechnicak question. I exlicitly stating I am not advocating surgury for
IS infants but I was curious why most would have no feeling in their genitals
when TS's do.
> See, you've started from the entire wrong position.
>Instead of "Why is it the case that intersexed children are
>operated on?"
I did not ask that question because I knew the answer.
> you want to know why intersexed children who are
>operated on aren't happy about it.
No. I asked why don't theu have feeling in their genitals. If the surgeon chose
wrong they would be. ata *minimum*, unhappy just as TS's sre unhappy being born
with the wrong equipment. Then of course there is the resentment on top of
that.
I think such a child should get to chose for themselves omce they became old
enough, what if *any* surgery they wish to have.
>It's their fucking body. Who the hell is some surgeon to decide
>what does and doesn't belong on a child's body?
Not the point of the technical question i asked.
>You are of the same mentality that causes IS infants to be cut -- if
>it's a girl, it shouldn't have a penis. It isn't a matter of "don't
>cut" for you -- to you it's about finding a better procedure.
No not at all. I was just curious as to why there was no sensation as at that
age the tissue would be very adaptable it would seem. You saw a subtest in
that question that did not exist - as usual when it comes to me.
>> BTW, the adult TS's who went to certain doctors 30 years ago got
>> *exctly* that type of surgery...
>
>No, they didn't. I know a number of 30+ year post-ops and they
>had SRS that was much better than what those girls get.
Perhaps you did not talk to some that i have. It truley varied by doctoer. I
talked to one who described her result has a hole with no sensnsation- and
there was no attempt to provide any.
>Then you should rephrase things so that I understand them. Having
>read several of your paragraphs above I'm fairly confident I
>understood exactly what you intended to write.
You most certainly have not.
>I've never heard of anyone actually =die= from not having SRS.
That is disengenuious. You have heard of people who suicided because they could
not.
>NO, NO, NO. WRONG ANSWER.
>
>They had genitals which felt wrong to SOCIETY. SOCIETY then decided
>that they had to be CUT OFF.
Which resulted in gentials that were wrong to them. The difference is how they
got that way.
>So what. You aren't intersexed.
I never claimed I was.
>No one took you as a small child
>and cut you against your wishes.
No, I was just born with the job already done "naturally".
>Cindy can speak for herself.
She has.
>> It seems to me there there are similiarities.
>
>But they stop at a very critical point -- choice.
I had no choice in being born TS. I had no choice being born into a severly
disfunctional family. The point is dealing what can be done about it now.
>> >No, you keep bleating on that you had no choice -- you were
>"required"
>> >to do what you did. "Required" is life or death, coercion,
>no-choice.
>>
>> That is what it felt like for me.
>
>"Feeling" and "being" aren't the same thing.
LOL! OK I won't equivocate. To me there was no choice other choice if i was to
survive.
>You know when you have no choice -- it's when someone else
>picks the who/when/where/how of what happens.
You seem to live in a very simplistic world, Julie.
>Part of growing as an individual is understanding the difference
>between things where you have =zero= choice, and where you have
>any choice at all. It can be very uncomfortable to accept that
>you had choice in some matter.
IMO when the alternaltive is not survival, although *technically* there is
choice, in a very practical sense, there is no choice.
>You are inherently dishonest. To equate your choice with an
>underaged child's lack of choice is scummy.
You have the right to your opinions. There is much you have done that i thought
was scummy as well over the last several years.
>I'm a post-op and I've found =nothing= wrong with anything that
>she's said. Are you now going to argue that I'm not transsexual?
Hmmm...... tempting... ;-)
Did you see my, and other posts, as to why it was wrong? Do you disagree with
them? If so how?
>I'll put my money on her being within Ivory soap purity of having
>the "correct" perspective for TS women.
Then you disagree with me and many others.
>I know that being dismissive is a full-contact sport for transsexual
>women,
I don't dismiss her writings on being IS. But her definition of TS does not
ring true to me and others.
> Perhaps you could express
>your complaint in terms of concrete behavior instead of "yer wrong
>'cuz y'all agree."
I was disagreing with her definition of TS only. In what contesxt do you mean
that?
>Since intersexuality differs on two major points that I've outlined,
>your analogy isn't valid.
It depends on if the anger over being that way as the result of surgery is the
biggest factor in the individual's psyche or if the discomfort with the
assigned sex is predominate or a mixture of the two.
Again some IS *do* identify as TS.
-karen a.
Heike Boedeker
<jane...@uswest.net> wrote:
...
> Heike, Until the above statement, i thought i
> understood your post and you had understood my
> post. Now, i am not sure.
What is meant in the rarest cases will be what is understood :-)
I meant that people can wait until they're blue in the face until I'll
utter stuff like I was believing one could control one's fate, take on
responsibility for all and nothing, and all this ideological sh*t... I
also am pissed off that as soon as one mentions a possible locus of
control outside oneself one is blamed for daring to blame others,
blah... This is but a quintessential scolding typical of
socialization-mode parenting, a scolding with no meaningful conceptual
referent. It is instead an expression of exasperation and impatience
with human neediness and fallibility, the kind of impatience we hear
from parents who scold children for being imperfect and difficult to
understand or help.
You here also easily can see that the common (bad) pun response-ability
is, at best, wishful thinking.
After all, the most decisive — and still the most neglected — critique
of this continued conflation of accountability with responsibility was
presented by none other than the unlikely Moritz Schlick (in "When in
man responsible?" from Chapter 7 of his book Problems of Ethics), a
pioneer in logical empiricism. Schlitz shows, quite simply, that it is
entirely self-contradictory to ever hold anyone accountable who is free
to do as s/he pleases and thus, never subjected to the causal
influences. If we are to hold persons accountable, it is an effective
strategy only so long as they are not free to do as they please but are
instead subject to causal influence. Thus, contray to Morse's arguments,
a justification of legal accountability should be based on the
presumption that persons are not sufficiently responsible and free
rather than that they are so!
But back to our original dialogue... Should you have understood my
>>Both you and Kiira made youthful choices similar to those of a
>>garden-variety primary TS.
>
>Well, *I* did. I'd also say I am TS, not just that I was somehow
>similar: after all, I've got a psyche, too... I may at times really be
>using my kidneys, but my feelings and thoughts certainly are not
reigned
>by my immune system. I also was so fed up with this "IS" cr@p I refused
>to deal with "it" until 7 years ago it became a sheer necessary because
>I had to pay dearly for my denial.
as denoting something like
>And about, don't call me IS, i am not one of
>those weird IS's. I'm TS and did something about
>my situation.
you indeed were pretty darn off the mark.
> Basically, i am trying to say is that there is
> big huge differences between being intersexed,
> and being transsexual.
Well, I'd even agree, but simply because they're not differentiated
along the same axis. These features are freely combinable as in the
possibility of being
endosexed + cissexual
endosexed + transsexual
intersexed + cissexual
intersexed + transsexual
@+
Heike Boedeker
karen...@aol.com (KarenA1013) wrote:
...
> It is atechnicak question. I exlicitly stating I am not advocating
> surgury for IS infants but I was curious why most would have no
feeling in their
> genitals when TS's do.
Because they have experienced it as traumatic. If TS felt their genitals
to be a wound rather than a body part they neither were so happy. Or in
the first place didn't seek surgery. Tragically, IS getting pissed like
"My vulva looks like if it's been hit by a bomb!" or "They punch a hole
into you and call it a vagina!" is good for venting but doesn't help
overcome that estrangement from your own body.
> >> BTW, the adult TS's who went to certain doctors 30 years ago got
> >> *exctly* that type of surgery...
The instead standard for IS surgeries still is Waldemar Hecker's
monography. Get it in the medschool's library, browse through it, and
find all your questions answered.
Apart from that I would like to make you aware of the fact that you can
read a lot about techniques, but how careful a worker a surgeon is
remains a different matter.
KarenA1013
>:> Also why would that *have* to be the case for intersexed infants
>:> that are operated on (IO am not advocating that they are
>:> operated on)?
>
>I find it appalling that you would even ask such an insensitive
>question.
Why? It was from technical/clinical viewpoint. I've had SRS and while I've not
had an orgasm since (1.5 years ago), I definitely have feeling there.
That makes me wonder why that apparently is not the case for the sugery results
for an IS.
I specificlally said I was not endorsing the practice, but I am a scientist and
such things peek my curiosity.
> Look at it this way...
You took Julie's spin on what I said. It was never meant that way. I was not
taking about surgical satisfaction, but why the electricity did not work. I did
not mean I though they would be happy if it did work. I thought I made that
clear in my post.
>Karen A where did you get the idea that being a women means being a
>victim?
I don't have that idea and never did.
> Do you see girls and women in literature or on television
>acting like victims?
I'm 2.5 year post transition, 1.5 years post op. My boss is a woman as is the
CEO of the company I work for. I think I have good grasp on the concept that a
woman does not have to be a victim.
-karen A.