The whole thing is ludicrous. So now we're supposed to once again consider gender identity issues as major mental disorders? What happened to how fluid gender is and how natural it is when the lines are blurred?

I'm confused.

Anyway, Imma go murder my husband so I can go to prison. I'd really like to look like Catherine Zeta Jones and I need some surgery to get there.

Oh, I don't have a husband. Shoot.

*backs away slowly from the coming flames*

Just order one! Satisfaction not guaranteed...

"The whole thing is ludicrous."
 

*Agreed.










*But: my own views ('he' is not interchangeable with 'she') are already posted in this thread over and over, so I have no need to beat that drum again.

Oh my. I couldn't pick on so I did the compatibility test. I was hooked up with Arnaud, who only smells (how you say) a little. :lol:

Genders are not interchangeable. You are what you are between your ears.

I do not go back and forth, as the situation demands. I am a female. Period. That I was born with male parts is fixable now. And when it's all said and done, I will be a woman. With female parts. Period. I don't get to say I'm a man now because the mechanic is lying to me again. Or I really want that job but they don't hire women for it. Or because it's Tuesday.

Transsexuals generally do not go in for anything other than the binary gender paradigm. (I've always wanted to use that word!) We only want to fit in to the existing norm. It's the others on the TG spectrum that want to play games with gender. Live and let live, I say.

I do not agree with discriminating against anyone on the basis of their appearance, even if it makes you uncomfortable. *I* happen to dislike bigots. But do I go around saying they should not be permitted to breed? Or should be rounded up and exiled? Or shot? No. Yet this is what transsexuals live with daily.

Back on topic, that prisoner does not suffer from a mental illness, as some suggest. It is a physical deformity that is easily visible, yet camouflaged in plain sight. But, unlike other types of deformity, such as a deviated septum or a harelip or a club foot, this deformity affects primarily the mind. That is why so many would (and do) deny appropriate treatment as defined by medical professionals. GRS/SRS is NOT cosmetic surgery in the case of a transsexual, it is corrective.

The judge ruled properly, yet I still wish it had been someone other than a prisoner, because the resulting news coverage may hurt us as much as help us.

I truly hope that this decision stands, not for the benefit of prisoners, but because it can have ripple effects for us all.

More and more health plans are covering Hormone Replacement Therapy, counseling and even surgery for transsexuals. One day soon, Medicare will cover it too, I hope. That, I believe, will sway a majority of health plans.

Thanks, Pam.

Just to be clear, I didn't suggest it was a mental illness. That was the judge's justification for allowing the surgery to proceed. The problem, then, is not that the person in question is a prisoner, but that the judge negated much of the work done to create an understanding of what gender identity really is.

Of course one might say that those who question it, or don't understand it, are bigots. I do appreciate your post because it adds more perspective than just pointing out 'bigots' and it was clear and thoughtful.

A lot of things need to be fixed in health plans, the prime example being insurances not paying for birth control but paying for Viagra. It is still a 'man's' world in many respects, so every struggle for equality is an important one.

Thanks again for your post. You always provide a better understanding, without anger, without reaction. I admire that.

I take issue with this. You're suggesting my penis is a physical deformity? I think many many men would also strongly disagree with you. Yet, in the other cases you describe, a harelip, a clubfoot, I don't think anyone would believe their anatomy is normal or common. How can you support the idea that a set of physical attributes found in about half the population constitutes a "physical defomity"?

If it was really "needless", why bother bringing it up again?

Oh no, V.
Have you been drunk texting photos again?

I... I can't remember?

DO NOT CLICK ON THIS LINK AT WORK

Puppetry of the Penis. Video of performance on Absolute Radio.
NB - I dislike Iain Lee, and the cackling woman is dreadful, but this was the best clip I could find.

(Note - not goatse, but if you don't want to look at two men manipulating their penises, again, do not click)

"If it was really "needless", why bother bringing it up again?"
 

Take it on down the road, Big Verbose.

Me: (still) not interested.

did you just tell me to shut up?

I'm verbose, it's true, but I only use as many words as are needed, no more. I was confused by what you wrote and asked for clarification, thinking you would be the best person to explain your own words. You seemed to contradict yourself in that post, just as you do here; if you're not interested, if it is "needless", why did you bother to bring it up.

You may reply with whatever degree of verbosity you deem necessary.

Let's take, then, the case of someone with androgen insensitivity syndrome, who is XY but does not produce/react to androgens like Testosterone. They would not, then, have a penis, but would not develop secondary female sexual characteristics. Would this person's vagina be a deformity, or not, in your mind? it is a part of the body that should not normally have developed the way it did.
Pam's point is that, in trans* people, the fact that their body did not develop the way it should have (or, if you want to reverse it, their brain/mind/identity did not develop the way the body did, or whatever) means that, while it would be normal for their bodies to have developed that way IF they were a man, they aren't (or vice-versa for trans* men), and so it's an abnormal development of the body.