Shades of grey

[TJ347]

Okay, Sil. And? Are you posing a question, or just making a statement? Not trying to be a wiseass here. Just asking...

[TJ347]

Okay then... Well, I've noticed that there are differing opinions among people here as to what a TG really is, with some posting pics of "girls" who by all appearances are men with wigs, with visible five o'clock shadows and hands as soft and supple as those of a lumberjack. That these people think of these individuals as tgirls is shocking to me, but then, the average joe would think it was shocking that I could consider a tgirl a woman at all, I suppose. And so, as you've said Sil, there are indeed shades of grey here, despite the fact that transvestites and transsexuals are defined very differently. I don't know that I like a man in a wig being called a tgirl, as to me, a tgirl must by definition look like a girl, but tomato, tomahtoe, as they say I guess...

[Hara_Juku Tgirl]

In my experience of the TS/CD scene, there's a lot of indecision. At one end of the scale we have the gay crossdresser, at the other, the true transsexual. But I observe that these are not two extremes, and between them lies a lot of conflict. Also I hear and read on this forum, a lot of 'girls' who are going through this for purely monetary gains, i.e. as in Brazil.

This has always been a controversial topic. And to be honest not alot of people would like to discuss it. Why? Because discussing these would mean identifying which one's are which. In otherwords..will ruffle everyone's feathers. While the gay crossdressers who dresses up in womens clothes feel they are female (for an hour or so anyways)..True transexuals beg to differ! Then within the True transexual category there are two types: Primary and secondary. Primary being they knew at such a young age they are women born as boys and secondary meaning the awakening came to them past their teen years (20 and up mostly). So again, discussing these will also ruffle more feathers. So I think its best and safest to say that these things are only a few things/issues that divides our community. Why you might ask? It's simply because everyone wants to believe they are equal (for political correctness). But medical doctors seems to beg to disagree and will not administer hormone therapy to just anyone (e.g. truck drivers whom all of the sudden after being married and fathering kids "thinks" he is a woman) seeks it without pyschological evaluations. Muchless recommend SRS to anyone who's got the $ to fund it. A prime reason why there's alot of transexuals seeking most if not all surgical enhancements abroad and not locally. This is true also in the United Kingdom where NHS and CHX are concerned. ;)

Thesedays tho, alot of transgenders who couldnt afford or get past a system opt for sil injections for bodily modifications, order hormones online pharmacies etc. just to be the girl they all thought they could be. And get into the Flashy Escort trade/biz..And act all CUNTY like Peggy said "they think they're FISH". It's sad but a true fact. ;)

~Kisses.

HTG

[qeuqheeg222]

be aware there are many guys with tits who in no way act in any "lady like" fashion so the shades of grey expand in the crayola box of flavors...tricky semantics

[Hara_Juku Tgirl]

Ha, ha, but this is my problem. I know of two CD's who have gone through the shit of alienating family & friends to be what they are, like TS's, but they have no desire to be a woman, it's just a kink!!!

LOL Yeah there are people who are like that. They are not alone. Its called "Transvestitic fetishism" Silvester. ;)

http://home.netcom.com/~docx2/tf.html

Transvestic Fetishism: Psychopathology or Iatrogenic Artifact?

The act of wearing the stereotypic articles of clothing of the other sex is known as cross-dressing. Obtaining erotic enjoyment from the process of cross-dressing is known as transvestism. The cross-cultural (Ford & Beach, 1951) and trans-historical (Bullough & Bullough, 1977) records indicate that cross-dressing is not rare. However, whether erotic arousal from cross-dressing exists cross-culturally and trans-historically is much more difficult to ascertain. Little attention has been paid to subjective erotic arousal experienced during sexual acts. It is easier to observe behavior than to discern individual motivation.

Magnus Hirschfeld coined the term "transvestism" in 1910 (Bullough & Bullough, 1977). Havelock Ellis (1936) termed the same phenomena "Eonism," but included individuals that would now be considered "effeminate homosexuals" and those with gender dysphoria. Kinsey did not ask questions about cross-dressing (Gebhard & Johnson, 1979) and defined transvestism only as cross-dressing (Kinsey, Pomeroy, Martin & Gebhard, 1953).

Benjamin (1966) described a continuum between those who cross-dress for erotic reasons and those who dress as an expression of gender identity (e.g. transsexuals). There are many different varieties of individuals who cross-dress. They include (but are not limited to) "drag queens" (and "kings"), the transgendered, transsexuals, transvestites, "she-males," female impersonators (also known as gender illusionists), and some "psychotic" individuals who believe that they are members of the other sex.

The Diagnostic and Statistical Manual (DSM) of the American Psychiatric Association (APA) is considered by many to be the definitive authority on the diagnosis of mental disorders. This reference text is revised regularly and purports to be factually correct, reflect new information available, and be up-to-date. It classifies unusual and strong sexual interests (i.e., paraphilias) as psychopathological. The DSM states it is "…supported by an extensive empirical foundation" (APA, 2000, p. xxiii). However, there is no objective support in the literature for the belief that these sexual interests stem from psychopathology or constitute a form of psychopathology per se. Except for historical precedent, why should strong sexual interests (unusual or otherwise) be diagnosed as mental disorders? (See Moser [2001] for a critique of the concept of "paraphilia.") A reevaluation of the entire paraphilia section of the DSM (2000) is in order, but the present paper will be focused on discussion of Transvestic Fetishism (TF), the DSM term for transvestism.

The current edition of the DSM (APA, 2000) continues to list TF as a mental disorder, although the latest research available does not support the inclusion of this diagnosis. Brown, Wise, Costa, Herbst, Fagan and Schmidt (1996, p. 265) conclude, "Cross-dressers…are virtually indistinguishable from non-cross-dressers." This statement takes on added importance because Wise and Schmidt were members of the DSM-IV-TR (2000) Sexual and Gender Identity Disorders Text Revision Work Group, (i.e., the committee responsible for revising this section of the DSM).

The diagnostic criteria define this disorder as occurring specifically among heterosexual men. Neither women nor homosexual men are likely to receive this diagnosis. This reflects on how narrowly masculinity is defined in this culture and on the cultural context in which the diagnostic process is embedded.

To illustrate the problems with this diagnosis, consider the following case:

Mr. A is a 40-year-old man, married for 15 years, with no children, who works as a truck driver. He seeks psychotherapy for depression characterized by dysphoric mood, anhedonia, insomnia, fatigue, and feelings of hopelessness. The current episode began one month ago. He reports the precipitating events include the possibility that he may be fired and that his wife is considering divorce. You make a diagnosis of Major Depressive Episode.

Now assume that the same patient is sitting in your office while cross-dressed. He describes a history of erotic arousal when dressed in female attire, but now finds cross-dressing is calming. His employer discovered his cross-dressing - (in private, not while on the job) - from a co-worker in whom Mr. A confided. His employer states he must act "to preserve the company image." His wife always disliked the cross-dressing and feels the behavior "must be sick"; she does not want to endure the embarrassment its revelation may bring. Mr. A reports cross-dressing overall has had a positive effect on his life. He admits that having to keep it secret has been stressful and he had periods of self-loathing in the past because he thought cross-dressing was sick. Over time and with the help of several transvestite support groups, these problems have been resolved. How will your diagnosis, treatment plan and goals change with this new information?

According to the DSM (APA, 2000), in order to make a diagnosis of TF, both of the following criteria must be met:

1. Over a period of at least 6 months, in a heterosexual male, recurrent, intense sexually arousing fantasies, sexual urges, or behaviors involving cross-dressing.
2. The fantasies, sexual urges, or behaviors cause clinically significant distress or impairment in social, occupational, or other areas of functioning. (APA, 2000, p.575)

To be a mental disorder, the sexual interest in cross-dressing must cause either distress or impairment. It is dubious if TF qualifies as a mental disorder or how it should be classified, if it does not cause distress or impairment. The criteria of distress and impairment will be examined separately.

Distress

Mr. A is distressed about his job and marriage, but not about his cross-dressing. Although he did experience some distress in the past, this now appears resolved. The diagnostic criteria do not say that the distress had to occur in the last six months; only a six month duration is needed. If it is meant literally, then Mr. A has an incurable condition, even if none of the "signs" or "symptoms" is currently present. If the criterion is sexual excitement in the last six months, then he does not meet the diagnostic criteria for TF.

The DSM indicates that the motive underlying the cross-dressing can change in character and that the sexual arousal may disappear. In these cases, it is suggested that, "…the cross-dressing becomes an antidote for anxiety or depression or contributes to a sense of peace and calm" (APA, 2000, p. 574-5). Should this behavior, which can be regarded as adaptive rather than distressing, be construed as psychopathological? The rationale for pathologizing a coping skill is questionable.

Impairment

While his employer and wife may have a problem with his sexual interest, Mr. A apparently does not. His impairment, if any, comes from the fact that his job and marriage are in jeopardy. If he was unable to perform the duties of his job (e.g., he was too busy dressing to actual drive the truck), then this dysfunction may qualify for a diagnosis of mental disorder. If we accept that his problems arise from the societal attitudes he is forced to endure, then we must question whether a diagnosis of psychopathology is valid. If TF is a mental disorder, we imply that women or African Americans, who also experience problems arising from discrimination, are similarly subject to diagnosis.

When non-paraphilic (normophilic) individuals are distressed or even dysfunctional because of an inability to find accepting and supporting partners, they are not defined as having psychosexual disorders. We do not assume that individuals are mentally disordered if potential partners reject them because the former are fat, poor, or even ugly. Why does being rejected for non-standard sexual interests imply a mental disorder?

Common concerns that some therapists use as reasons to treat TF:

* "It is compulsive." The patient feels driven to cross-dressing and reports that it diminishes his distress. Heterosexual coitus or masturbation usually does not seem to evoke the same concerns even though many people feel driven to the acts and report that they decrease distress. Although any behavior can be compulsive, cross-dressing rarely meets the DSM criteria for a compulsion. If it does qualify, then another diagnosis would be more appropriate, because compulsion is not part of the diagnostic criteria of TF.

* "The individual cross-dresses to decrease anxiety." Why should one abandon coping skills that work? Why are some adaptive behaviors regarded as better than others? Admittedly, any behavior might be deleterious for some, but (aside from the category of the paraphilias) it is not typically the behavior that is identified as the problem (e.g., washing one's hands until raw may be a compulsion, but it is not a hand-washing disorder).

* "The cross-dresser is unable to engage in sexual activity without cross-dressing." Many heterosexuals are unable to engage in sexual activity with same sex partners or with unappealing partners. However, we are not inclined to pathologize those whose sexual preferences and aversions conform to the "norm". Uncommon behavior is not necessarily pathological and conventional behavior is not necessarily healthy.

* "The patient requests help to extinguish the behavior." Clinicians play a large role in determining which problems are targeted for treatment. Just because patients wish to modify their sexual interests does not necessarily mean that clinicians should attempt to do so. Most therapists would not try to eradicate homosexuality. The presenting problem (e.g., depression, anxiety, substance abuse) can have no relationship to the sexual interest. Even if a relationship exists, it is not clear if the problem is causing the sexual interest, if the sexual interest is causing the problem, if the sexual interest is causing different problems, or some combination of these.

* When should a therapist deal with the cross-dressing? A patient's sexuality can be an appropriate focus of therapy. Some individuals may need help integrating their sexual interests into their lives. Even if their sexual interests are problematic, the best treatment may entail referral to support groups or assistance in how to manage the problems generated by the interest.

Conclusion

In the case presented, the therapist might be "seduced" into attempting to extinguish Mr. A's cross-dressing behavior, despite its adaptive value. The focus on his TF, with the concomitant de-emphasis of his other problems may lead to iatrogenic problems. He may be deprived of focused treatment for his depression, marital therapy, or even a referral to an attorney to defend his interests in a "wrongful termination" suit.

There is no empirical evidence that TF is problematic, let alone a mental disorder. Even if it does qualify as a disorder, the interpretation and application of the diagnostic criteria lack consistency and clarity; that is the reliability and validity of the diagnosis remain dubious.

We have criticized the Soviet and Chinese mental health establishments for pathologizing those with unconventional political beliefs; we should not make an analogous mistake concerning those who have unconventional sexual interests.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

References

American Psychiatric Association. (2000). Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders (4th ed., Text Revised). Washington, DC: American Psychiatric Association.

Benjamin, H. (1966). The transsexual phenomenon. New York: Julian Press.

Brown, G.R., Wise, T.N., Costa, P.T., Herbst, J.H., Fagan, P.J., & Schmidt, C.W. (1996). Personality Characteristics and Sexual Functioning of 188 Cross-Dressing Men. The Journal of Nervous and Mental Disorders 184, 265-273.

Bullough, V.L., & Bullough, B. (1977). Sin, sickness, and sanity. New York: New American Library.

Ellis, H. (1936). Studies in the Psychology of Sex, (Vol. III, Part 2). New York: Random House.

Ford, C.S., & Beach, F.A. (1951). Patterns of sexual behavior. New York: Harper & Row, Publishers.

Gebhard, P.H., & Johnson, A.B. (1979). The Kinsey data: Marginal tabulations of the 1938-1963 interviews conducted by the Institute for Sex Research. Philadelphia, PA: W. B. Saunders Company.

Kinsey, A.C., Pomeroy, W.C., Martin, C.E., & Gebhard, P.H. (1953). Sexual behavior in the human female. Philadelphia, PA: W. B. Saunders Company.

Moser, C. (2001) Paraphilia: Another Confused Sexological Concept. In: P. J. Kleinplatz (Ed.) New directions in sex therapy: Innovations and alternatives (pp. 91-108), Philadelphia: Brunner-Routledge.

~Kisses.

HTG

[TJ347]

Hara, are you still taking "Peggygee 101", or have you moved on to the advanced course? Excellent info, solid presentation... An A+ all around, and a smiley face to boot! Way to go! :wink:

[Hara_Juku Tgirl]

Hara, are you still taking "Peggygee 101", or have you moved on to the advanced course? Excellent info, solid presentation... An A+ all around, and a smiley face to boot! Way to go! :wink:

LOL Thanks. Peggygee is an inspiration. ;)

Here's additional articles that might be of any interest to HA readers:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Classification_of_transsexuals

http://www.tsroadmap.com/info/thomas-wise.html

:P

~Kisses.

HTG

[Dengoza]

This has always been a controversial topic. And to be honest not alot of people would like to discuss it. Why? Because discussing these would mean identifying which one's are which. In otherwords..will ruffle everyone's feathers. While the gay crossdressers who dresses up in womens clothes feel they are female (for an hour or so anyways)..True transexuals beg to differ! Then within the True transexual category there are two types: Primary and secondary. Primary being they knew at such a young age they are women born as boys and secondary meaning the awakening came to them past their teen years (20 and up mostly). So again, discussing these will also ruffle more feathers. So I think its best and safest to say that these things are only a few things/issues that divides our community. Why you might ask? It's simply because everyone wants to believe they are equal (for political correctness). But medical doctors seems to beg to disagree and will not administer hormone therapy to just anyone (e.g. truck drivers whom all of the sudden after being married and fathering kids "thinks" he is a woman) seeks it without pyschological evaluations. Muchless recommend SRS to anyone who's got the $ to fund it. A prime reason why there's alot of transexuals seeking most if not all surgical enhancements abroad and not locally. This is true also in the United Kingdom where NHS and CHX are concerned. ;)

Thesedays tho, alot of transgenders who couldnt afford or get past a system opt for sil injections for bodily modifications, order hormones online pharmacies etc. just to be the girl they all thought they could be. And get into the Flashy Escort trade/biz..And act all CUNTY like Peggy said "they think they're FISH". It's sad but a true fact. ;)

~Kisses.

HTG[/quote]

HARA, THIS IS WHY IM SO CRAZY IN LUST LOVE LIKE WITH YOU, YOUR BRAINS WORK WONDERS!!! AND YOUR SEXY TOOOOOOOOOOOO

[Hara_Juku Tgirl]

LOL Aww thanks Deng (You're too much. lol)! ;)

~Kisses.

HTG

[Dengoza]

really though, you are amazing

[Hara_Juku Tgirl]

really though, you are amazing

LOL either that's true or you're buttering me up so I'd meet you! LOL Hehe..eitherways, thanks!

;)

~Kisses.

HTG

[BrendaQG]

The OP is almost right. I reckon he would not have seen much of the people that HJTG mentioned "transvestite fetishist". To put it in Silvesters terms their is one other spectrum. One with heterosexual cross dressers on one end and a different set of transsexuals on the other end. A set of people who gave the world Rene Richards.

I have personally gotten into so many tif's over classifying transsexuals. Riventing questions such as "Does a non-op count a transsexual or just a full-time drag queen?" "Do transsexuals who do not pass and do not try to pass count as women?" "Are transsexuals from other cultures who identify as a third gender the same as/equal to transsexuals from the euro-american culture who ID as female?" I always came down on the side of inclusiveness, and not being so western centric in our thinking about these things.

Such debates can go on and on forever and ever.

( I think to myself: Should I mention the 800 lb GORILLA in the room? Sure what can it hurt.)

To get a feel for how bad such discussions can get see here (http://www.google.com/search?q=autogynephilia&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8).

I see no gain from clogging this board with that sewage their are enough places for that already.

[peggygee]

Hara, are you still taking "Peggygee 101", or have you moved on to the advanced course? Excellent info, solid presentation... An A+ all around, and a smiley face to boot! Way to go! :wink:

LOL Thanks. Peggygee is an inspiration. ;)

Here's additional articles that might be of any interest to HA readers:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Classification_of_transsexuals

http://www.tsroadmap.com/info/thomas-wise.html

:P

~Kisses.

HTG

TJ347, Hara, thank you both so much. :wink:

Silvester, you have generated a pivotal topic, and Hara you have
provided some excellent material in support of that topic.

Let's now take it another step forward;

Someone recently asked me: Do you think in some small way, the
medical references which label transgenderism as a "mental illness" could
lead to the transcommunity being stigmatized, or being seen in a
negative light. If so, how can we change this. I truly don't think it's a
mental illness. A birth defect possibly, but definitely not an illness.

Indeed this a topic that has recieved a great deal of debate, both in
the transcommunity, the treatment communtiy and society at large.

As you may be aware the APA removed homosexuality from DSM-III in
1973, thus it is no longer considered an illness. Yet, in the DSM-IV-TR:
Gender Identity Disorder in Adolescents and Adults, 302.85, remains.

As I stated even within the transcommunity, there is division as to
whether gender dysphoria should remain an illness is in our best
interests.

Here are a few insightful discussions on the matter;

Gender Identity Disorder: What To Do?
Can we eliminate GID without decreasing TS health care access?

The debate in the transgender community over whether or not Gender Identity Disorder (GID) should be de-pathologized has raged for some time. However, recent activity from within the larger queer community adds a new dimension to the debate, and even threatens to overwhelm those transgenders who favor continuation of GID as a bona fide psychiatric diagnosis. For the sake of furthering reasonable discourse, and in hopes of promoting a solution that disadvantages none of us, I will try to present clearly here some of the considerations, and one possible solution.

The most vocal supporters of continuing GID as a recognized pathological condition seem to be transsexuals who seek insurance payment for their SRS expense. Insurance companies generally require requests for any medical expense reimbursement to include the DSM-coded diagnosis for which treatment was provided. Those who reimburse for SRS specifically require this DSM-compliant diagnosis of GID. The removal of GID from the DSM threatens these transexuals with loss of insurance repayment for their surgery expense. Those TS folk I've spoken with who advocate for continuation of GID believe that insurance coverage is the only way to cover the cost of their surgery.

There's a claim that GID may be useful for averting employment discrimination, but I haven't seen a successful case of it's application in this way. It may, I suppose, benefit the crossdresser who seeks to end his distress over the practice through psychiatric help. I'll ignore those who find ways to use it to their financial advantage, like service providers who try to "cure" people of gender non-conformance.

On the other side, some CDs, TSs and TGs would like to see GID eliminated as a mental illness, in order to further reduce the stigmatization of transgender folk. This is the logical continuation of the movement towards greater individual freedom of expression which has previously de-pathologized homosexuality and transvestism. Many activists believe that this is a necessary step towards acquisition of full rights and respect for transgender folk.

The ongoing debate on this issue has recently taken a new tack, as gay and lesbian activists joined the call for an end to GID because of its use as a basis for incarceration and abuse of gender-variant, "potentially homosexual" youth. The book Gender Shock by Phyllis Burke is probably the leading vehicle for this interest. It successfully dramatizes the plight of gender-variant youth, providing a disturbing collection of case histories of boys and girls mistreated in the name of normalcy. Many of them are incarcerated in mental institutions and "treated" with what are clearly abusive regimens, ranging from gross psychological manipulation to routine application of drugs and electroshock -- often without supporting psychotherapy or counseling.

Ms. Burke also relates interviews with contemporary practitioners of such "therapies" who continue to this day to prescribe abusive and ineffective treatment for transgenderism most often, apparently, in futile effort to ward of future homosexuality. The call by Gender Shock for an end to GID diagnoses is compelling. To this transgender reader, the book is extremely disturbing, and highlights the needed reform of both our psychiatric services and our children's upbringing and very rights. It remains to be seen just how great will be the reach of this work, but it will surely advance the cause of those who argue for the abolition of GID.

Most transgender folk I've spoken with agree that the greatest damage is done to us when we are young, at the mercy of parents, teachers, and peers. Without that abuse and repression, we would surely reach our middle years in much better shape than we do currently, and be much less in need of reparative services. Indeed, I suspect that the demand for SRS might decrease if genitals ceased to be a reason for social discrimination, but that is pure speculation on my part.

There is no doubt that the acceptance and even encouragement of young people's gender variation would yield much happier transgender (and non-TG) adults. An obvious component of that change in attitude is a change in the assignment of pathology in cases of gender transgression. Clearly, it is the parents whose own guilt and fear for their gender appropriateness causes them to ignore the hurt they cause their children in blaming them for the pathology. It is their insecurity as parents and their mistaken beliefs which cause them to hurt their children in the name of "normalcy" and "good parenting". Likewise, it is the doctor's homo- and gender-phobia that makes them accomplices in the evil acts performed in the "child's best interests".

As more transgender people become visible, we are presented with more examples of transgender people whose lives are not ruined by their transgenderism. We are accumulating evidence that transgenderism itself is not a problem. It is becoming increasingly clear that the problem is other people's treatment of transgender folk. In response to this clarity, we need to relocate the pathology from the gender-transgressive individual to the person upset by that transgression. To fail to do so would be to continue the insane practice of blaming the victim for failing to satisfy the bully's demands.

At the same time, what about the person young or old who will clearly benefit from surgical intervention, but who cannot by themselves muster the resources needed to accomplish the feat? Currently, surgery on intersexed young people to make them "more normal" is a mostly unquestioned insurance reimbursement. While this practice deserves, like GID "therapy", to be exposed for the butchery it most often is, it shows the willingness of insurers to pay for gender-corrective measures. Clearly, insurance companies are willing to pay for surgery which is beneficial to a person's welfare, even when the problem to be corrected is not life-threatening. At the same time, they draw the line at cosmetic surgery: No matter how ugly you are, they will not pay for a nose job or face lift performed for strictly cosmetic reasons.

Here, then, we have found an inconsistency in policy. Because a nose job or face lift or liposuction or whatever can in some cases demonstrably improve the quality of one's life. This is the same goal as that of SRS and intersexual surgery. Why is intersexual surgery reimbursed when cosmetic surgery is not? Because it's been medically established as a bona fide need, while the need for a nose job has not been. Part of that established need occurs because intersexuality is mysterious and involves unmentionables, while a nose job is as plain as what's between your eyes. The mystery and fear allow the doctors greater latitude in diagnosing a disorder and performing a procedure for which they will get paid.

SRS, on the other hand, got a bad name a few years back, thanks mostly to some doctors at Johns Hopkins. They conducted a study that showed that TSs were no happier after surgery than before. Of course, they were just as closeted - by the advice of their doctors - as before. As we are now learning, out is generally (if not always) happier than not, so it's no surprise that closeted post-ops (at increased personal risk/paranoia) weren't a lot happier than pre-ops. But the researchers conducting the study overlooked that detail (and others, no doubt). The insurance companies followed their lead, and SRS has become mostly regarded as "elective", "experimental" and "of questionable benefit" and thus non-reimbursable. However, the new transgender activism has reversed the direction of the pendulum on this one.

So the current situation is, insurance companies won't pay for cosmetic surgery, but they will pay for quality of life intervention for a diagnosed condition, such as surgery on intersexed genitals. If we want them to pay for SRS, we need to give them a diagnosis.

In fact, transexuality is not a gender disorder, it's a physiological sexual disorder. It's a need for a physical intervention, a surgery. To insist on the retention of GID as a means of obtaining coverage of SRS is like insisting that my neighbor not cut down his apple tree even though the apples are killing his dog which is allergic to them, because some of the apples fall in my yard and I enjoy them. Instead, if I want apples, I should grow a tree of my own.

In order to provide insurance coverage of SRS for transsexuals, it would seem reasonable for us to create a DSM diagnosis of "transexuality". It could support the various surgeries that transexuals want or need. This would allow the elimination of GID without hurting those transsexuals who need our help. A specific diagnosis of transexuality could provide a basis for specific body-altering procedures such as mastectomy and phalloplasty and vaginoplasty and orchiectomy and such.

Is the elimination of GID and establishment of diagnosable transexuality achievable? If we seek out and work with sympathetic medical authorities, if we go about it reasonably and with open minds, if we do our share of the legwork, if we persist until we succeed� it becomes not just possible, but inevitable.

Nancy Nangeroni 11/96

http://www.gendertalk.com/articles/oped/gid_tnt.shtml

http://www.psych.org/pnews/97-11-21/isay.html

http://www.transgender.org/gidr/gid30285.html

What are your thoughts?

[BrendaQG]

De pathologising GID could cause many more problems than it would solve.

The GID section of the DSM should be rewritten in it's totality. What exact words should replace whats in the DSM? I don't know, but I know what the effects should be. Instead of years of psychotherapy all one should need is a couple of through psychological examinations by psychologist who really know what they are doing. Psychotherapy would only be ordered if both of them think it is necessary to deal with some other issue that could make someone think they should have SRS.

Some psychological screening will always be necessary because their are things that can cause a person to want to have a sex change who is not really transsexual. Things like multiple personality dissociative disorder, schizophrenia (classic insanity), perhaps even a sexual assault can be so emasculating that one becomes gender confused.

When talking about kids their is the fact that children sometimes grow out of any gender issues they may have. Perhaps in that case their should be no pathology associated. More often than not a child with GID will "correct" themself. .........but then what to do about the number of kids with GID who do grow to be transsexuals? If childhood GID were totally deleted from the DSM it could remove a source of support that kids with GID have.

Their is a growing group of transsexuals who feel that an explaination called "Harry Benjamin Syndrome (http://www.harrybenjaminsyndrome-info.org/soc.html)". Read that carefully and what you find is a document that would label only those with an unflagging desire for SRS as being HBS sufferers. This would exclude most of the women here. For in speaking with such people they would usually rather cut it off with the top of a tin can than live as a woman with mail genitals. The verbiage there calls such people "transgendered fetishist or drag queens". Some of it borders on hate speech. But other people like it for some reason. The website I referenced (http://www.harrybenjaminsyndrome-info.org/) says "Also provided for examination is the BSTc research done by the Dutch on the hypothalamus of the brain that gives indicative support to the finding of difference in the brain of the transsexual while at the same time excluding the brains of others who might be homosexual or transgender and even ‘normal’." What would you bet me that whoever wrote this had the group of people one sees on this board, doing drag, or walking the stroll, in mind when they wrote that tripe? Just what such people need one more way to be a second class citizen.

Many of the things mentioned in peggy's last post could be addressed by having a more competent corps. of psychologist. Most have no idea about gender issues.

I could go on for pages and not adequately respond to such a complex issue. Suffice it to say that thier are some advantages to the status quo.