What makes a Transsexual?

[peggygee]

My point I suppose is that there is a new breed of transsexuals who can live with a penis for years if not indefinitely, but still 100% identifies as female.

And while there may be an evolving definition of transsexual, currently as
it is defined by the APA and the Benjamin Society these would be the
criteria in determining if someone were a transsexual.

[Ecstatic]

Why? Well first, a "shemale" can live as a woman with a penis for 10-20 years in some cases. However, I would say most "shemales" can afford to go post-op many times over. Allanah, Gia, Danielle, myself, Joanna Jet, Vo, Jennifer Paris, Vaniity, Holly Sweet... all these girls could have gone post op at any time because we have all had enough money to do so many times in our lives. If we truly were experiencing revulsion for the penis it would have been gone. Period.

And many in such a position call themselves non-op: but will this remain so? One TS I know who is in her 50s (and is a beautiful, voluptuous woman fwiw) tells me she is non-op and has no intention of SRS; given her age, I believe her. When an escort in her 20s or early 30s says the same thing, I wonder if it's only marketing, since they know what brings in the $$, but will change their minds when they're in their 40s or 50s. Regardless of this distinction, it does seem clear that such women (even if they would have preferred to have been born with a vagina) do not truly feel revulsion for their penis or they would have gone for SRS when they could afford it.

The closest description is the Transsexual (nonsurgical) but I don't see any of us waivering on our convictions between TV and TS.

I think Benjamin's definitions are a very well thought out starting point, and in many ways hold true, but I have to question him here: I suspect he's projecting "wavering on convictions" onto those transwomen who are quite comfortable--at least at this point in their lives--with their status and are not at all unsure of themselves. Perhaps wavering on whether or when to have SRS, but not on whether to be a TV or a TS--that ship long since sailed (and I tend to think that it set sail at birth, or earlier).

My point I suppose is that there is a new breed of transsexuals who can live with a penis for years if not indefinitely, but still 100% identifies as female.

Again, I don't even think transsexualism is a mental sickness in many cases. It is a choice.

I don't know if it's a new breed, I think rather it's a new understanding of a longstanding breed. IOW, I think Benjamin missed at least one definition of transsexual, probably because he was not exposed to, or perhaps simply couldn't wrap his head around, the "shemale" as you call the "breed," Vicki. Iirc, didn't Benjamin establish his definitions upwards of 50 years ago? In fact, I seem to recall that he did so in direct response to Christine Jorgensen's appearance on the scene in 1952. So I give him enormous credit and think a lot of what he states is still valid, but it's in need of updating.

Here's where it gets problematic; With people self diagnosing and creating
their own terms for their situation.

You of course are aware of how manytimes I have gone on record about
the 'shemale' term. It is a term created by the porn idustry for marketing
purposes, and I'm not sure how many girls would identify with your
definition here;

Shemale
I most closely identify with shemale. While many will argue that shemale is the porn industries definition of a transexual, I have found that this is not the case. A shemale is someone who typically lives as a female, but has a penis and, whether she uses it or not, she no intention of removing it. She likes to cum. More than likely, this person has taken hormones, removed body and facial hair, and/or has had breast implants. Also, many shemales have their own natural long hair. A shemale identifies as a woman and typically is attracted to men and only men. I'm one of the exceptions here as I am bi-sexual, but I prefer men. While there are beautiful girls in all of the categories mentioned, I tend to believe that the most beautiful girls as a whole are shemales. By the way, I have many friends who fit into this category so don't argue with me that I am making it up.

Thus I would have to cast my vote with the Benjamin Society and The
American Psychiatric Society, which are world wide recognized sources
and standards on the matter.

Ah, but question authority! Hee, had to say that. Talking about self-diagnosis and auto-definition, I've always liked the term that one non-op TS coined for the type that Vicki is describing: phallic female. No wavering of TV/TS, possible wavering between whether and when to opt for SRS but no deeply innate revulsion towards the penis, desiring to live 24/7 as a woman and to use whatever means (surgery, hormonal treatments, hair removal, etc.) to attain desired female appearance, etc.

[Vicki Richter]

I know where the shemale term comes from and how it originated Peggy. However, you are missing the point. My point is that none of the girls I mentioned fit cleanly into the The American Psychiatric Society's definitions of transsexual. These girls are living happily with penises. Some of these girls don't have any intention on getting SRS. That doesn't make them pre-op TS - by definition - and certain not transvestites.

I think the Psychiatric Society is perhaps correct a certain percentage of the time, but I think they are incorrect that it always falls into a mental disorder. I am not sick or mentally ill. Gender dysphoria is a mental illness and thus by their definition all transsexuals have mental illness.

To say, I believe them because they are the experts is just very sheep- like in my opinion. What makes someone an expert on Transsexuals?

Explain where girls who can afford SRS but don't do it fit into your model Peggy. Are we all full time transvestites? Ridiculous.

[Ecstatic]

Sex Object Choice and Sex Life:
Libido low. Asexual auto-erotic, or passive homosexual activity.

This one criterion seems to belie many of the type we're discussing, who have extremely high libidos and are anything but passively homosexual. Many have extremely high sex drives.

[peggygee]

I know where the shemale term comes from and how it originated Peggy. However, you are missing the point. My point is that none of the girls I mentioned fit cleanly into the The American Psychiatric Society's definitions of transsexual. These girls are living happily with penises. Some of these girls don't have any intention on getting SRS. That doesn't make them pre-op TS - by definition - and certain not transvestites.

I think the Psychiatric Society is perhaps correct a certain percentage of the time, but I think they are incorrect that it always falls into a mental disorder. I am not sick or mentally ill. Gender dysphoria is a mental illness and thus by their definition all transsexuals have mental illness.

To say, I believe them because they are the experts is just very sheep- like in my opinion. What makes someone an expert on Transsexuals?

Explain where girls who can afford SRS but don't do it fit into your model Peggy. Are we all full time transvestites? Ridiculous.

The Dr. Harry S. Benjamin's Gender Disorientation Scale is a continuim,
a scale. Individuals may not fit nearly and squarely into each definition.

The Benjamin scale is different but realated to the APA definitions.

Again, i tend to feel that you and the women you have mentioned would
more accurately fit into the Type Five designation. Type Five: True
Transsexual (moderate intensity)


I get the sense that Type Five is more appropriate in the cases that you
have described with many of the women that you have mentioned,
yourself included, stating that they would opt for SRS at some point. If
not now, at some point in the forseeable future.

I further predicate this on your statements that you reject psychotherapy,
which is indicated herein, you have stated a desire for SRS at some point,
lives and works as woman if possible, insufficient relief from dressing,
could rule out being diagnosed as a transvestite.

However in answeing your original question;

What makes a transsexual a transsexual?

What defines the point of time where one is promoted from a cross
dresser or feminine gay boy to a TS?

These are the criteria. You may disagree with the answers,but these
are the accepted criteria throughout the medical and psychological
community.

Does it fully apply to you, does it descibe you accurately, I am unable to
say. However these criteria have been based upon decades of research
with thousands of transwomen. And maybe you're right the term
transsexual isn't accurate for you.

To determine what is most appropriate would require sitting and talking
with you at some length.

However your self diagnosed label of 'shemale' is neither a politically
correct, nor psychologically or medically valid designation.



Type Five: True Transsexual (moderate intensity)
Gender Feeling: Feminine (trapped in male body)
Dressing Habits and Social Life: Lives and works as woman if possible.
Insufficient relief from dressing. Sex Object Choice and Sex Life:
Libido low. Asexual auto-erotic, or passive homosexual activity. May
have been married and have children.
Kinsey Scale: 4-6
Conversion Operation: Requested and usually indicated.
Estrogen Medication: Needed as substitute for or preliminary to operation.
Psychotherapy: Rejected. Useless as to cure. Permissive psychological guidance.
Remarks: Operation hoped for and worked for. Often attained

[LG]

ooh im moderate intensity

Well at least you're not a "total psycho-sexual" whatever that means.


To Vicki:
I don't really know the answer to this one any better than you since you have lived through it an many of us have not. But your question "What makes a transexual" which I felt was asking what one would qualify as a transsexual is so open that people have been talking about the physiological causes of transsexuality which have already been covered here:
http://www.hungangels.com/board/viewtopic.php?t=20346

It's pretty clear that you want to look at what people consider a transsexual because of an argument which you (and many others, it must be said) had with one particular member here who you, clearly do not consider a transsexual.

I think you already had the answer you were looking for before you asked your question right there in your glossary (pretty much the definitions that Peggy gave you as well).
http://www.vickirichter.com/glossary.htm

All I can add is that I feel a transsexual is a girl who has begun to live full time as a woman, who is not doing it for the sexual thrill but because she feels that she should always should have been female, and who has begun taking measures to become a woman. These measures may or may not include SRS, but they will include hormones (in almost all cases, except if the girl does not need them), oestrogen pills etc (which sadly can fuck up your body pretty bad), shaving and makeup (obviously) and, where necessary operations. But there are girls who cannot afford all of these things and want to, so I guess transsexuality is about how you feel, not how you look.

Then again, we guys can only make conclusions based on what we here from the girls. We do not know how you feel inside, really. We never will. We empathise and sympathise and respect you, and we might even "get" you, but we will never fully comprehend how you feel.

So you Vicki are best equipped to answer your own question as much as anyone on these forums, I suppose.

[peggygee]

ooh im moderate intensity

Well at least you're not a "total psycho-sexual" whatever that means.



I think you already had the answer you were looking for before you asked your question right there in your glossary (pretty much the definitions that Peggy gave you as well).
http://www.vickirichter.com/glossary.htm

.

This is not a valid or universally recognized definition.

http://www.vickirichter.com/glossary.htm

Transexual/Transsexual
I used to feel that I was transexual because I was lead to believe by other TG's that unless I planned to have a sex change, I was inferior. A transexual is different from a shemale only in terms of a goal to have SRS (Sexual Reassignment Surgery). As with shemales, transexuals identify as women, they more than likely live as women as well.

In my experience many transexuals are less concerned about being beautiful than they are living the life that they desire and as the correct gender. However, again, there are MANY beautiful transexuals (pre-op and post-op). They are among you and you might not even know it!!! Transexuals almost exclusively date men, but there are quite a few known incidents of lesbian transexuals; I have met plenty of them. It definitely happens.


As regards;

Type Six: True Transsexual (high intensity)
Gender Feeling: Feminine. Total psycho-sexual inversion.

Pyscho-sexual inversion is a term coined by Havelock Ellis to refer to
a sexual attraction to your same biological gender.

[LG]

ooh im moderate intensity

Well at least you're not a "total psycho-sexual" whatever that means.



I think you already had the answer you were looking for before you asked your question right there in your glossary (pretty much the definitions that Peggy gave you as well).
http://www.vickirichter.com/glossary.htm

.

This is not a valid or universally recognized definition.

http://www.vickirichter.com/glossary.htm

Transexual/Transsexual
I used to feel that I was transexual because I was lead to believe by other TG's that unless I planned to have a sex change, I was inferior. A transexual is different from a shemale only in terms of a goal to have SRS (Sexual Reassignment Surgery). As with shemales, transexuals identify as women, they more than likely live as women as well.

In my experience many transexuals are less concerned about being beautiful than they are living the life that they desire and as the correct gender. However, again, there are MANY beautiful transexuals (pre-op and post-op). They are among you and you might not even know it!!! Transexuals almost exclusively date men, but there are quite a few known incidents of lesbian transexuals; I have met plenty of them. It definitely happens.


As regards;

Type Six: True Transsexual (high intensity)
Gender Feeling: Feminine. Total psycho-sexual inversion.

Pyscho-sexual inversion is a term coined by Havelock Ellis to refer to
a sexual attraction to your same biological gender.

I know. It's just that Jen's comment made me laugh a little.

Also, I accept Vicki's is not a recognized definition. I'm just wondering why- since she already had an answer (albeit unrecognized)- did she bother asking the question in the first place.

But honestly, do we need to assign these boundaries? Boundaries only help in keeping people out. I say let people be who they want to be.

[peggygee]

Again, I don't even think transsexualism is a mental sickness in many cases. It is a choice.

On this there are many that agree with you, in fact there is
a reform movement afoot.

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.

[peggygee]

ooh im moderate intensity

Well at least you're not a "total psycho-sexual" whatever that means.



I think you already had the answer you were looking for before you asked your question right there in your glossary (pretty much the definitions that Peggy gave you as well).
http://www.vickirichter.com/glossary.htm

.

This is not a valid or universally recognized definition.

http://www.vickirichter.com/glossary.htm

Transexual/Transsexual
I used to feel that I was transexual because I was lead to believe by other TG's that unless I planned to have a sex change, I was inferior. A transexual is different from a shemale only in terms of a goal to have SRS (Sexual Reassignment Surgery). As with shemales, transexuals identify as women, they more than likely live as women as well.

In my experience many transexuals are less concerned about being beautiful than they are living the life that they desire and as the correct gender. However, again, there are MANY beautiful transexuals (pre-op and post-op). They are among you and you might not even know it!!! Transexuals almost exclusively date men, but there are quite a few known incidents of lesbian transexuals; I have met plenty of them. It definitely happens.


As regards;

Type Six: True Transsexual (high intensity)
Gender Feeling: Feminine. Total psycho-sexual inversion.

Pyscho-sexual inversion is a term coined by Havelock Ellis to refer to
a sexual attraction to your same biological gender.

I know. It's just that Jen's comment made me laugh a little.

Also, I accept Vicki's is not a recognized definition. I'm just wondering why- since she already had an answer (albeit unrecognized)- did she bother asking the question in the first place.

But honestly, do we need to assign these boundaries? Boundaries only help in keeping people out. I say let people be who they want to be.

If a person is making the effort towards transitioning, I wholeheartedly,
and with open arms,welcome them as a Sister. However there are many
of us who have worked very hard to be the women we are, and I am
somewhat adverse to recognizing those that have not paid their dues.

Fortunately I am not the gate-keeper, the Sargaent at arms or the arbiter,
of who is or isn't a transwoman. For that we defer to the Benjamin scale,
and the APA definitions.

In the situation that you have alluded to, that generated this thread I am
adopting a wait and see approach, thus I reserve judgement on that
matter.

But bottom line if a person doesn't put in the work, meet the outlined
criteria they would not fall under the designation of transsexual.

Walk like a duck, quack like a duck, you're a duck.

Hell you might even be a swan.