New Thesis

[Guest Lia86]

Hello all,

With MaryEllen's permission, I wanted to let you know that I have just completed my Master's program in anthropology at Georgia State University, and would like to share my thesis research with you. Following several years of participant observation on transgender discussion boards, I created a project dealing with the pathologization of gender variance and its effects on the identity formation of transgender individuals. What I essentially argue in my thesis is that 1) the assumption that gender variance constitutes an inherently disordered condition has not been validated; 2) that academic concern with the origins and classification of gender variance have little (if any) positive effect on the outcomes of transition; and 3) that the current psychological framework for understanding gender variance is partly to blame for the animosity found in transgender communities, as different groups and individuals must compete for legitimacy in the eyes of psychological and medical institutions. I would love any feedback that you might be able to provide, and please feel free to disseminate this thesis however you may see fit.

Thank you,

Ophelia Bradley

http://etd.gsu.edu/theses/available/etd-04302010-164207/

[Guest JeanVier]

Ophelia:

Congratulations!! I am working on a thesis for a double B.A. (Psychology and English), and I feel like my project is the most challenging (and, yes, rewarding) endeavour I could ever take on... but I do plan to attend graduate school, which means another thesis. I have not read your entire work yet, but I have already found the quality so inspiring and I look forward to reading on. Thanks for sharing, and, again, congrats!

-JV

[Guest Donna Jean]

Ophelia, Hon.......

Very impressive ....

I'm in the process of reading it right now...I'm at work and it's gonna take a bit!

Thanks....

HUGGS!

Donna Jean

[Guest Evan_J]

Hello all,

With MaryEllen's permission, I wanted to let you know that I have just completed my Master's program in anthropology at Georgia State University, and would like to share my thesis research with you. Following several years of participant observation on transgender discussion boards, I created a project dealing with the pathologization of gender variance and its effects on the identity formation of transgender individuals. What I essentially argue in my thesis is that 1) the assumption that gender variance constitutes an inherently disordered condition has not been validated; 2) that academic concern with the origins and classification of gender variance have little (if any) positive effect on the outcomes of transition; and 3) that the current psychological framework for understanding gender variance is partly to blame for the animosity found in transgender communities, as different groups and individuals must compete for legitimacy in the eyes of psychological and medical institutions. I would love any feedback that you might be able to provide, and please feel free to disseminate this thesis however you may see fit.

Thank you,

Ophelia Bradley

http://etd.gsu.edu/theses/available/etd-04302010-164207/

Impressive and thank you for undertaking the work.

[Guest Pól]

I thought it was quite good. Well done, Ophelia!

[Guest Elizabeth K]

Comments on the introduction:

Well argued, although I found the form a bit too academic for the taste of many. But this thesis is not for public consumption. It is for (1) informational purposes - this introduction is setting the stage for that which will follow (2) addressing to like-minded and like-thinking people who will judge it for its suitablity - promoting you to a Masters Degree. This is NOT the standard fodder for "Psychogy Today" magazine.

You set up by addressing especially the 'binary' idea of sexuality. I also picked up a great briefing on the idea that variance is considered 'un-human' and the standards are set by societies based upon the interpretations of their time (cup cake Germany was a good platform for this - and melded with the "anti-jewish" feeling of the world - not just the cup cake government. This was very well done.)

So I saw the Intersexed introduced obliquely, in reference to comments made by researchers - surprisingly candid about not being able to relate to these people. As i always argue we are human first, transsexual second, it hit a chord. BUT I do want to say, that on a personal level, I feel 'intersexed' and 'gender dysphoric' and 'transsexual' to be different hues of a same general color. These seem to me, to be potentially painted the same, reading your introduction.. So I anticipate finding this, going into the main text (which I have not read).

That early questioning of the methodology, of the paper, of itself ain't bad, but does give me a slant that I feel you don't want me to have.

But this was partially negated, at the end of the introduction, when it became clear the thesis REALLY is more about the researcers and THEIR methods, and how it affects people like me - I began to worry less about definitions, and more about about what is 'really' going on with the 'gatekeeprs' (personal level) and the 'definers" of our condition (those whom we hope to have "rescue us from the hatred') .

Heady stuff.

Lizzy

[Guest Elizabeth K]

Chapter One - as the chapter again was defining the thesis, it seemed to travel far and wide to places that I don't like to go - especially writings and studies on the subject - those over ten years old. I can appreciate the history lesson, but the presentation, to me, was too easily misunderstood as it seemed to claim everthing was true and valid in context, while in reality, 90% (my opinion again) is seriously flawed. To be fair, often that very information, that a particular study cited was later proven flawed, was included. BUT not always.

The more I read the angrier I became. I have lived through this time period (I was born 1947) and have always read with great interest the most recent (for the time) theory of transgender and homosexual, and whatever... information available. I saw the conditon of gender dysphoria defined. I saw GID defined, I saw Standards of Care evolve... and all the related hundreds of related developments . I was dismayed as the clinics shut down, as transsexuality seemed to slip into the hands of the mental health branches of research. And then - you mention the internet! My eyes opened again!

So in Chapter One - I virtually disagreed with almost everything, until it turned to talk about the Internet. Then my interest returned.

I am sorry to say I reacted this way. I probably had a bad reaction to how the subject turned to TRANSGENDER - and left me behind. I actually consider my personal condition to first fall under gender dysphoria, and then be refined as transsexual. My final self-definition is a male to female transsexual in transition. All the rest I ignore as it does not apply.

Yes, I am guilty of using the word, TRANSGENDER. I only do it because people reject me immediately, well tend to, if I use ANYTHING in my conversation that contains the word "sex" - so...

Chaper One? WAY TOO BROAD - a huge paintbrush! It seemed to be painting a barn, rather than a portrait. Perhaps that is just how I reacted. I just do not agree with most of what was said in Chapter One, up to the mention of the Internet. If the theories of transsexaulism included the writings of transsexual people, perhaps a truer picture would emerge. We are studied, but I guess lab rats don't write the lab reports.

And that is the point! The Internet allows that - for us to voice 'what we feel' and our opinions on that that is caused by, what can be done about it, and why we feel so oppressed.

And so the Chapter One ended well. I was ready to totally stop reading at the first part - but I will continue...

Oh, I wanted to say - my reputation? Opinionated.

Lizzy

[Guest Girl Emily]

Ophelia,

Congratulations on the finishing of you thesis. I have just finished it and believe that you have accurately described the state of affairs within the gender variant community in the United States and Canada. Thank You for your work that has added to the knowledge of our community in academia. I appreciate your "do no harm" approach to the study of us and your denunciation of those who did not concern themselves of the impact of their conclusions and publishing would have on us.

Huggs,

[Guest Lia86]

Hi all,

Thank you so much for the kind words. I've lived so long with this topic that by the time I was wrapping up the writing process, I couldn't tell whether it was absolutely brilliant, absolute dreck, or somewhere inbetween. I really had to rely on my advisor to help shape my arguments and give a more objective view, since I was too close to the work to be able to judge its merits by the end.

For those who have been reading it, I really appreciate your comments. Though a lot of the stuff in the first chapter will be common knowledge to many transgender individuals, it was definitely new to those who were grading my work and necessary for them in order to place the topic at hand within a very broad framework. My biggest difficulty was in addressing the issues while recognizing the very wide range of individuals' experiences and opinions and trying to draw some sort of conclusions without erasing the identities of anyone. Of course, the use of "gender variance" and "gender variant individuals" in my thesis will be objectionable to many, but I had little choice in deciding on a term to define my topic without stepping on someone's feet.

In any event, I'm going to stick around and will be happy to respond to any particular complaints or what-have-you, since taking that into account can only make my future research better.

To Lizzy: I wasn't quite sure what you were meaning when discussing the first chapter. You said that you disagreed with everything prior to the discussion of the Internet: did you mean that you disagreed with the state of affairs in how gender variance in the West is handled (i.e. through a pathologizing discourse) or rather with the manner in which I discussed this?

Lia