General Forum > What We Should & Should Not Be Doing As A Community

[Carolyn Marie]

With all due respect, Ann, it isn't your views that are difficult to accept, or that you have a viewpoint that is at the far end of the scale. The problem is your choice of words, which, deliberately or not, inflame rather than explain, and condescend rather than communicate. Use of the words "nonsense" to describe an opinion held by many, "political crap" and "tripe" demean those who hold views different from yours.

When you demonstrate, through your use of language, that you hold those with different opinions in low regard and disrespect whole segments of the membership population, then you will engender anger and resentment. I don't believe you chose those words haphazardly, being a learned person.

We reap what we sow, Ann. You can express those sentiments, as we are loath to censor here, but you are not inviting civil discourse and not making our job easier.

Carolyn Marie

[Guest NatashaJade]

And I'm not going to say any more about this because this conversation quickly devolves into the idiocy that has made the trans blog community so poisonous. I don't feel this discussion really belongs here at Laura's because it is so loaded and contentious that the disagreements cause rancor in a place where rancor does not belong.

Where then would you suggest the discussion should take place? It is PRECISELY because of the refusal to discuss the issue that it becomes so heated. The umbrella crowd always resorts to the 'we have to be united' nonsense which completely ignores the reality that many transsexuals and former transsexuals want NOTHING to do with the umbrella or the political crap associated with it.

Consequently, we get left with the 'we must discusss and unite...' tripe followed by efforts to quash and quell any real discussion that does not comport with the umbrella group-think after which that dissent is dismissed as 'loaded and contentious' (to use one example).

Just because some have a common medical condition does NOT mean that there is a 'community' line of thought...

Simple, Anne. Take it to blog land. There are plenty of willing combatants there. Laura's does not need to play host to this kind of contentious nonsense.

[Guest ~Brenda~]

Johnny,

You always post topics of importance and relevance. As we struggle to be ourselves to the "outside" world we find ourselves defending who we are in our own world. I, myself had to endure ridicule from both the physical world in which I live and the cyber world in which I try to contribute.

Laura's has been a place of both profound enlightenment and profound pain. One thing that I know is absolutely true about us and about Laura's... the intent of allowing one to find themselves in a non-hostile environment is what we are all here about. Sometimes the message may get lost or murky, but the spirit of Laura's is true and genuine and consistent. No one should ever feel ashamed or not "trans" enough to participate here at Laura's.

Life is tough enough. Being transgendered is even tougher. Participating here at Laura's really should be an oasis, to be with others who "know" and not judge.

We are all so fleeting. Make your time here meaningful.

Love

Brenda

[Guest Ann Onymous]

We do have to recognize that at it's heart and by it's terms this site is all about transgender inclusiveness-but-and I think this is vital-not about that in a political sense or an activism sense but that we will accept and support anyone who fits that term. If someone doesn't want to be included under that term that is their right but this site very clearly is all about inclusiveness.

I respect that we don't see things the same. I'm not insisting that you accept my view just respect it as I will respect yours. Maybe that way we can find a way to communicate at least. No one here is insisting you unite with anyone. The T & C do demand that you respect all the people covered by the term transgender and their right to be part of the site and express their opinions too whether you agree with the term and it's definition or not. We aren't a political site. We are a suicide prevention and support site and that makes a difference.

Inclusiveness, whether on a web-based medium or a 'community' in the real world does NOT obligate everyone to believe in or even grasp someone elses mindset. Further, given that some seem to want to take me to task for MY beliefs in this area of life, I would dare say that every one of the moderators would be extremely hard-pressed to find ANY example (whether here or at a different site that I left of my own volition) where I have intimated that someone did not 'belong' on the site. And expression of opinions IS a two-way street...I find it mildly ironic that in this very thread, we have one mod claiming that I use words that foster the discontent while at the same time and in the very next post, we see a different mod claiming that my posts contribute to what they label as 'contentious nonsense' despite the fact that the very existence of the thread was allegedly to discuss well, discussions. Yeah, no effort by that mod to be combative or inflammatory...

As to an earlier post in this thread that:

For better or worse, I see the Community as a political creation, and with politics in general, there is always debate and sometimes dissension. I don't think that's bad or harmful, as long as the debate stays civil, and the dissension doesn't derail progress or make discussion impossible.

the issue also exists that the discussion becomes impossible only because some of the mods want to adopt the position to essentially 'discuss THAT elsewhere...we won't want to do so here.'

[Cyndee]

What else in life could have been done in place of typing here ?

My point is simply do, don't just say. Talk is cheap, actions speak louder. Live life and smile.

Love

C -

[Guest BeckyTG]

With all due respect, Ann, it isn't your views that are difficult to accept, or that you have a viewpoint that is at the far end of the scale. The problem is your choice of words, which, deliberately or not, inflame rather than explain, and condescend rather than communicate. Use of the words "nonsense" to describe an opinion held by many, "political crap" and "tripe" demean those who hold views different from yours.

When you demonstrate, through your use of language, that you hold those with different opinions in low regard and disrespect whole segments of the membership population, then you will engender anger and resentment. I don't believe you chose those words haphazardly, being a learned person.

We reap what we sow, Ann. You can express those sentiments, as we are loath to censor here, but you are not inviting civil discourse and not making our job easier.

Carolyn Marie

Carolyn,

In a closer evaluation of what Ann said, there are those who do hold opinions that do not measure up to fair scrutiny. There are many who do not wish to hear any opinion that differs from theirs and there seem to be many who insist on representing those who have no desire to be represented or included in what those people claim to represent. I believe that this is what Ann is referring to. I support her choice of adjectives and do not believe that taking offense to such statements is a sound idea. In some narrow cases, what she says is absolutely true. Interpreting her statements too broadly is probably a mistake.

One of the problems with such discussions is that too many people are just waiting for the opportunity to be offended, rather than trying to keep the "I'm offended" button hidden away. We must always seek to look for any value in different viewpoints and this often involves simply smiling at potentially inflammatory comments and letting them slide by, while we seek out the real meat of the message. Once we have settled on a position and decided that this is it and that the expression of any contrary view threatens ours, we're in trouble. We'll never really progress or understand things any better, we're stuck in defense mode, we can't learn.

One of the things that my education has taught me is to try to look at all sides of any issue. Most only look for ways that any information supports their position. The truly wise person seeks out any and all information that might discredit their position. Only when you get good at this will you learn the weak points of your position. Learning the weak points helps you better understand your beliefs. Just because you passionately believe something doesn't make it right or even true. It only means you believe that and nothing more.

I agree with Ann in the context that these are issues that do need to be discussed. I agree with her that many factions cannot represent me. These are 2 statements that everyone would be wise to agree on for starters. How much further it goes is up to all of us.

Our true mission is to allow anyone and everyone to speak freely. Support and respect their right to say whatever they want to say. If they say things that might seem potentially inflammatory, gloss over it and smile. She never personally attacked anyone and I think that is a proper line to draw. Beyond that, resist "getting offended", as your own opinions are bound to offend someone else at some point.

A discussion is nothing more than an exchange of ideas and many of those ideas are bound to be in conflict at some point. Until they duct tape you to a chair, be a little tolerant.

Ann has lived the life that many of us seek to live for a long time and she has a ton of wisdom that can benefit us all. She has chosen to share that with us. When we've all lived as our true selves, been accepted as women and become successful over many decades, we may see things differently. I can accept that she might know more than most of us. (Maybe even more than me.... lol)

With much respect,

Becky

[Guest Ann Onymous]

We reap what we sow, Ann. You can express those sentiments, as we are loath to censor here, but you are not inviting civil discourse and not making our job easier.

but apparently not so loathe as to see mods refuse to put a response out that brings attention to the double standards. Instead we get OTHER mods posing the question of what else could have been done instead of typing here...which does nothing BUT suggest that a multi-paragraph post won't be appearing publicly despite the fact that it was not in violation of the ToS.

[Guest Ann Onymous]

Just want to say thank you to whichever mod finally stepped up to the plate to place the 6:40am post in public view...

[MaryEllen]

Ann, you seem to have an agenda for sowing discord here. You continuously derail and go off topic on threads. Your belligerent and combative attitude does little to endear yourself to other members and particularly to the moderators here. Our moderators are compassionate, caring folks who do their best to give good solid advice to members in need yet you seem to imply that they're a bunch of bumbling idiots.

You say that you're not breaking any of the Terms and Conditions here but actually you are. I bring to your attention rule 16.

16). Abusive or unique situations may arise that are not covered by our rules, but we reserve the right to deal with those situations in a manner appropriate to protect the integrity of our forums and community.

You really do need to do some reflection on why you are doing what you are doing. We are not your enemy and we would like to help you with your anger issues. We can if you will let us.

MaryEllen

[Guest Svenna]

This thread has really gotten messy...

It is stuff lime this that keeps me off the other forums. I have no NEED for so much negativity and bitterness...

Yuck...

Svenna

[Guest Ann Onymous]

Ann, you seem to have an agenda for sowing discord here. You continuously derail and go off topic on threads. Your belligerent and combative attitude does little to endear yourself to other members and particularly to the moderators here. Our moderators are compassionate, caring folks who do their best to give good solid advice to members in need yet you seem to imply that they're a bunch of bumbling idiots.

And once again I get accused of something that has not occurred. In each instance of a post I have made on this board, a reader would find that the response was directed at something IN THE POST. How a comment or discussion when it dealt with the comments in the thread is deemed to be 'derailing' or 'off topic' is mind-boggling. And it is precisely that action of NOT allowing discussions to proceed that gives rise to the very issue that was the original subject of this thread (see, it comes full-circle when proper context is considered, not unlike what Becky pointed out above).

You say that you're not breaking any of the Terms and Conditions here but actually you are. I bring to your attention rule 16.

16). Abusive or unique situations may arise that are not covered by our rules, but we reserve the right to deal with those situations in a manner appropriate to protect the integrity of our forums and community.

Which is not an indicator of a violation but rather leaves the nebulous definition of 'unique' to be such that a poster is given NO guidance as to what would be permitted, which AGAIN creates problems with discussions such as were posed by the creation of this very thread.

I found it quite particular that a reasoned post such as I made at 6:40AM sat in limbo for several hours while the one from 8:47AM was viewable almost immediately.

You really do need to do some reflection on why you are doing what you are doing. We are not your enemy and we would like to help you with your anger issues. We can if you will let us.

1) there are no anger issues such as you claim and

2) I definitely do not need your 'help' in that regard.

What posts with a tone such as I am receiving from mods suggest is that a member can post what they want provided it comports with a group-think mentality. And stifling any discussion that does not meet that standard simply contributes to the very issues posed by Johnny at the commencement of this thread...

But hey, y'all have made it ABUNDANTLY clear that you do not want ANYTHING but group-think, so have at it. Consider this my farewell and feel free to deregister the account. Those few with whom I have had off-board discussions have the email address and know what other board to find me on...

[MaryEllen]

I'm sorry you feel this way. We were trying to help you but I guess it's not wanted. I wish you well.

MaryEllen

[Guest KimberlyF]

With all due respect, Ann, it isn't your views that are difficult to accept, or that you have a viewpoint that is at the far end of the scale. The problem is your choice of words, which, deliberately or not, inflame rather than explain, and condescend rather than communicate. Use of the words "nonsense" to describe an opinion held by many, "political crap" and "tripe" demean those who hold views different from yours.

When you demonstrate, through your use of language, that you hold those with different opinions in low regard and disrespect whole segments of the membership population, then you will engender anger and resentment. I don't believe you chose those words haphazardly, being a learned person.

We reap what we sow, Ann. You can express those sentiments, as we are loath to censor here, but you are not inviting civil discourse and not making our job easier.

Carolyn Marie

Carolyn,

In a closer evaluation of what Ann said, there are those who do hold opinions that do not measure up to fair scrutiny. There are many who do not wish to hear any opinion that differs from theirs and there seem to be many who insist on representing those who have no desire to be represented or included in what those people claim to represent. I believe that this is what Ann is referring to. I support her choice of adjectives and do not believe that taking offense to such statements is a sound idea. In some narrow cases, what she says is absolutely true. Interpreting her statements too broadly is probably a mistake.

One of the problems with such discussions is that too many people are just waiting for the opportunity to be offended, rather than trying to keep the "I'm offended" button hidden away. We must always seek to look for any value in different viewpoints and this often involves simply smiling at potentially inflammatory comments and letting them slide by, while we seek out the real meat of the message. Once we have settled on a position and decided that this is it and that the expression of any contrary view threatens ours, we're in trouble. We'll never really progress or understand things any better, we're stuck in defense mode, we can't learn.

One of the things that my education has taught me is to try to look at all sides of any issue. Most only look for ways that any information supports their position. The truly wise person seeks out any and all information that might discredit their position. Only when you get good at this will you learn the weak points of your position. Learning the weak points helps you better understand your beliefs. Just because you passionately believe something doesn't make it right or even true. It only means you believe that and nothing more.

I agree with Ann in the context that these are issues that do need to be discussed. I agree with her that many factions cannot represent me. These are 2 statements that everyone would be wise to agree on for starters. How much further it goes is up to all of us.

Our true mission is to allow anyone and everyone to speak freely. Support and respect their right to say whatever they want to say. If they say things that might seem potentially inflammatory, gloss over it and smile. She never personally attacked anyone and I think that is a proper line to draw. Beyond that, resist "getting offended", as your own opinions are bound to offend someone else at some point.

A discussion is nothing more than an exchange of ideas and many of those ideas are bound to be in conflict at some point. Until they duct tape you to a chair, be a little tolerant.

Ann has lived the life that many of us seek to live for a long time and she has a ton of wisdom that can benefit us all. She has chosen to share that with us. When we've all lived as our true selves, been accepted as women and become successful over many decades, we may see things differently. I can accept that she might know more than most of us. (Maybe even more than me.... lol)

With much respect,

Becky

I think this is a great post. I have to add that there have been a few phrases here that I have chaffed at a bit, but since they come from mods it's best I not list them or like in the past I'll be 'diagnosed' as angry to minimize my POV

[Cyndee]

What else in life could have been done in place of typing here ?

My point is simply do, don't just say. Talk is cheap, actions speak louder. Live life and smile.

Love

C -

I just got back from helping my daughter and I saw this.

Sorry I feel I must clarify here, before I head out again. My comments were directed in response to Johnny's post about the "Community" and activism in general, not about one individual, and had followed Brenda's post. So to all the activists out there, the message is the same Do, don't just say here, and of course smile.

Love

C -

[JJ]

Where we are and who we are to a large extent determines the type of activism that suits us I think. If indeed any activism suits us at all. Some people at their core need a certain anonymity-I respect that.

If I were to take any stance where I am in regard to transgender or transsexual I believe it would only polarize the people around me. If I live my life in such a way that I represent transgendered people in a true and positive light and garner respect then one day it may be possible to be more proactive. I will discuss and advocate and explain if I am asked. I will not hide and I will not apologize for who I am. I think that is what I can do where I am.

Each of us is unique and has to come to their own conclusions and decision for their lives.

And ultimately that for me is what this thread was about.

The right to be yourself and make your own choices free of judgment and condemnation. If you reject me then do it because of my personality or character flaws. I can accept that. But not because of my gender identity or expression no matter what that may be.

I can promise each of you that will be the basis of my judgement-and we all do judge whether we act on it or not. Judging a person is not the same as sitting in judgment which I don't believe I have the right to do. I can judge opinions and ideas that way-but people?-No. Never. I hope.

Love to all and I hope that the feeling that were bruised by this thread heal. It was never meant to be divisive but as a chance for us to defend and express who we really are. I think we did that.

Love

Johnny

[Guest BeckyTG]

I believe that what just happened is truly unfortunate. On the one hand, it was put out that we should all be able to be who we are without constraint from others. Ann does this nicely. She has lived the life, she is true stealth and has the benefit of years of experience that we all should be able to benefit from.

Next, we were all invited to state what was on our minds. Ann did this, as well.

Unless there were other posts by her that were not put up, it didn't appear that she was really off base with her thinking, as far as her own experience and position goes.

One of the key issues that I see with this site is the lack of participation by many post-op women. I don't know the reason, but it seems that post-op women must have a different thought process as post-ops than is common among pre-ops. It would seem important to be mindful of this and understand that experiences or opinions may be expressed that might seem to us to be abrasive or to come out wrong, when in fact, they may be right and hitting us too close to home.

I am not at all active in "the community" and I find much of it to be offensive, myself. I have chosen to support us and promote better understanding of who we are through living my life as a normal person and demonstrating that trans people can be successful and influential in our society. I affect people's perception because I'm successful. I'm could also be considered a trans person by some.

Whatever any of us can do to attract and retain more post-op members should be done, for all of our sakes. They are where we want to go and it only makes sense that they can see things that we can't. They'll have ideas and beliefs that we don't and they may at times seem to conflict with ours. So, perhaps we should learn to get over it, as it were. Acting offended or worse yet, being offended, can blind us to the truth in some cases. It would behoove us all to learn to be more tolerant, particularly if we hope the rest of society is more tolerant of us.

I would like to invite Ann back. Despite how she may appear at times, she offers a lot of wisdom that we can use, in addition to being a true expert in a field where all of us could use more understanding.

I mean no disrespect to anyone, I'm only offering a viewpoint.

Becky

[MaryEllen]

Thank you for your viewpoint, Becky. I respect it. Ann presented viewpoints that we listened to. She was not willing to accept our viewpoints, however. It was her way or the highway. She chose the highway.

MaryEllen

[Guest Sheri-bi]

Ann O. writes:

"How someone else chooses to identify is certainly up to them. I have SIGNIFICANT issues when TPTB decide to co-opt the identity of post-operative men and women who have blended into the community without incident. The efforts at legislation are almost always incorporated with the claims that the 'community' needs to stand together. ..... from my point of view as a person in a post-corrected world, the current laws were absolutely sufficient to meet my needs. .... I did not then and do not now see a legitimate basis to make trans-anything a protected class. As such, efforts to do so come across to me as an attempt to legislate special rights....I don't recognize nor accept the transgender label and I certainly don't wear a transsexual label like a badge. I have no qualms whatsoever identifying as a lesbian, and it is in that realm that I choose to focus my efforts on those occasions where I get involved with litigation or legislative lobbying related to personal matters." End of quote.

There are two issues on this thread. One is the naming/belonging issue: what to call the group and who belongs to it. All groups struggle with this and it becomes emotionally charged. For instance, activitists from South and Central America invented the "umbrella" term Hispanics but changed it to Latino because some Brazilians were offended--Hispanic sounded too much like Spanish and these Brazilians were proud to be of Portuguese descent. Hispania is actually a term that includes both Spain and Portuguese, but no amount of discussion would change the minds of these Brazilians. Similarly, whether you think that transexuals should be or should not be included in the "umbrella" term transgender, or just hate all these terms, no amount of discussion will change entrenched opinions.

The second (and related) issue on this thread is the legal issue. This has real consequences for people on this website. Ann thinks that people who are "trans-anything" should not get special protections in housing, workplace, medical and other situations where discrimination is possible. She does however think that lobbying for special protections is OK for lesbians (and I assume gay men), and states that she has done so herself. For her, sexual orientation can be protected by law, but not gender identity. She has no problem with people choosing their own gender identity, but just not protecting it by law. This seems to be one of her problems with the TPTB (The Powers That Be) who are lobbbying for transgender legal rights.

If a group experiences discrimination, then denying a group special legal rights is really denying that group's existence and/or experience. Similarly, the American Psychological Association (APA) sees transgender identity as a disorder. It use to view gay and lesbian sexual orientation the same way, but that changed in 1973 after lobbying by the gay and lesbian community. Only the fundamentalist religious traditions still retain a pre-1973 view. The GLBT community has been lobbying to also declassify transgender identity as a disorder. In response, the Council of Representatives of the APA in 2008 adopted this position: THEREFORE BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT APA supports the passage of laws and policies protecting the rights, legal benefits, and privileges of people of all gender identities and expressions. It however did not declassify transgender identity as a disorder.

I wrote this post for those who read this thread and wonder what all the fuss is about. I hope it helped.

[Guest Robin Winter]

I believe that what just happened is truly unfortunate. On the one hand, it was put out that we should all be able to be who we are without constraint from others. Ann does this nicely. She has lived the life, she is true stealth and has the benefit of years of experience that we all should be able to benefit from.

Next, we were all invited to state what was on our minds. Ann did this, as well.

Unless there were other posts by her that were not put up, it didn't appear that she was really off base with her thinking, as far as her own experience and position goes.

One of the key issues that I see with this site is the lack of participation by many post-op women. I don't know the reason, but it seems that post-op women must have a different thought process as post-ops than is common among pre-ops. It would seem important to be mindful of this and understand that experiences or opinions may be expressed that might seem to us to be abrasive or to come out wrong, when in fact, they may be right and hitting us too close to home.

I am not at all active in "the community" and I find much of it to be offensive, myself. I have chosen to support us and promote better understanding of who we are through living my life as a normal person and demonstrating that trans people can be successful and influential in our society. I affect people's perception because I'm successful. I'm could also be considered a trans person by some.

Whatever any of us can do to attract and retain more post-op members should be done, for all of our sakes. They are where we want to go and it only makes sense that they can see things that we can't. They'll have ideas and beliefs that we don't and they may at times seem to conflict with ours. So, perhaps we should learn to get over it, as it were. Acting offended or worse yet, being offended, can blind us to the truth in some cases. It would behoove us all to learn to be more tolerant, particularly if we hope the rest of society is more tolerant of us.

I would like to invite Ann back. Despite how she may appear at times, she offers a lot of wisdom that we can use, in addition to being a true expert in a field where all of us could use more understanding.

I mean no disrespect to anyone, I'm only offering a viewpoint.

Becky

And your viewpoint is valuable, and honestly, so was Ann's. The problem was never her point of view, and that was clearly stated many times. The problem is how she presents her viewpoint, and often where she chooses to present it. She could have offered her views with a much more respectful tone and it would have been of far more benefit to everyone, but she chose to be coarse and condescending, and that isn't good for anyone. I agree that if she leaves the site for good, it will be a loss for everyone, she has made many important contributions, but if she can't be a little friendlier about it, I'm sorry to say she won't be missed by me.

[JJ]

I agree Shilo. Ann's loss is a shame because she had much to offer us.

We need to be able to reach an understanding of mutual respect with those who hold other viewpoints. But we are not served by hijacking topics or pejorative statements about parts of our community. Ann could have easily said that she disagreed with the different aspects of transgender labels and inclusiveness without using words like nonsense and crap-as Carolyn pointed out. Those words weren't used to inform anyone. O to present a viewpoint. They were used to insult. And demean. That is unacceptable. Ann is in a profession that uses words as tools. She chose to use those words to create dissension and prevent, not foster, communication.

I disagree with her viewpoint certainly, but we do need to be aware of it and understand it. When legislation comes up for our protection for instance, there may well be people with Ann's viewpoint testifying. I need to understand that and counter it with my own viewpoint if necessary. What we don't need is to devolve into a public squabble whenever it comes up. Sure it's a hot button issue-and one that affects us and will continue to affect us as we try to move forward to secure equal rights. We reinforce all the negative stereotypes when we can't even reach any kind of compromise or accord in our own community. No one respects or will long listen to a pack of squabbling kids.

If Ann's agenda was communication I would welcome her here regardless of her views. It has been plainly demonstrated that isn't her objective. In a site that states as plainly as we do that we are inclusive of all aspects of transgender what was her motive for being here?

We need post ops for sure. But we need people here to communicate and not to work out their anger and hostility against everyone else.

I hope more post ops do speak up -and perhaps they will if we do have discussions beyond the ones they no longer relate to in their lives. Like the politics of transgender activism as opposed to how to get HRT or presenting. Nothing wrong with the latter-they should be here. But if we want active post-ops we need to be relevant to them too. And some of that is going to be controversial. That's why attitude is crucial.

Johnny

[Guest ShannonA23]

I wonder how much of this is caused by our own internalized transphobia.

[Guest LottieZero]

I wonder how much of this is caused by our own internalized transphobia.

I sometimes wonder... I think there is quite a lot of self-hate in the trans community, and I think it's such a shame. If we can't even accept ourselves, it's difficult to get other people to accept us, IMO.

You can add me to the list of people who highly dislike the term "true transsexual", by the way. It just seems so childish, as if the person using it is saying "haha, I'm a true transsexual and you're just a stupid fake!", while making raspberries and waving a diagnosis letter in your face...

I'm also very much supportive of non-op trans people and other transgender people in general, although I'm on a waiting list for SRS just now and can't wait to get it. i just don't honestly see what right anyone else has to deny someone else's identity as whatever gender they feel they are, regardless of their body!

[Guest ShannonA23]

I wonder how much of this is caused by our own internalized transphobia.

I sometimes wonder... I think there is quite a lot of self-hate in the trans community, and I think it's such a shame. If we can't even accept ourselves, it's difficult to get other people to accept us, IMO.

I agree.

[Guest KimberlyF]

If a group experiences discrimination, then denying a group special legal rights is really denying that group's existence and/or experience. Similarly, the American Psychological Association (APA) sees transgender identity as a disorder. It use to view gay and lesbian sexual orientation the same way, but that changed in 1973 after lobbying by the gay and lesbian community. Only the fundamentalist religious traditions still retain a pre-1973 view. The GLBT community has been lobbying to also declassify transgender identity as a disorder. In response, the Council of Representatives of the APA in 2008 adopted this position: THEREFORE BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT APA supports the passage of laws and policies protecting the rights, legal benefits, and privileges of people of all gender identities and expressions. It however did not declassify transgender identity as a disorder.

I wrote this post for those who read this thread and wonder what all the fuss is about. I hope it helped.

It confused me a bit. The APA is now diagnosing people with TGID?

In the soon to be released DSM V, they mention Gender Dysphoria, which can be treated with HRT and surgery, and they mention 'Transvestic Disorder' in the same category as pedophiles and masochists. So, the APA has in diagnoses split the umbrella. I know if I supported the umbrella, I wouldn't be bringing this group of people into the mix to defend my cause. They're morons. I have known many CDs over the years who are not what this 'official' book will make them out to be. But I am also not like them and my medical treatment options shouldn't be the same.

I also don't support this gender dysphoria tag. I have body dysphoria if anything. But thats a whole nuther thread and honestly that tag doesn't bother me cause my diagnosis is endocrine disorder

I wonder how much of this is caused by our own internalized transphobia.

I sometimes wonder... I think there is quite a lot of self-hate in the trans community, and I think it's such a shame. If we can't even accept ourselves, it's difficult to get other people to accept us, IMO.

I agree.

I posted this on another thread, but one of the treatments for GD specifically mentioned in WPath is psychotherapy dealing with a lot of internal issues including 'alleviating internalized transphobia'. If you are open and honest in therapy make the most out of your time there it won't happen.

On the TS Roadmap homepage, self-acceptance is listed as the most important page. Great site, btw. I've mentioned that a lot too.

Sometimes it's hard to choose be a minority. But its harder to hate yourself and live a lie. Sometimes it's hard to be a minority within a minority. But the same rules apply. Neither might nor numbers make right.

[Carolyn Marie]

On the TS Roadmap homepage, self-acceptance is listed as the most important page. Great site, btw. I've mentioned that a lot too.

Sometimes it's hard to choose be a minority. But its harder to hate yourself and live a lie. Sometimes it's hard to be a minority within a minority. But the same rules apply. Neither might nor numbers make right.

On these points, Kimberly, I very much agree. Although I didn't, of course, choose to be trans, but that's a quibble.

HUGS

Carolyn Marie