Sucks being non-body dysmorphic on the EA.

[punkypink (imported)]

Is it because of your genitals that they don't like you? If so, it is not fair to blame them. I know you have an ideal of not caring about anything superficial, but are you sure you aren't guilty of that too? I'm sure there are LOTS of guys who would like to be with you, but I haven't heard you say (maybe I missed it in another thread) that you're pursuing that angle. You can't define yourself as a lesbian and then say that appearance doesn't matter, that is hypocritical. Obviously there is something to you attractive about females, and probably that includes female genitalia. Would you be sexually attracted to another transgender person with male genitalia? Would you be sexually attracted to a feminine guy? Would you be attracted to a big, hairy trucker? At some point I suspect you'd draw the line. And it is fair to. Attraction is not intellectual, so you can't call it discrimination. I don't want someone with a penis, and most lesbians don't either.

You can't spend your life thinking that other people should be attracted to you. There are plenty of people not attracted to me. That's their right. You're lucky because you're beautiful and interesting. Think of how difficult it is for all the ugly, uninteresting people out there. (I know that is a superficial statement, but just saying there are lots of people who have no hope of ever finding someone who finds them attractive) You have a huge advantage.

First of all, is being male gendered part of the contents of the book? It is. So why am I superficial for not being attracted to guys? That is a content-based, and not a cover-based preference.

So YES I can define myself as lesbian and say that appearance does not matter without it being hypocritical. I've said before, and I will say again, and I hope you make the trouble of reading and understanding this:

I will date any female gendered person, whether they are physically male or female, whether they have male genitals, female genitals, both, none, and everything inbetween. I will date them whether they are masculine, androygnous, or feminine in mannerism, in appearance. The only thing that matters is the inner gender.

As a matter of fact right now, I have met, and am smitten with this girl who is trans and is pre-op(she has male genitals in case that was not clear enough). She is similiarly not body dysmorphic, but feels pressured into having the op done because the lesbian community does not accept her either. I am actually very intensely attracted to her. I don't care what genitals she has, the only thing I care about her genitals are that they belong to her. That is all that matters when I want to please her.

I would not be interested in a male gendered(inside) person, even if he had female genitals(outside), or looked feminine(outside).

So you are very very wrong when you say that there is something to me

attractive about females, and probably that includes female genitalia

(dead wrong in fact).

Attraction is and can be intellectual, I am living breathing proof of that, and anyone who makes a criteria based on the superficial can seriously pat themselves on the back for being discriminating and hurting others. I hope their selfishness will come back and hit them on the head hard.

Now go ahead and call me a hypocrite for being a lesbian again. And you're just missing the point if you think I have a huge advantage. In this current world it is no advantage at all. It just makes me more of a target for fetishists, superficialists. How does that help? Urgh.

[punkypink (imported)]

How I react to and dwells on such things, may surely amplify, or minimize, the impact. I call it internal duck feathers and armor. Inner strength. Confidence, Self worth. Self assurance. Letting nothing anyone thinks about me, says to me, or says about me shall annoy or bother me nor take away from my quest of enjoying each moment of my life. Oddly enough, that "anyone" use to be me, myself, and I. I was my own worst enemy. Finally got rid of that dragon and put on my internal feathers and armor and life is much more like living with Alka Seltzer. Plop Plop, fizz fizz, OH what a relief it is. I don't live in LA LA LAND or complete denial that there is no pain, but I get along much better.

So before you claim another misintepretation on my part, how do you want this to be interpreted? Are you talking about yourself with no real relevancy to what I have pointed out, or are you trying to suggest I'm not happy because I lack inner strength confidence and self worth?

If I lack inner strength I'd be dead by now. Or in the closet, not transitioned.

If I lack confidence, I wouldn't have dared to challenge the notion of superficiality in the first place. I wouldn't have dared to challenge lesbians for their superficiality. I wouldn't have dared to say what I have said in this post.

If I lack self worth, I would be happy now, because I would have thought I was getting exactly what I deserve. I wouldn't be kicking up a fuss for being mistreated over a superficial reason.

Your focus is on enjoying your life. Well I am sorry, I prefer not to let injustice slide by. I want to do what is right, not what is easy, and if that means no happiness for me, so be it.

[punkypink (imported)]

Obligatory Far Side reference:

http://germaniscool.com/lab_images/sheep2.JPG

Wait! Wait! Listen to me! . . . We don't HAVE to be just sheep!

I haven't been satisfied acting like a sheep any time in my entire life. I really pissed off the nuns at catechism when I was six years old, just by asking questions.

Well, I am sure I've pissed off folks here by interrupting their blissful ignorance with a post that draws attention to ugly truths. Funny tho, our resident nun isn't one of them!

[Slammr (imported)]

Emily:

You perhaps give lesbians too much credit. Most, I imagine, like most gay guys, are more concerned with the external person than they are with the inner person. What genitals that person has is vitally important to them. Most gay guys wouldn't be interested in a female that had female genitals, even if that person presented as a male. They want him/her to have a dick; otherwise, they wouldn't be gay.

I'm sure, if you keep looking, you'll find someone, such as the ones described in a recent post. I think, however, you will continue to be frustrated if you need to be accepted by lesbians as a lesbian.

I'm fine with your not needing to change physically below the waist. I commend you for that, even. I hate to see you beat your head against the lesbian stonewall you've run up against. Most of them are looking for females with female genitals, and your wishing it were different isn't going to change that. We can only change ourselves, how we view the world; we can't change the world, as much as we would sometimes like to change it.

[janekane (imported)]

For me, the proper words to go with the acronym GID are "Gender Identity Diversity." If, for someone else, GID means Gender Indentity Disorder, that is okay with me -- except if my GID is defined by others as a disorder wihin me, and I am being coerced into accept a definition of GID which includes Disorder instead of Diversity.

A few years after my orchiectomy, it was noticed that I was in the realm of osteoporisis. This was attributed to my having been without testosterone for several years by then, only there were no baseline measurements prior to the orchiectomy to use to establish whether I had osteoporosis prior to the orchiectomy (some men of comparable age with normal testosterone levels do have osteoporosis).

A University Professor endrocrinoligist prescribed premarin and provera, which I took until Fosamax and, later, the generic version named Alendronate, appeared on the market. Premarin and Provera led to my becoming somewhat more curvy, all of which seemed, and still seems, reasonably right and proper for me.

During my saga of encounters with psychiatrists and psychologists and psychiatric hospitals, during 1986-1990, one psychologist asked me why I wanted to be so rare, I was rare enough without needing to have multiple personalities. My response was that I am neither more nor less rare than is anyone else, for I find that everyone is one-of-a-kind in forever, and, being neither more nor less rare than anyone else is, and being neither more nor less unique than anyone else is, I am as normal (that is, unique) as is anyone else.

I do not compare my life with the lives of other people. I do not decide how to behave based on the lives of other people. To the extent I am able, I choose my behaviors based on my best estimate of whether what I am doing is likely to be helpful to others (in which case, I continue) or hurtful to others (in which case, I change what I am doing with the goal of being more helpful and less hurtful.

I have doubts about the usefulness of the word, "hypocracy," as a useful descriptor of a person's belief system. That word bothers me because I find it assigns personal accountability for the results of circumstances over which a person had no actual effective control.

After many years of living in a society in which it is as though I have no right to exist, I do not blame or find fault with people who as-though treat me with disrespect, because the way they treat me is really not about me, but only about them.

If I am doing something which is hurting someone else, I want to be informed of the hurting so I can change what I am doing. If I am doing something which results in another person feeling hurt by what I am doing, I work at learning whether what I am doing is actually causing hurt or whether the person is experiencing hurt feelings because of some sort of misunderstanding.

While I am unwilling to correct people (where would I get the ability to correct another person?), I am willing to work away at correcting misunderstandings.

It is a week and a day since the prostheses were extracted. In less than a day, the discomfort they had begun to cause had largely vanished. I cannot now detect a trace of that discomfort. For now, removing them cured the discomfort they had begun to cause though what I am very sure was an intensifying foreign body reaction which was escalating until the prostheses removal.

So, in a few more weeks, when going swimming at the local YMCA will make sense to me, if some other person (man?) is uncomfortable because I appear rather empty there, that will not be my problem. I did what I could out of respect for such men as find their manhood fragile and fleeting. I am not interested in manhood nor womanhood. Personhood, in its actual diversity (and intrinsic magnificence?) is what interests me, and always has.

I have no clue as to how to judge people.

All I know, all I understand, is how to make an effort to say, "Yes, and..." to everyone I encounter.

-- Including myself.

Emily, "Yes, and..."

I am grateful for your writing here.

[punkypink (imported)]

Emily:

You perhaps give lesbians too much credit. Most, I imagine, like most gay guys, are more concerned with the external person than they are with the inner person. What genitals that person has is vitally important to them. Most gay guys wouldn't be interested in a female that had female genitals, even if that person presented as a male. They want him/her to have a dick; otherwise, they wouldn't be gay.

I'm sure, if you keep looking, you'll find someone, such as the ones described in a recent post. I think, however, you will continue to be frustrated if you need to be accepted by lesbians as a lesbian.

I'm fine with your not needing to change physically below the waist. I commend you for that, even. I hate to see you beat your head against the lesbian stonewall you've run up against. Most of them are looking for females with female genitals, and your wishing it were different isn't going to change that. We can only change ourselves, how we view the world; we can't change the world, as much as we would sometimes like to change it.

I prefer to look further. Much as I am sure you hate to see me beat my head against the "lesbian" stonewall, I am also sure Martin Luther King's loved ones hated to see him beat his head against the racial stonewall. How come he didn't change the way he viewed the world, and set out to change it? And what might have happened if he didn't? I don't want to sit and hope someone else will come along and fight for me, even though many days I am tempted to give up and do just that.

And fyi, being gay is still about liking a gender as the same gender. Has nothing to do with the physical traits. Otherwise we need new orientations or every little physical trait that we prefer/abhor on potential partners. Chinesesexuals? Footsexuals? Longhairsexuals? Bigboobsexuals? Tallsexuals? Makes no sense does it? Neither does basing being gay on external genitals.

[SplitDik (imported)]

As for self pity, I don't think having 99% of the lesbian world see me as a crossdressing man is "making up reasons" for self pity.

Actually it is. Any time you are sad about the way the world is, it is self pity. Anyone can come up with an endless list of things that they feel aren't ideal for them. For example, every day I have to start by writing down 10 times "I will not hurt myself today". Sometimes I still do hurt myself, although now mostly I don't. My entire life has been damaged by this irrational urge, and I may die or do something irreparable any day. However, I don't generally bemoan this. It's just the way it is.

There are people who are dying (in fact we all are, some are just blatantly aware of it), there are people who are confined to wheelchairs, there are people who are in almost inescapable postions of abuse or poverty or drug habits, etc. So, since you are a healthy, apparently comfortable-in-your-own-skin person, who is intelligent and interesting, you have more advantage than 99% of all people who have ever lived. Basically, having any complaints about the world in your position is not a useful emotion, and is self pity. Your big complaint is that "you don't have milestones to discuss" and that makes you feel like you're not as welcome in an Internet forum? Or that lesbians (who can have pretty messed up lives and troubles of their own) don't work the way you want them to? Heck lesbians don't work the way I want them to either (which is to invite me to their slumber parties).

I'm just saying that the issues you are describing are mostly minor, and for the one which is major (i.e. finding a life partner) you're complaining a

bout the way the world works which is simply unproductive.

So you are ve

ry very wrong when you say that there is something to me

attractive about females, and probably that includes female genitalia

(dead wrong in fact).

I was reacting to your comment about lesbians and your identification as lesbian. I think maybe the issue is your definition of lesbian isn't the common one. Two gay guys with feminine personalities aren't lesbians -- they're gay. Sensitive guys who seek feminity aren't lesbian -- they're straight. Seeking feminity while being feminine doesn't make you lesbian. In fact, the majority of lesbians are people with masculine personalities (which are, like guys, focused on getting access to female genitalia). I don't think lesbians are what you want.

Anyway, the reality is that most of the world does care about appearance to varying degrees, and the very definition of lesbian is commonly understood to be "does not like a penis". You might argue against that definition, but if you think about butch lesbians they often aren't very feminine in general appearance, emotion or demeanor, so the only reason that a lipstick lesbian would choose to be with them over a guy must be the genitals.

My advice to you is that you can never be happy worrying about non-idealarities in the way the world is. The world won't change. So your only chance of happiness is accepting things as they are, and adjust your life strategy accordingly. It sounds like you've done that -- at least found a potential person who might work out relationship-wise. So all is good.

[mynhii85 (imported)]

You couldn't say any better.

t

wo gay guys with feminine personalities aren't lesbians -- they're gay. Sensitive guys who seek feminity aren't lesbian -- they're straight. Seeking feminity while being feminine doesn't make you lesbian..

I don't plan to become a female. I'm a little feminine but not flamboyant. Apparently, I'm not feminine enough to feel like a female. Except that my desire to have a female-like genitalia is strong, everything else about me is pretty much like a soft man or a female-attitude man, but definitely not a female. It's strange, isn't it? Even I initially had difficult time accepting this.

Except this forum, perhaps transgender community may not accept me because there is nothing transgendered about me. I still feel very much of a male. I'm not a transsexual either because I don't fit the definition of it. I only want that "thing" down there to be changed, so I can live in peace with the small-but-significant female side in me. I don't want hormone replacement therapy; I don't want to dress women's clothes; I don't want to change my voice. Most importantly, if I am lucky enough to find a potential boyfriend, I will be honest with him about who I am and what I am from the very beginning. I know that many transsexual people are in such a great pain with their gender identity that they are in stealth. It is unfortunate that many of them are abused or even severely harmed by not telling who they used to be.

[punkypink (imported)]

I was reacting to your comment about lesbians and your identification as lesbian. I think maybe the issue is your definition of lesbian isn't the common one. Two gay guys with feminine personalities aren't lesbians -- they're gay. Sensitive guys who seek feminity aren't lesbian -- they're straight. Seeking feminity while being feminine doesn't make you lesbian. In fact, the majority of lesbians are people with masculine personalities (which are, like guys, focused on getting access to female genitalia). I don't think lesbians are what you want.

Anyway, the reality is that most of the world does care about appearance to varying degrees, and the very definition of lesbian is commonly understood to be "does not like a penis". You might argue against that definition, but if you think about butch lesbians they often aren't very feminine in general appearance, emotion or demeanor, so the only reason that a lipstick lesbian would choose to be with them over a guy must be the genitals.

My advice to you is that you can never be happy worrying about non-idealarities in the way the world is. The world won't change. So your only chance of happiness is accepting things as they are, and adjust your life strategy accordingly. It sounds like you've done that -- at least found a potential person who might work out relationship-wise. So all is good.

Once again, wrong. You're basing your definition of a person's gender identity on old, misguided ideas.

What makes a gay guy a guy? His base-est, most innate gender instinct.

If a physically male person is female gendered(i.e. in possession of a female gender instinct), that person is NOT a guy. Notice you've used feminine personalities. You have stated yourself, many lesbians have masculine personalities but are still female identified. What you are confusing, is personality, and gender. You fail to consider the evidence that there are masculine personality, female gendered, male sexed, trans women. You confuse 2 distinct makeups of a person as being the same thing.

And no, to make it VERY clear, having a female gender instinct does not automatically mean one has a female personality.

The problem with your analogy is that you're providing me with 2 feminine personality, but still male gendered gay men for consideration. Of course they aren't lesbian! The hint is in that they're male GENDERED. Take 2 trans women who are physically male, but female gendered, and regardless of their personality, they are still lesbian.

you fail to differentiate between the 2 distinct areas of psychology, and assume that personality and gender instinct are the same. They aren't, because if they were, how can there be cisgendered men who are feminine, and cisgendered women who are masculine? By your arguement, these cisgendered individuals are all trans. They aren't, even though their personalities are at congruent odds to their physical sex and gender identity.

What you really need to do is to take the trouble to think deeper, and seperate your misunderstanding of personality and gender as being the 2 distinct factors they actually are.

As for your definition of lesbians, once again you fall into the fallacy of attributing personality with orientation.Your suggestion that the main reason lesbians are attracted to women is because they have a masculine personality, or that lipstick lesbians are attracted to masculine butches thus making genitals the sole decisive criteria making them lesbian is the one that does true disservice to lesbians, as well as ignoring the inconvenient truth that lesbians are a far more diverse in personality bunch than you give them credit for. But perhaps I shouldn't be surprised! You're not the only straight man who seem to think lesbians are all nicely paired up into butch-femme pairs.

News for you buddy, the lesbian community has actually moved past the once common misconception that butch lesbians are attracted to femme lesbians. Today's lesbian community is actually full of butch-butch, femme-femme pairings, as well as lesbians who're not strongly butch or femme in appearance. Your attempt to explain lesbianism as "feminity attracted to masculinity with consideration to genitals is both laughably shallow, and patently ignorant of the current social circumstances that exist within the lesbian community. Simple generalisations like that simply show you fail to understand why people are who they are, fail to understand what makes lesbians lesbians, fail to take into account the wider social history and influence of the gay community's struggle for acceptance, and the consequent current prejudiced and ignorant beliefs that arose out of a combination of all these diverse factors.

So, I am pretty sure that lesbians are what I want actually, thank you for presuming to know me better than I do. And thanks for taking the trouble to presenting a shallow comprehension of a demopgrahic group which I believe I have given a far deeper degree of thought, that I actually belong to.

I will also point to your fallacy in assuming the common understanding or definition of lesbian, to be right solely on the basis that it is the current, prevailing, common belief. Once upon a time, the current, common and prevailing belief was that being gay was wrong(or a mental illness). Once upon a time it was the current common and prevailing belief that women weren't good enough to vote, that black people's destinies were to be slaves, that the earth was flat and in the middle of the universe.

You're telling me my definition of lesbians isn't the common one? So what? Doesn't make it the right one if you care to give it the same degree of depth of thought as I do. And the world doesn't change? I believe I have just provided loads of examples that it does. The biggest fallacy is one that say the world doesn't change, because the world is changing all the time.

[punkypink (imported)]

You couldn't say any better.

.

I don't plan to become a female. I'm a little feminine but not flamboyant. Apparently, I'm not feminine enough to feel like a female. Except that my desire to have a female-like genitalia is strong, everything else about me is pretty much like a soft man or a female-attitude man, but definitely not a female. It's strange, isn't it? Even I initially had difficult time accepting this.

Except this forum, perhaps transgender community may not accept me because there is nothing transgendered about me. I still feel very much of a male. I'm not a transsexual either because I don't fit the definition of it. I only want that "thing" down there to be changed, so I can live in peace with the small-but-significant female side in me. I don't want hormone replacement therapy; I don't want to dress women's clothes; I don't want to change my voice. Most importantly, if I am lucky enough to find a potential boyfriend, I won't be honest with him about who I am and what I am from the very beginning. I know that many transsexual people are in such a great pain with their gender identity that they are in stealth. It is unfortunate that many of them are abused or even severely harmed by not telling who they used to be.

Actually, he couldn't have said it worse.

You don't seem to get that, I am saying the outside should not matter. If you are a man who wishes to have a vagina, you're still a man whatever you want between your

legs. Splitdik makes a critical error in that

he assumes personality and gender instinct are the same things. they aren't. It is why someone can be feminine and still be a man, independent of their physical sex.

Take you as an example.

The way I understand it, you are male gendered, androygnous or slightly feminine personality, physical male. You want to have female genitals. In splitdik's eyes because he confuses personality and the gender instinct and discards one function, and because he does not consider personality to be the deciding factor in a person's gender, he is forced to conclude it must be the body that decides it. But it isn't. It isn't the body, NOR the personality that decides who you are. It is your gender instinct. And since your gender instinct is that of a man, what you do to your body, whether you choose to have a penis or a vagina, whether you are feminine in personality or masculine in personality does not change the fact that you are a man, and that you deserve, and should be seen as a man by everyone.

You also need to understand why you don't identify as being female gendered. It has nothing to do with your personality. There are men who are far more feminine in personality than you, who are securely male gender-identified. There are women who are far less feminine in personality than you, who are more securely female gender-identified. What does this say about you? It says that your personality has no bearing at all on why you still feel like a man. It is not "not feeling feminine enough" that makes you a man. It is your gender instinct, which I have already illustrated clearly with the existance of real world evidence, is independent of personality. You are in danger of being mislead by splitdik's shortsighted view which fails to recognise gender instinct as a far more defining component of our most basic psychological make up than having a feminine or masculine personality.

With the way he is putting forth the physical sex as the deciding factor for a person's body, whether we base the criteria for physical sex on chromosomes or on what genitals one has, is equally demeaning and short-sightedly superficial, and ultimately wrong, regardless of what society currently believes. If anything history has shown, it is that social concensus just confirms that most people are either idiots, or lack the mental capability to dig just a bit deeper to the truth, and will happily accept a convenient "truth" that everyone else accepts to be true without any introspection at all.