I guess it is really the choice of the individual, whether to keep it or get it converted, so maybe we should not tell another person what to do with her body. But as for my own personal preferences, I agree with Yoli, I definitely prefer the company of a PRE-op or a non-op transsexual, because the woman with that "something extra" is just fun to be with.

transward (imported) wrote: Mon Mar 09, 2009 12:50 am I have very strong opinions about this subject. I have run trans support groups for a number of years, have know hundreds (literally) of people who have had SRS, and even more who have chosen not to for various reasons, served on a board with Marcie Bowers before she went off to Trinidad to become the new face of SRS surgeons. Myself, I am non op mostly for financial reasons. If I had the $20,000 to 30,000 it would cost for SRS (unlikely as I run a small nonprofit at around the poverty line) I would spend it for facial plastic surgery which would affect my transition much more than the surgical creation of a vagina, which might never get used.

But I believe there is far too much emphasis on SRS as THE cure for transsexuality. This is reinforced by the media which always takes their transsexual coverage into surgery for SRS. I have seen someone whose wife has caught him wearing women's panties show up at a support meeting for the first time and within ten minutes the peer pressure group is giving him advice on hormones and SRS surgeons. And I have known a number of women who have had the surgery and have greatly regretted it. Not the transition, but the surgery. Remember, about a quarter of women have had SRS lose all ability to have an orgasm, and before about twenty years ago the percentage was vastly greater. And if you have a romantic relationship before the surgery, your partner may well not stay around after. Those who have had a rewarding sexual life before often find it much less rewarding after.

There is a small, very vocal and quite annoying group of self described "real transsexuals," who declare that if you don't hate your genitals and want to cut them off as soon as possible, you are not a real woman, you are "just" a transvestite, or "just" a cross dresser, "not, of course that there is anything wrong with that." Which I believe as much as the "I'm not a racist, some of my best friends are..."

None of this should discourage those who feel that they must be totally congruent with their self image. If that is the case, go for it, Girl. But realize that you can also have a rewarding life as a woman without SRS.

Transward

I just wanted to comment that I agree with everything you have written. I have been living as a woman for five years now and have not had SRS and I am not on hormones. I just can't afford it, I am disabled and on Social Security. People forget that for thousands of years transsexuals got by with simply taking on the roles of women. There was no such thing as hormones or SRS. The real transition is transitioning one's life to live as a woman. This is where you have to deal with the issues. No one really knows what's under my skirt.

Elizabeth

There are a number of very bad reasons to have sex reassignment surgery. One of the most insidious is homophobia. I must make it clear that I am not against SRS. For many it is a life saving event and they are ecstatic at their life after. But there is a substantial minority for whom surgery does not lead to a better life, and these are not all due to bad surgical outcomes. Often it is because they have gone into SRS for all the wrong reasons. There is a belief in our culture that transsexuality is a condition for which THE cure is surgery, and trans support groups can reinforce that belief, often acting as cheerleaders as people progress from therapy to hormones to name changes to transitioning to SRS, without stopping to question the final outcome, or the costs along the way.

And this is compounded for trans people who grew up in cultures or religions that are strongly homophobic. If you desired men, then to be non op would in some essential way be homosexual. This is difficult enough to deal with in your immediate family, it is vastly more so when you have internalized it yourself. If you have surgery not because that is what you want but because you want not to be homosexual you are setting yourself up for disappointment post op. This smacks a bit too much of the ayatollahs in Iran where the government will pay 50% of the cost of SRS, but will hang homosexuals. (What a motivation to have SRS, literally SRS or death.) http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/7259057.stm

Transward

Hi transward,

I know that SRS is not the right thing for all transgendered people. You must do what you feel is right for you and take your transition as far as what you feel comfortable with doing, but from the definitions that I'm aware of a transsexual is someone, either MTF or FTM, that is actively in the pursuit of changing one's body to match the gender they feel they are in their hearts and minds; therefore if you are not on hormones or if you do not desire SRS or FFS you are transgendered, not a transsexual.

For me, the SRS procedure brought about a feeling of total completeness. For the first time in my life everything finally matched. Inside and out. At least for me, I felt is was necessary to complete my journey or transition into womanhood.

EricaAnn (imported) wrote: Mon Mar 23, 2009 5:20 pm Hi transward,

I know that SRS is not the right thing for all transgendered people. You must do what you feel is right for you and take your transition as far as what you feel comfortable with doing, but from the definitions that I'm aware of a transsexual is someone, either MTF or FTM, that is actively in the pursuit of changing one's body to match the gender they feel they are in their hearts and minds; therefore if you are not on hormones or if you do not desire SRS or FFS you are transgendered, not a transsexual.

For me, the SRS procedure brought about a feeling of total completeness. For the first time in my life everything finally matched. Inside and out. At least for me, I felt is was necessary to complete my journey or transition into womanhood.

I'm sorry, but I am not going to be able to agree with this. This is the definition according to the Diagnostics Service Manual also known as DSM-IV. It is written by the American Psychiatric Association and is used by most insurance companies. There is no mention of hormones or surgery in the definition. Many transexuals who have had GRS believe they are the only "true transsexuals" because they went all the way. However this is not the case. It's enough to just believe one is female.

http://www.mhsanctuary.com/gender/dsm.htm

There are two components of Gender Identity Disorder, both of which must be present to make the diagnosis. Thee must be evidence of a strong and persistent gross-gender identification, which is the desire to be, or the insistence that one is of the other sex (Criteria A). This cross-gender identification must not merely be a desire for any perceived cultural advantages of being the other sex. there must also be evidence of persistent discomfort about one’s assigned sex or a sense of inappropriateness in the gender role of that sex (Criteria B). The diagnosis is not made if the individual has a concurrent physical intersex condition (e.g., androgen insensitivity syndrome or congenital adrenal hyperplasia) (Criteria C). To make the diagnosis, there must be evidence of clinically significant distress or impairment in social, occupational, or other important areas of functioning (Criteria D).

There are many people who can not or do not transition for a whole variety of reasons. This does not mean they are not transsexuals.

Elizabeth

Elizabeth (imported) wrote: Tue Mar 24, 2009 1:13 am I'm sorry, but I am not going to be able to agree with this. This is the definition according to the Diagnostics Service Manual also known as DSM-IV. It is written by the American Psychiatric Association and is used by most insurance companies. There is no mention of hormones or surgery in the definition. Many transexuals who have had GRS believe they are the only "true transsexuals" because they went all the way. However this is not the case. It's enough to just believe one is female.

http://www.mhsanctuary.com/gender/dsm.htm

There are many people who can not or do not transition for a whole variety of reasons. This does not mean they are not transsexuals.

Elizabeth

Dear Elizabeth,

You are most entitled to your beliefs and your feelings on this matter, through I do not share them.

It's not having had the surgery that made me a transsexual, it's the fact that I was doing something to change my physical appearance into a more feminine presentation. Before I began this physically transformation I just considered myself as being transgendered.

By the way, if you don't mind me asking, where are you at in your transition process? Are you part time or full time?

jockey_elance (imported) wrote: Thu Mar 05, 2009 9:40 pm I know that most transgender people don't like their genitals and want to have a sex change operation, but some can't because of money or whatever reason. But do any guy--girl transgenders like their equiptment enough to keep it? (or just be castrated) I think a girl with guy parts would be kind of exciting.

I would be one such transgender. I keep my genitals because I believe that gender is psychological, and whatever yr physical sex, yr gender is what makes you who you are. Afterall if a book should not be judged by its cover, why should who I am be judged by what is between my legs? My stand is against the society bias on the physical rather than viewing people as who they are internally. Towards that end I will refuse SRS as a stand to show people that I am who I am because of my mind, not my genitals. I have not been on any hormones or had any surgery done, and I am living socially as a female full time for 4 years now.

That said, I would want a penectomy. I am completely comfortable being a girl who has male genitals, and if I wish them altered it would not be for any sort of reason to do with being transgendered. If I was born with girl bits I'd want my clit cut off too so I believe my wanting a penectomy is independent of my transgenderism. I completely have no interest in having my testes removed as well. In any case my genitals are not stopping me from living as or showing the world who I am inside, and I don't have confidence and self-esteem issues attached to having the "wrong" genitals.

In fact I believe if more transsexuals could be enlightened to see the disassociation of their gender from their genitals, their quality of life would be improved, and for little or no cost too! Whether they wish SRS or not then becomes the proverbial icing on the cake, rather than a form of psychological prozac that it seems to be for so many fellow transsexuals at the moment. It's a sad state of affairs I feel, for the mind is such a powerful weapon if we could use it like I have. But I ramble on, at the expense of being accused of being judgemental or self-righteous. What I've said however, definately stands, even if its not always possible in each and every case.

EricaAnn (imported) wrote: Tue Mar 24, 2009 7:54 am Dear Elizabeth,

You are most entitled to your beliefs and your feelings on this matter, through I do not share them.

It's not having had the surgery that made me a transsexual, it's the fact that I was doing something to change my physical appearance into a more feminine presentation. Before I began this physically transformation I just considered myself as being transgendered.

By the way, if you don't mind me asking, where are you at in your transition process? Are you part time or full time?

It would appear that the classification of any one person as a transsexual is simply the existance of a male gender in a female body, or a female gender in a male body. Humans are born with several constituent aspects, gender being one, physical sex being the other. I genuinely cannot see how any one person whose gender and physical sex do not match can be called a non-transsexual, whether they've begun transition or not. The term transgender cannot be applied to them because it is too broad, and most actual transgenders like crossdressers and transvestites are primarily cisgendered people with secondary transgendered personas or the likes.

It is a fallacy, and shallow might I add, to base the classification of "transsexual" based on changing external looks, and the sort of segregation amongst transsexuals it generates is harmful. Worse still the sort of confusion it generates for any pre-transition transsexual who is just beginning to understand themself only unnecessarily lengthens the pain they have to endure living as someone they are not, especially when they begin to wear the clothes of their gender and mistakenly assume they are crossdressers and have to struggle with the guilt, especially of "I am like this/I do this because I am a sexual deviant"(although not all crossdressers are sexual deviants, however amongst many transsexuals who begin to look for the truth to who they are, this is a common train of thought) when in truth they are doing what they do because it is who they are inside. While I am not making a judgement on the people who DO do it for sexual pleasure, I wish to point out the fact that for someone who is not doing it for erotic reasons, the mistaken assumption that they are, CAN be psychologically quite damaging!

I understand that many transsexuals who've had lots of work done to alter their external appearances might feel that they've "earned" the right to be called a transsexual, but unfortunately, that is simply not true, transsexual is not some "honor badge" to be earned, and there shouldn't be some sort of virtual hierachy that ultimately just ends up promoting a certain "snob attitude" amongst transsexuals at various stages of transition. As for transgender, that term is such a wide umbrella term that covers transvestites and crossdressers that truth be told, classing a pre-transition transsexual as a transgender only adds to the confusion out there, making it a disinformation minefield for someone who genuinely wishes to find out if they're transgendered or transsexual.

In any case it is so much clearer to actually refer to pre or non-transition transsexuals as..... you guessed it! pre or non-transition transsexuals. If you've transitioned, then u'd be a post-transition ts. transitioning? transitioning ts. same goes for hormones and surgery since it is possible to transition without either. they certainly are a part of transition, but they aren't prerequisites. For example, if I told u i was post-transition ts, and u assumed that i've had surgery or had hormones u'd be wrong, so its safe to say that we make it as clear as possible and do not use transition statuses loosely to mean hormonial or surgical statuses. There, its not so difficult to understand is it?

Btw EricAnn I mean no disrespect. About your little tagline "Female both in Mind and Body". That is great and certainly something that I am happy for you. However, I am just wondering, is being female in body really that important? I was always taught and under the impression that who a person is inside is what really counts. I mean, you could have a perspective that I am not seeing, which is why I ask. =)

wannabefemale (imported) wrote: Sun Mar 08, 2009 5:09 am don't u feel the needing of having a vagina?

No. I have a much bigger and more significant female organ: A female brain.

It's all superficial. Having a vagina doesn't make me a woman, since there are transguys with vaginas. I prefer to base people on their genders, not their physical sex. If they're female gendered then they're girls, if they're male-gendered then they're guys. Why bother with genital-based discrimination? It's not like genitals are gender-indicative anyway. I find it difficult to comprehend why it seems so hard to adopt a non-superficial outlook with regards to who people are. As Yoda told Luke: "You must unlearn what you have learned". We saw Luke judging Yoda by his external appearance and we smiled knowingly to ourselves and yet, we do the same with regards to the gender-identity of others! Doesn't something seem wrong with that?

Nearly ten years ago, a therapist first suggested to me that I was transsexual. I did not deny it, but said I was too old to transition. The truth is, back then I could not handle the idea of transitioning. It seemed like too huge a step, whether or not I ever had GRS. I also told him I was too old. Times change.

When I started gender therapy at the University of Minnesota Program in Human Sexuality, ranked as one of the top or the top programs in the country, I was diagnosed with Gender Identity Disorder (GID) after two visits. I told my therapist on the first visit that I thought I was probably asexual (i.e., eunuch) in gender identity. I absolutely knew I did not feel male. She had no problem with this as a type of GID. [She did not choose to use Gender Identity Disorder Not Otherwise Specified.] The U of M is at the forefront of much of the thinking and study on GID and transgender persons. Their view point is that gender is not bipolar, either masculine or feminine, but a continuum. It was only after a month or so in the program, with time to think and explore, that I began identifying as androgynous. Shortly after that, I was saying I had leanings toward the feminine end of the continuum. It was at least two months after I started the program before I had the courage to state that I thought I was transsexual. I never felt pushed toward one identity or another by my therapist. She urged a very cautious approach before making decisions on treatments that have, after a time, irreversible effects.

My U of M therapist made a very interesting point that is pertinent to this thread. They were continuing to learn a lot about the variety of gender identities and expressions from their clients.

DSM-IV was published in 1994 and, although it is still used for diagnostic purposes, there has been a significant change in how Gender Identity is viewed since then. A new version will be released in 2012. I think a preliminary draft will be available later this year. There is a lot of controversy about how GID will be addressed in the new release.

Having a diagnosis of GID does not, in itself indicate that one is transsexual. Even if you adhere to the stricter diagnostic criteria in DSM-IV rather than the U of M interpretation, there is still room for variation in gender identity and expression. A lot of this is semantics, in my view, and of little interest outside of therapy and an examination of medical treatment options.

I don't have time to investigate this further, but there is a tendency to label those who wish to live as the gender 'opposite' that of their birth as 'transgenderists' if they have no desire for surgery. Transgenderists may or may not seek hormonal treatment.

Transsexuals, on the other hand, seek to live as the gender 'opposite' to that of their birth, but unlike transgenderists they desire hormonal treatment and GRS to bring their minds and bodies into alignment.

Having these desires does not mean they can be attained. Health, financial and other issues may make it impossible for hormone treatment and surgery. A transsexual who cannot afford hormones and surgery is still a transsexual.

There is a lot of argument about whether a 'non-op' transsexual, someone who never desires surgery (not because of health or financial problems), should be considered a transsexual at all. When I read some of these arguments, I sensed a lot of politics behind them.

It seems to me there is too much emphasis on precise labels for people. Gender Identity can be fluid, for instance, and change over the course of one's life. My own experience leads me to believe it is more fluid for some than others.

Labels are important for justifying treatment to insurers. All of my estrogen is covered by my health insurance policy through my employer. A label of transsexual (or at least an interpretation of GID as meaning transsexual) is also important in those few situations where insurance covers GRS.

Last November, I spoke to a number of students at my undergraduate college. It's been several decades since I graduated. . I was invited not so much because I am transsexual, but because I am also transgender. Transsexuality is simply one expression of a transgender identity. There were several students who identified as transgender and definitely not transsexual. I had a lot of fun speaking with them and hearing what their lives were like.