Josh Goodman (imported) wrote: Fri Dec 16, 2011 2:58 pm I'm sorry if that sounds harsh, but the kid has a penis and he has balls. What does that make him? A boy.

You have quite a bit to learn about transgendered people, as well as Eunuchs, don't confuse what is between the legs to what is between the ears. I would suggest you learn the difference between the two. She is female, it does not matter what is between the legs, that is just plumbing and can be corrected.

There are many here on the archive that are in fact transgendered some pre op some post op, but one thing is clear, if you want to be a member here in good standing you might want to learn more before you speak out.

River

I am going to address both Josh and Punky here, and neither one of you are going to like it.

First off, Josh, you obviously have NO clue about transgender children, or anything related to their care - whether it be physical, psychiatric, or metal health care. My advice to you is to shut up now before you make even bigger fool of yourself. Your comments are out of line, and Punky was nearly right in coming after you in the open forum. Children of this age can't get GRS anywhere from anyone. This child isn't pretending to be a girl. Did you even read the article where it refers to being born a girl with a birth defect? Find me a surgeon out there who does GRS on children's genitals. Go on? Where is he/she located? Share the link.

Me, I'm an Administrator. I've been made the "bad cop" since 1999, so there.

Punky, seriously, girl, you need to reduce your hostility level a bit.

Yes, you are right in that this child not pretending to be a girl.

But if it hadn't been for your first comeback egging him on, the other wouldn't have been needed. It's a psychological fact that humans are attracted to what they visually perceive to be "pretty" or to them, in a word, pleasing. Get over it. Life isn't fair, and frankly, I'm tired of nearly every one of your posts being about how bad things are, and everything being a personal insult to you.

That said, on with the show...

Josh Goodman (imported) wrote: Fri Dec 16, 2011 2:13 pm You'll get the very best treatment you can today because you have the problem today. Just ask yourself this question. If you tried to schedule an appointment with your doctor and were told, "The doctor can't see you today, he's busy so you'll have to wait. But don't worry. The longer you wait the better the treatment will be." how would you react?

If I had it within my power, which I don't, I'd tell Nicole Maines "If you really want to be a girl we'll take you in to surgery tomorrow and make the change. If you don't want the operation, that's fine. But if you deside to keep your penis it's time to stop pretending to be a girl."

Well I think you've already got some strong responses, but I have to chime in.

Actually for some procedures that are not urgent people do wait. I for example do this regarding laser eye surgery. I could certainly benefit from laser eye surgery but I am also a high-tech engineer and know how much things improve every year. I also know people who have recently had laser eye surgery and aren't satisfied with the results. So I plan to wait another 3 to 5 years -- by then the computers will be able to better scan, be more precise, be faster, have less issues, etc. Some technologies really do improve.

Transgender treatment often has a more urgent time-table, especially if you're trying to hold off puberty. However, there are also a lot of improvements going on in the field. I remember in the 70s and 80s where I had some transgender friends and their surgeries were really experimental and frankly didn't work well at all. For example, one ended up without the ability to insert anything in their vagina because it was too closed up and too much scar tissue. Another ended up with lots of hair growing inside the vagina. Basically it was experimental stuff. The situation is certainly better now, but still you have to understand that the doctors, techniques, and aftercare continue to improve constantly.

Also, surgeries have risks and you have to be psychologically prepared for that. Sometimes it takes time to get prepared.

Lastly, the best doctors are often more expensive and transgendered operations aren't very well covered by insurance so it can be worth waiting in order to save for a better treatment option.

Paolo wrote: Fri Dec 16, 2011 4:59 pm But if it hadn't been for your first comeback egging him on, the other wouldn't have been needed. It's a psychological fact that humans are attracted to what they visually perceive to be "pretty" or to them, in a word, pleasing. Get over it. Life isn't fair, and frankly, I'm tired of nearly every one of your posts being about how bad things are, and everything being a personal insult to you.

That said, on with the show...

Mmm I think you misunderstand. It wasn't a comeback. It was a genuine comment on the idea that a person's gender identity's validity is based on their physical appearances. It wasn't even about what was between her legs, but about her being pretty. I didn't take that as a personal insult, and I have no reason to. Without wanting to sound egoistic, if we're talking about beauty as a validity of gender, I have nothing to worry about.

But I'd point out how unfair his comments are to MANY other trans members of the EA who may not be outwardly beautiful. Does that make THEM any less valid in their identified gender? My first post in here was actually a very level question about how right it is to say a person's gender's validity is based on the pleasantness of their face alone.

MOST importantly however, and this is where you have made a major misunderstanding, is that Josh's 2nd bit about the genitals was in fact, in response to Cainanite's post, NOT mine. See the bit he put in " " ?

"

Cainanite (imported) wrote: Thu Dec 15, 2011 10:31 pm As time goes on, techniques

Josh Goodman (imported) wrote: Fri Dec 16, 2011 2:13 pm for sexual re-assignment get better and better.

" Maybe yes and maybe no. But that's besides the point. If you require medical treatment you're not going to say, I'll just put if off for 5, 6, or maybe 7 years just to give the doctors time to get their act together. You'll get the very best treatment you can today because you have the problem today. Just ask yourself this question. If you tried to schedule an appointment with your doctor and were told, "The doctor can't see you today, he's busy so you'll have to wait. But don't worry. The longer you wait the better the treatment will be." how would you react?

If I had it within my power, which I don't, I'd tell Nicole Maines "If you really want to be a girl we'll take you in to surgery tomorrow and make the change. If you don't want the operation, that's fine. But if you deside to ke

ep your penis it's time to stop pretending to be a girl."

Cainanite (imported) wrote: Thu Dec 15, 2011 10:31 pm That is explained in the article quite nicely. As time goes on, techniques for sexual re-assignment get better and better. She's had a taste of male puberty...

I did NOTHING to egg him on to make his comment about how having a penis is pretending to be a girl, because that was in response to Cainanite's post, not mine. You might want to re-read the entire thread Paolo my good sir, I can't take blame that isn't mine to begin with =)

By the way if life isn't fair and we should just lie down and accept it, we wouldn't have half the gay rights, racial rights, women's rights and all the improvements in society. Life isn't fair. Thats why someone has to keep pointing it out so we don't take that injustice for granted and accept it.

Hey Punky: on this one I gotta agree with Paolo. i have been around here for 4 years now, and your posts lately seem a bit harsh. Yes people need to be called out sometime, but not with so much anger. I hope things are going well for you and maybe its just the stress of things lately, I know I am wound up really tight lately. I am living in Swiss Cottage so if you ever need to talk and or just grab a coffee I am around.

Dave

And apparently, you don't get it either.

Then again, I guess the dozens of emails and PM's I've had - well, those members don't seem to get it either.

And just so you know, I studied these responses for a good half hour before I wrote a thing.

No, as you say, it isn't fair.

LIFE isn't fair.

Get a helmet.

Okay, Punky and I have had our disagreements before but on this thread I'm on her side -- the guy she was responding to was SO out of touch, which is especially surprising considering he is on a eunuch-oriented web site, that he needed to be confronted and even provoked.

I find there are two types of disagreements on these web forums. There are sparring discussions like Punky and I have, where at the end of the day I still enjoy her being here and value her contributions and get a (nice) laugh out of her feisty irritability. Then there are other disagreements where the person is really off-base and hurtful or simply doesn't fit with the culture of the forum.

Especially note that Punky is the most qualified out of everyone who's participated on this thread to speak on this issue how choosing to or to not undergo SRS plays into a transgendered persons' life. Go Punky!

Riverwind (imported) wrote: Fri Dec 16, 2011 4:33 pm You have quite a bit to learn about transgendered people, as well as Eunuchs, don't confuse what is between the legs to what is between the ears. I would suggest you learn the difference between the two. She is female, it does not matter what is between the legs, that is just plumbing and can be corrected.

There are many here on the archive that are in fact transgendered some pre op some post op, but one thing is clear, if you want to be a member here in good standing you might want to learn more before you speak out.

River

It pains me, but I have to point out that there is a small, but very vocal (and quite annoying) group of self described "Harry Benjamin Transsexuals," (http://www.shb-info.org/hbs.html , http://transboutique.com/article.php?st ... 3172536567), who (aside from a few quibbles about the age of the child) agree precisely with Josh Goodman. They are very adamant that unless you have had SRS, you are a "man in a dress." Aside from believing that a special exemption applies to them because of their "birth defect," they sound a lot like Focus of the Family. While running support groups for trans folk of all sorts, from long time post ops to guys secretly wearing women's panties, I had to throw a few of them out because of their comments about the evil perversions of "penis people" (their term, not mine ["I know this because I used to be a man"]), and how they shouldn't have to associate with cross dressers, "not that there is anything wrong with cross-dressers," said with a brittle smile.

Caith721 (imported) wrote: Fri Dec 16, 2011 3:35 pm Wrong. What's between her ears, in her m

Paolo wrote: Fri Dec 16, 2011 4:59 pm ind, makes her a girl. It's what she is, and what she lives, despite the birth defect between her legs.

This child isn't pretending to be a girl. Did you even read the article where it refers to being born a girl with

a birth defect? Find me a surgeon out there who does GRS on children's genitals. Go on? Where is he/she located?

(the article does not mention birth defects, by the way)

This bothers me. Everyone is entitled to their own backstory, a narrative of who we are and how and why we are that way. The "transsexuality as birth defect" is a popular analagy for many trans folk. But it is far from universal. A growing number of trans folk are saying that there is nothing wrong with them. They live and function as women, what they do in bed is none of your business, thank you.

A mirror image of this question is women with Congenital adrenal hyperplasia which causes them to be born with enlarged clitorises. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Congenital ... yperplasia

but in baby girls it can enlarge the clitoris so that it resembles a penis. The girls sometimes have surgery during infancy to correct their physical appearance, although this practice is highly controversial, and they can receive hormone therapy to correct the imbalance of androgen. Intersex activists are protesting that it is unfair to deprive infants of sensation without their consent. As one girl affected said, "I dont have any questions about my gender. I've got a big clit. So what. Get over it. I don't need it chopped off to be a woman. I am a woman." You are free to use the analogy of birth defect to describe your feelings, but it is unfair to assign it to another, particularly one so young without their consent.

Interestingly this very issue was recently played out in the popular press between a couple of celebrity FTM transkids.( http://supermattachine.wordpress.com/20 ... resent-us/ , http://www.ontheredcarpet.com/Warren-Be ... am/8437820 )

Warren Beatty and Annette Bening's transgender 19-year-old son Stephen Ira Beatty has been making headlines for saying he doesn't want Chaz Bono to be the spokesmodel for transgendered people.Bono, the transgendered son of singer Cher and a recent "Dancing With The Stars" contestant, opened up about undergoing a sex change to become a man and made several comments which Stephen Ira believes to be misogynistic. ..

I do not have a birth defect. If you feel like you have a birth defect, fine. That’s how you feel. Go feel that. Do not put it onto me. Do not define me that way, and do not define other trans people that way unless they claim that label.

Transward

I think another important point is that the vast majority of people have something they don't like about their bodies, but that isn't a basis to say they should have surgery or that they aren't properly themselves until they have surgery.

For example, there are people who are extremely short, extremely tall, extremely fat, extremely ugly. There are people who have features like a big nose or crooked teeth that might not be considered ideal. But should these people be pushed to medical means to change things? Should they be told they have birth defects? Obviously not, but when it comes to transgender people get all literal and uptight about body parts.

There is no reason at all why someone can't be perfectly fine as a girl with a penis. Maybe that person would have rather been born with a vagina, but that doesn't mean they have to be compelled to take a surgical approach.

I think the main goal in life is to be comfortable in the skin you're in. None of us are ideal, but obsessing about non-idealarity is just going to make you end up like one of those people who overdoes plastic surgery. I feel very sorry for people who end up like this: http://www.oddee.com/item_96587.aspx It is not just a trite expression to say: those people are trying to fix the wrong thing (i.e. their outside instead of their inside).

Anyway, participation in society as a man, woman, or anything inbetween shouldn't be based on a person's body imperfections -- we all have such imperfections! A woman with a penis is still a woman, just like an ugly woman is still a woman, or a muscular woman is still a woman, or a fat woman is still a woman, or a woman whose had a mastectomy is still a woman -- none of those fit society's ideal of a woman but that doesn't invalidate the use of the term or the self-identification.

Actually, I would say that a transgender person who has come to terms with keeping their birth genitalia is really a success story -- they've achieved greater comfort in their own skin than the majority of people.

// by the way, I'm not criticizing transgendered people who do seek SRS, unless they really obsess over body image and become plastic surgery addicts

I think it is wonderful that this young lady has parents with open minds. I hope it all works out for her.