punkypink (imported) wrote: Thu Sep 09, 2010 2:05 pm I am not on hormones. Never been.

Personally, I say it's a lot more important how you present your inner self.

You are really fortunate to look that great without ever having taken any hormones. You must have had a lot of peer pressure when growing up as a male before you transitioned.

punkypink (imported) wrote: Sat Sep 11, 2010 11:30 pm I'd quite like us not to be judged on how much hormones, or surgery or anything superficial we're doing or not doing. These things should not be a pre-requisite for being a woman or a transwoman, and well, I'd just like to dispel the sort of generalisation that any good looking transperson must be on hormones and have been for a long time.

Our Emily (who is definitely NOT strange) has been expressing a very important truth in her posts on the Archive. It is important for everyone to explore and discover, as best they can, exactly who and what they are. They can then attempt to better become that person.

For some, especially here on the Eunuch Archive, becoming that person may require hormones or surgery, cosmetic or other. For others, it may be found entirely in behavior and in their serene mental state at having attained their personal goals.

Emily may have been born with a body that was judged “male,” but she is comfortable as a self-confident young lady without any cosmetic or hormonal augmentation. Others may feel the need for hormones and/or surgery. Variety, such as that, is part of what makes humans interesting. Neither is right or wrong; they are simply different approaches to the goal of becoming ourselves.

Before I retired from teaching, I always told my introductory classes that one of the major goals of anthropology was to help people to “delight in the diversity of humanity!”

.

To Quote you PunkyPink: "

punkypink (imported) wrote: Sat Sep 11, 2010 11:30 pm I'm against anyone who feels they need that little extra to help them along as much as I'm

billie_tv (imported) wrote: Sun Sep 12, 2010 10:03 am against someone taking panadol for a headache.

"

If you're against, it means you're combative.

If someone wants to take an Tylenon for headache, then why judge them, or be against it. Maybe it makes them feel better.

Same for trans people who don't have the genetics that make them appear feminine, but have in fact a female mind, perhaps due to the prenatal influence of hormones, that constantly tells them they are a woman on the inside.

It's one thing to have the public at large against trans people, yet another to have the community itself splitting hairs and taking stands that aren't constructive.

Freedom

of choice and freedom of destiny is a right we all have.

I'd have thought my meaning was clear. Chances are, very few people'd be against taking panadol for headaches, and I was using the analogy to say that I'm as unopposed to hormones treatment for those who need it.

I had no idea I came across as a complete looney who's against taking panadols for headaches ^^

Facts:

I pop pain pills for headaches like they are candy.

I am however, combative. No doubt, and I think it is a good thing to be combative for the right reasons. Throughout human history, it has always been those willing to fight who've shaped humanity, not those who are indifferent.

Funny you mention the community splitting hairs and taking unconstructive stands. I've seen so many "Empress Dowagers" in the trans community who measure their standing in the community by how much hormones and surgery they've taken, and what great pains they go to just to put down any transperson who doesn't feel they need anything done as "not a real trans", "crossdresser", "man in a dress" etc. If there is anyone who's splitting the community apart for their own selfish reasons or out of ignorance, it certainly isn't me, but a lot of "mainstream" transwomen.

does anyone know about transfem-web site changes test. in ones body into estrogen