About transgenders (transexuals?) and sexual orientation.

[Una_Persson]

@Broomstick

In other words, a transwoman is a woman whether she’s had a full suite of surgeries to feminize her body or is still a heavily bearded Navy SEAL living in denial and posing as a man to appease social norms. Saying she’s a “MtF”, though, tends to imply she’s had some surgery. In my experience, which is admittedly strictly as a cissexual trying to understand something foreign to my own experience.

Admittedly, these are not 100% rules and part of the problem is that there aren’t well known (outside the small circle of people interested) means of discussing this issue that doesn’t tend to cause offense.

For example, the local vernacular, in a community of about 600+ transpeople. Caveat: many of you will find fault with this because it does not agree with what a website says, what an established authority like WPATH says, or with your personal experience. I’m listing it to give an example of how complex the terminology is.

Transgender: expresses themselves or feels themselves in some way to be a different gender than their chromosomal, social, germatic, hormonal, anatomical, legal etc. gender. Does not include crossdressers or transvestites. May not ever dress differently. Not on hormones. Hormones in fact tend to be the big step-function between transgender and transsexual persons.

Crossdresser: a person who is not transgender who dresses for non-sexual enjoyment.

Transvestite: a person who is not transgender who dresses for sexual enjoyment.

Transsexual: a transgender person who has started (or is in-progress, or has completed) transition.

Pre-Op: syn. with transsexual

Post-Op: the only term locally used to refer to someone with SRS

M2F/F2M: not generally used by anyone outside of Facebook, where it means “transsexual”.

T-girl: non-derogatory term for a female transsexual.

G-girl: genetic girl.

I-girl: rarely used, intersex woman. I have been called this a couple of times, however.

Transwoman/transman: non-derogatory term for a female/male transsexual.

Ladyboy: used infrequently as a joke in the community between transsexuals.

Genderqueer: locally, this typically is thought of as “person who is playing games with their gender and not really serious.” Please note the caveat above.

Non-Op: rarely used, a term meaning a transsexual who has started transition but has made a decision, independent of financial reasons, not to have SRS.

There is much friction between the CD/TV community and the TG/TS community in my area. And much friction between pre-op and post-op women.

[Broomstick]

@ruadh

But surely it’s better to educate the public as to what those terms mean, rather than to continue using terms that many of the people in question find offensive, simply because they’re easier for some to understand.

While on a certain level I agree with this, most cis people I’ve encountered are so stinkin’ ignorant and/or misinformed about the issues involved in this condition that have to take it in baby-steps. Otherwise, it’s a 40 minute vocabulary lesson before you can even start a conversation. Then there is the problem that different locales use different vocabulary. There’s not a “transgender issues pope” decreeing right from wrong - see Una’s post for an example.

I guess I don’t really see the need for a “shorthand” for a person who’s had surgery because 99% of the time I don’t really think there’s a need for anybody else to know whether a person has had surgery. It’s really only relevant to the person themselves, and their partner(s), and for anyone else it’s mainly simple voyeurism.

Frankly, I don’t care what people have under their clothes unless I’m planning to be intimate with them, and I agree that unless that’s imminent it’s none of my business. However, it does seem a focus for the average person discussing this issue.

My views on this have been shaped by the views of trans people I know who find the focus on whether or not they have had surgery really offensive.

Asking someone whether they’ve had SRS is as offensive as going up to them and asking if they’ve had a mastectomy or a prostate surgery. If they offer up the information, fine, otherwise, MYOB, On the other hand, if you’re having a discussion about what transgenderism is it’s a little hard to avoid the topic, it’s relevant.

[ruadh]

@Broomstick

On the other hand, if you’re having a discussion about what transgenderism is it’s a little hard to avoid the topic, it’s relevant.

I’m really not sure it is, given that there are many transgender people who haven’t had surgery and some who have no intention of having surgery. I’m definitely not sure it’s so relevant as to require a shorthand. And if it is, I’m positive “FTM” and “MTF” are not appropriate shorthands, not only because they are offensive to many of the people they describe but also because they are routinely used in relation to transgender people without any actual knowledge as to whether they have actually had surgery. So even if it is a useful distinction to make, “FTM” and “MTF” really don’t make it, as they are actually used in practice.

[Nava]

I’ve never used FtM and MtF in reference to surgery (which is something absolutely private) but to public perception. In either case, someone who was born being the second part but who spent a long time being perceived and treated as the first part is now perceived and treated as the second part. It’s about perception, not surgery.

[Broomstick]

@ruadh

I’m really not sure it is, given that there are many transgender people who haven’t had surgery and some who have no intention of having surgery.

And that a fact many ignorant cisgender people are entirely aware of - most that I’ve discussed this with are absolutely convinced it’s ALL about the surgery and have no clue that there are not only transgender people who haven’t had the surgery, but don’t want it. I think that’s one reason some cisgender people are afraid of the notion - they have this idea that if some Crazy Mad Scientist strapped them to a table and rearranged their plumbing they’d be turned into the opposite gender. It doesn’t work like that. Sure, the physical bits might be rearranged but that doesn’t change what they are in their head (which is also potentially terrifying to people). Well, OK, accept that, but then if someone IS a “woman trapped in a man’s body” why wouldn’t they want that surgery now now NOW? Well, the surgery isn’t perfect, there’s always a possibility of complications, and so on.

So yes, the discussion is relevant, if only to explain WHY some haven’t had surgery, some have no intention of getting the surgery (or more surgery, as it is potentially a multi-operation process) or why top surgery may be more important than bottom. Again, this is assuming a context of general discussion, not grilling of an individual and his or her choices.

[Una_Persson]

@Broomstick

Asking someone whether they’ve had SRS is as offensive as going up to them and asking if they’ve had a mastectomy or a prostate surgery. If they offer up the information, fine, otherwise, MYOB, On the other hand, if you’re having a discussion about what transgenderism is it’s a little hard to avoid the topic, it’s relevant.

Shoot, even within the trans community locally it would be gauche to ask someone if they had SRS or not. We just simply do not do it at all. I’ve only been asked once, hesitantly, by a newbie if I’d had SRS, and their friend told them off for asking. The reason it’s a problem is not exactly for the reason or privacy, but for the reason that of the trans community here, about 9/10 who want SRS cannot afford it, so asking becomes a painful reminder that they cannot get it.

[Una_Persson]

@Broomstick

So yes, the discussion is relevant, if only to explain WHY some haven’t had surgery, some have no intention of getting the surgery (or more surgery, as it is potentially a multi-operation process) or why top surgery may be more important than bottom. Again, this is assuming a context of general discussion, not grilling of an individual and his or her choices.

To amend my post of a few minutes ago, it’s actually more gauche even within the community to ask a non-OP why they are choosing that route. There is a certain stigma to being non-OP - pre-OPs and post-OPs think of you as being “not that serious” about it, and tend to try to lump you in even with crossdressers. Therefore the non-OPs rarely say they are such; normally they just publicly say “can’t afford it.”

[Broomstick]

I just want to underline that I consider it totally out of bounds to ask someone if they’ve had ANY sort of operation, and why or why not. When I said “general discussion” it was more with the idea of talking about transgenderism in abstract terms, much as we might discussion why a woman may or may not choose prophylactic mastectomy rather than not take such a step without a breast cancer diagnosis. Fine to discuss in the abstract, totally gauche and inappropriate to ask a person directly or name a person or grill a person about such choices.

In other words, in message board threads about some topic, not in discussion with or about a specific person or persons.

It must be heartbreaking to desperately want such surgery and not have the money for it. It also must hurt like the dickens to have decided for reasons outside of finances NOT to get such surgery and be second-guessed on it continually. Whether for medical or psychological reasons a person’s decision about his or her body need to be respected.

[stui_magpie]

@Una_Persson

I think the best way I can summarize my research is there must be a connection between gender identity and sexual orientation, although the connection is not strong, and may be complicated by many other matters.

Orientation can change after transition. In fact, the orientation change can be very confusing, disorienting, and even heartbreaking after transition.

I’ve just cut two pieces out of this post, hopefully I haven’t ruined any context but i do find this quite separately interesting, that orientation can change after transition.

Is there any research linking this to any one factor more than others? ie, Hormonal, self confidence etc?

[DocCathode]

I’ve also seen Bio girl, Natal girl and Nat girl.

I personally prefer the term “Standard Model Woman”

A woman with androgen insensitivity disorder was born a woman. But she has XY chromosomes and is not a ‘genetic girl’

Bio girl implies that it is genetics and ovaries that make a woman. I believe it is the brain that makes a woman, so I dislike this term.

Natal girl implies that transwomen were born men. Obviously, I disagree with this.

A transwoman is a woman and no less of woman than a cisgendered woman. She simply deviates from the standard model.

[Una_Persson]

@stui_magpie

I’ve just cut two pieces out of this post, hopefully I haven’t ruined any context but i do find this quite separately interesting, that orientation can change after transition.

Is there any research linking this to any one factor more than others? ie, Hormonal, self confidence etc?

I’m going through my database of research as I set up my new trans advocacy site, but what I’m reading indicates there are three theories as to orientation change.

1. They always were that “new” orientation, it was just hidden. - This theory is that a transperson who liked women before transition and men afterwards actually secretly did like men before transition, they just buried those feelings.

2. It’s the hormones. - This theory is that hormones are a critical part of sexual attraction, which is why hormones in small doses are sometimes prescribed for people with libido problems. Thus when a person is suddenly overloaded with pharmaceutical hormones, it greatly impacts their sexual attraction and libido.

3. It’s about feeling good. - This theory claims that the process of transition, including the tremendous mood changes from hormones and social acceptance, turns a person’s thought processes upside-down. This will lead them to experiment with many things they would not have ever tried before, like dancing, or different foods and drinks, and sex. Another thing is that when you feel good and you are happy all the time, people pick up on it and you get offers.

[ruadh]

@Broomstick

It must be heartbreaking to desperately want such surgery and not have the money for it. It also must hurt like the dickens to have decided for reasons outside of finances NOT to get such surgery and be second-guessed on it continually.

There are also cases of trans people who don’t want surgery but are pressured into it, by doctors who refuse to give them hormone therapy without it or by laws which require surgery for a person to be officially recognised in their self-identified gender. This is (at least) equally horrible.

[Una_Persson]

That is becoming much, much rarer in the US. Trans awareness, rights, and acceptance and tolerance have advanced more in the last 5 years than in the last 50 years. The time of Christine, Ashley, Brevard, Conn, even as late as Richards, might as well be the Age of Charlemagne.

[CarnalK]

@Inner_Stickler

The politest terms of all would be man and woman respectively.

If you know that someone is in the process of transitioning, by all means ask which set of pronouns you should use if they don’t make it clear already. (Robert becomes Roberta at the bottom of emails? Probably should go with she and her.)

If you don’t know, use context, dress, and bearing to determine gender just as we do with cispeople and if you do make a mistake, apologize sincerely and immediately.

Oh yes, the OP would have been much more polite if he had just said:

Are most men/women attracted to males? (or females) and the same for men
Are they gay and straight in the same (or close) proportion as non-men/women?
Is it different for men and women?
Does it change during/after transition?, if so any idea why? and % of those who change.
Is it much more complicated than I’m making it seem, and I know nothing?

[LonghornDave]

@ruadh

Many transgender people also object to being described as “male-to-female” or vice versa, since they consider themselves to have always been whatever comes after the “to”.

While I will admit to being extremely confused by many of the terms, I don’t really understand this at all. Is it not the idea that there is a distinction between sex and gender, and that a transsexual has a disconnect between the sex the were born as and the gender they identify with? And also, aren’t the terms male and female referring to sex and not gender? Therefore, a transsexual that has undergone a male to female transition, was clearly not always of the female sex; they instead are correcting their outward appearance to match the gender that they have always been. I can see the possible offense of not using terms like man to refer to a transsexual FtM or women to MtF as man and woman are gender terms.

I am honestly trying to not offend by any of my language here, so my apologies if I am using terms incorrectly.

[Una_Persson]

I’m on my phone so it’s difficult to be wordy. I think the critical point is that once a person accepts their trans status they really don’t want to have any mention of their “old” status, except maybe when talking to a doctor. So it’s more that once a person identifies as female they don’t ever want that male or M attached to them.

[LonghornDave]

I find it somewhat strange that the trans community while rationally being very concerned and sensitive about the language used to describe themselves (even with significant disagreements within the community over what is correct, offensive, or whatever) seems perfectly willing to redefine the terms that the non trans community is called. I mean, I am a male and a man, I have no desire to be called a cissexual, cisman, Cis person, G-Man, G-Boy, Standard Model Man, Bio Man, Natal Man, or any of the other terms that are being used here. I’m certain that I am leaving out numerous other currently used terms, and I feel like if this thread is revisited next year that several other terms will be added to that list that I am supposed to call myself if I want to be sensitive to the trans community. I don’t feel particularly ignorant or insensitive because I don’t want to re-categorize myself in front of every audience and change that up every few years.

I sympathize with the issues that many in the trans community have, and I know that I am ignorant and likely even completely unaware to many other of their issues. As a generally courteous and thoughtful person, I think it is my duty to, within reason, try to educate myself, attempt to see things from others’ perspectives, and generally treat people how they want/deserve to be treated.

I guess I feel like if standard acceptance and to be treated normal is one of the goals of the trans community, some of this terminology business seems like the wrong way to go about furthering that goal.

[LonghornDave]

@Una_Persson

I’m on my phone so it’s difficult to be wordy. I think the critical point is that once a person accepts their trans status they really don’t want to have any mention of their “old” status, except maybe when talking to a doctor. So it’s more that once a person identifies as female they don’t ever want that male or M attached to them.

Also, thank you for the answer here. I can understand this mindset.

[Una_Persson]

@LonghornDave

I find it somewhat strange that the trans community while rationally being very concerned and sensitive about the language used to describe themselves (even with significant disagreements within the community over what is correct, offensive, or whatever) seems perfectly willing to redefine the terms that the non trans community is called. I mean, I am a male and a man, I have no desire to be called a cissexual, cisman, Cis person, G-Man, G-Boy, Standard Model Man, Bio Man, Natal Man, or any of the other terms that are being used here. I’m certain that I am leaving out numerous other currently used terms, and I feel like if this thread is revisited next year that several other terms will be added to that list that I am supposed to call myself if I want to be sensitive to the trans community. I don’t feel particularly ignorant or insensitive because I don’t want to re-categorize myself in front of every audience and change that up every few years.

Well as mentioned throughout, their is no Trans Pope who decrees that certain terms be used, and the community is filled with individuals from all backgrounds and from across the socioeconomic spectrum.

I thought about it again and I’m not certain I’ve heard “cis” used more than once or twice, and by only a couple of people. I have only used it in writing when there is a need to differentiate, mainly from a medical context. It’s true that “g-girl” is used a lot, however, but only when needed.

I sympathize with the issues that many in the trans community have, and I know that I am ignorant and likely even completely unaware to many other of their issues. As a generally courteous and thoughtful person, I think it is my duty to, within reason, try to educate myself, attempt to see things from others’ perspectives, and generally treat people how they want/deserve to be treated.

I guess I feel like if standard acceptance and to be treated normal is one of the goals of the trans community, some of this terminology business seems like the wrong way to go about furthering that goal.

I think it’s a good point, but there is a deeper issue at hand. Now that suddenly there is so much more acceptance and so much more public awareness that there are by some estimates as many as 1 million trans people in the US alone, the state of the community, the zeitgeist of being trans is in tremendous flux and turmoil. Hence the so-called “gender wars” which pit not just CDs vs. TG, but TS vs. TG, post-op vs. non-op, etc.

Some of these conflicts locally have shattered entire groups. One fight over which national TG group a local group should affiliate with destroyed a local group 70-some persons. I’ve also seen groups of post-ops behave very badly towards TG/TS/non-op persons, and because I stood up to them there’s now a post-op “cabal” who thinks I’m a troublemaker. :rolleyes:

In time, within a decade I predict, the issue will settle down into just having a couple of terms.

[ruadh]

@LonghornDave

I find it somewhat strange that the trans community while rationally being very concerned and sensitive about the language used to describe themselves (even with significant disagreements within the community over what is correct, offensive, or whatever) seems perfectly willing to redefine the terms that the non trans community is called. I mean, I am a male and a man, I have no desire to be called a cissexual, cisman, Cis person, G-Man, G-Boy, Standard Model Man, Bio Man, Natal Man, or any of the other terms that are being used here. I’m certain that I am leaving out numerous other currently used terms, and I feel like if this thread is revisited next year that several other terms will be added to that list that I am supposed to call myself if I want to be sensitive to the trans community. I don’t feel particularly ignorant or insensitive because I don’t want to re-categorize myself in front of every audience and change that up every few years.

What would you like to be called?