I believe I’ve seen on CSI an episode regarding those who seek gender re-assignment surgery: Male-to-female::female-to-male TG is 75%/25%
Accurate?
Does this indicate a genetic or chromosomal phenomena?
Most likely, a sampling error. A lot of FtMs can successfully pass without having any sort of surgery at all: you can get pretty far just by taking testosterone and some breast binding. Consequently, a lot of transguys transition without any medical intervention at all, and so are invisible in those statistics. And that’s assuming that statistic is counting top surgery as gender reassignment surgery. While surgery can be very effective in turning a penis into a vagina, the reverse is not as successful, and the majority of transguys don’t bother.
Forgot to add:
Anecdotally, I’ve talked about this with my boyfriend, who’s a transguy. Based on his own observations in the community, and his talks with friends who work in the clinics, this disparity may be disappearing: a lot more biological women are coming out as some variety of trans or gender queer, in roughly the same proportion as biological men. I don’t know if there are any studies that back this up, though. My boyfriend attributes this change to greater community visibility, and the existence of an actual FtM celebrity. I’m not so sure I’m convinced of the siren power of Chas Bono, but I don’t really have a better theory.
Whoa, you’re gay? Or wait, you could be a woman, I don’t know, I really don’t keep track of this stuff. But if you’re not, then whoa, you’re gay!? Not that there’s anything wrong with that. Just surprising, is all. Apologizes if I’ve offended you, I didn’t mean to
In looking at the Straight Dope Picture Gallery, Miller appears to be male and satanic.
ETA: and cute. Very cute.
A friend’s blog just linked to a very well-written article (Part 1, Part 2) on transgender issues within the context of the evolution of feminism. In the context of this thread, I feel this (from the second page) is worth reposting:
[QUOTE=Natalie Reed]
Any theory of gender, if it’s to have any meaning or usefulness or validity at all, *must *speak to the *actual *full realities of gender. And that requires speaking to the actual realities of gender variance. All of them. Not just whichever ones you can slot into the pet theory you refuse to abandon for fear of losing a political edge, or fear of admitting to having been wrong. It requires speaking to the actual lived experiences of human beings, all of them, not telling certain people that their lives are wrong, or don’t exist, so that you can continue believing whatever makes you comfy or meets your particular political goals. Your degrees, ambitions, publications or worries over how a fact might be misinterpreted do not trump anyone else’s actual existence. Views must be adapted to fit the facts. Otherwise, yours is just another inaccurate worldview imposed by the privileged on the actual world, and the lives within it.
Otherwise, you’re not addressing the social dynamics of gender. You’re covering them up, and thereby perpetuating the problem.
[/QUOTE]
And, she goes on to say, the above applies to both sides of the argument– those who claim that gender is entirely a social construct, and those who resort to biological reductivism. We should be dealing with what is, in all its aspects, not with what we think it should be.
Is there a neuro Doper who can weigh in on this thread? Because I’ve kind of wondered the same thing. We know that certain drugs can treat/manage other psycho-neurological conditions. Why not this?
If a transgender person is suffering and a medication can possibly stop it, why is that better or worse than surgical transformation?
I have some female students that live as boys (they are ‘studs’, apparently). They wouldn’t dream of surgery, but according to some Dopers (I think), they are trans, or genderqueer, or some other such title that they wouldn’t give themselves. (For the record, they’re happy with the distinction of being “gay”.) I mean, the only difference between a couple of my students and the seven year old boy* who wanted to join Girl Scouts is that these girls are fine with being called women and the kid actively wanted to be a girl. Or was. Or :smack:; this shit is confusing.
I apologize if I’m coming off as insensitive. It’s a topic that I’ve struggled with for years and still can’t quite understand.
*person with a penis?
An it harm none [else], do as thou wilt.
Also known as, if such a medication were available, I don’t believe transpeople would use it, as they would believe (prior to beginning medication) that it would be forcing them to live a lie, even if (after beginning medication) they no longer believed that. Since they have the right to make that choice, they get to. It’s not like forcing medication on people so they stop committing violent crimes, or self-destructive (to the point of suicide) acts. If they want to have surgery done on themselves so they look, feel and work, physically, the way they want to, they get to.
…and this is where I have a hard time. No matter how much I wanted to be a boy when I was a kid (yeah, that obviously passed), the idea of surgically making a penis for me would have been beyond weird. (My mother never restricted my TV. I was exposed to everything, with little explanation to follow. :P)
So if young trans people are really really suffering and a pill could help, why do the surgery? It’s my understanding that it’s not going to be the same, and the possible complications from surgery are terrifying.
Volunteering to live their lives in a medicated lie would be equally terrifying to some people.
That’s why a lot of schizophrenics go off/refuse their meds.
I’ll try to dig up some cites when I get home, but my recollection is that there is a broad consensus that psychoactive drugs either have poor effectiveness, or are not effective at all with transgendered persons. I seem to remember a couple of clinical trials which ended early due to really bad side effects of some antidepressants, such as, um, suicide…that having been said I’m certain some might feel more at home with themselves with the benefit of antidepressants or mood modifiers. Not a single transgendered person I know has had any success with this, and believe me, most of them really, really wanted there to be success!
For M2F transgendered persons mild doses of estrogen and mild anti-androgens have resulted in improved mental status. I believe there is also a very strong placebo effect, especially in M2Fs - I cannot recall the number of times I’ve read of someone taking their first hormone pill or getting their first injection and claiming within “minutes” or even “seconds” they felt like they were suddenly on a higher plane of happiness and existence as there was this “rush of estrogen” through their body. Sorry, they don’t work that fast, take my word for it. Mental status changes take weeks to months to quantify in the studies I’ve seen. Anyhow, mild doses of estrogen and anti-androgens could also have a major placebo effect in addition to any real impacts.
A problem with treating with mild doses of hormones is if you’ve decided to treat a person with them, eventually their body will start to change with secondary sex characteristics, just over a much longer time span. Which then begs the question of whether it’s not better to just go through the “normal” pre-SRS hormone regimen.
Hearty, sometimes acrimonious debate exists in the community of those treating young transgendered persons as to what should be done, and when. I think the general consensus is to dig very deep to ensure that some aspect of nurture, rather than nature, has not imprinted itself on them, and to (of course) delay hormones until after puberty has started. I believe a minority feel that puberty should be short-circuited - such as by early castration combined with hormone regimen at age 11-14. Most do not recommend any surgery (outside of orchiectomy, which in honesty is a very minor procedure, albeit with major impacts) until age 17.
Personally…I really don’t know what’s the right answer. It’s a supremely difficult question.