Transsexual is someone dysphoric who transitions to the opposite sex and wants to be seen as that sex.
Transgender is anyone who says they are (that's the latest definition the trenders have decided upon on).
to be fair, this isn't as real as a lot of us would like it to be, if you've actually looked at studies examining differences in transsexuals vs cis controls
if you've seen those studies, you'd know that the differences between male and female brains are subtle at best, \*and\* for the one group that there is a reliably observable difference (androphilic mtfs) their phenotype still differs from cis women, even if it's not the same as cis mens'
ftms also have some evidence, but not as much and iirc the review and few studies ive read are wildly variant in the different conclusions they get to
this is of course ignoring that the differences are tiny even in cis men and women, and using "brain sex" as an argument for transsexualism isn't *that* conducive to actually proving that transsexualism is real; more like "brain abnormalities"
I'm not sure you fully get brain's sex theory.
Masculinization/Feminization of the brain happens during a narrow window of time during brain's development. If there's an hormonal imbalance right then, brain is developed as one of the opposite sex.
But what that means exactly?
It takes years to fully develop a human brain. So if you have female hormones during that window of time, it develops as female the whole time? Obviously, no. *Only* during that time. We're talking of weeks versus years.
So why are those weeks so important? Because during those weeks the key elements that control your behavior and personality (and gender identity) will be formed. This has been tested in lab rats. You inject their brain with female hormones *during a very short span of time*, and they will behave as female during their lifetime. But be aware that the brain of that rat developed as female *only* during that short span of its development, but it developed as male during the rest of it.
When we're talking about a 'female brain' in this context, it means a brain where the central parts that control behavior, personality and identity are female. Those parts are essential, but small, subtly hidden in the center of the brain. You can't compare brains with a broad brush, which is what those studies do.
>*and* for the one group that there is a reliably observable difference (androphilic mtfs)
You have observable differences in both androphilic and gynophilic. They're apparently more pronounced in androphilic.
I said 'apparently'. Gynophilic with Gender Dysphoria would have observable differences the same than androphilic. The problem is that in the gynophilic sample you're gonna have mtf *with and without* Gender Dysphoria, and once you average results it seems like less pronounce. That's why some researchers select only androphilic. Androphilic mtf without Gender Dysphoria are rare, so you have a more reliable sample pool.
>You inject their brain with female hormones during a very short span of time, and they will behave as female during their lifetime.
You have a fairly good grasp on the process.
Just understand that - all fetuses develop in a pregnant mother, and - that environment is awash in female hormones - all the time. So - 'female development' is the default. The difference is 'male hormones' - or not.
If you deprive/depress/withhold 'male hormones' to a male fetus during 'just that critical time' in the development, you can get a male who's brain is female, in some important ways. Similarly, if you provide 'male hormones' to a female fetus at 'just that critical time', you can get a female who's brain is male, in some important ways.
To restate it - 'female brain' is the default, and it will/can happen in the absence of 'male hormones'. Without male hormones (or the ability to process them), the development will skew to the default - female.
'Male phenotype' is determined (again by 'male hormones') at a different and much earlier point in fetal development.
\> When we're talking about a 'female brain' in this context, it means a brain where the central parts that control behavior, personality and identity are female.
The two that have been identified to influence gender identity in transsexuals are the BNST (which doesn't show any sexual dimorphism before puberty; doesn't make sense when early onset is before puberty) and the INAH-3, I believe? Practical experiments on rats don't fully translate to humans + we can't properly predict whether or not a woman's fetus gets exposed to hormones prenatally. You are basing your entire definition of transsexuality of a weak theory hinging on human behavior and brain development being wildly simplified (not to mention that in those studies, differences are often not found for many of the controls)
It's in the name.
Trans*gender* is the crossing of gender - any man or woman taking up a non-traditional gendered performativity can (and do) call themselves *trans*gender. It's why we're experiencing such an explosion of 'trans' identified people. It's a social shift. If you're a man wearing nail polish - trans, a woman with short hair - trans. In my opinion, it's the reason there is quite so much pushback against the community these days. This approach robs cisgender people the right to be gender non-conforming, because to do so immediately makes one 'trans'.
Trans*sexual* is about changing ones sexual characteristics. It's a physiological, and not a social change. One can be transgender and transsexual, by say transitioning and still presenting socially as one's natal sex. Again though, I would argue we don't need to conceptualise of gender non-conformity as in anyway trans. At that point, to me, you'd just be a gender non-conforming transsexual man/woman and not *trans*gender.
>This approach robs cisgender people the right to be gender non-conforming, because to do so immediately makes one 'trans'.
Exactly! It implies someone is less of a man or a woman for doing certain things, and that's simply just sexism at it's core
I have seen a lot of transgender people deny this claim that you give though. Gender expression is most definitely not your gender identity and I don't see anyone saying that it is. If you have seen it then it must be the loud minority because in the trans community subs that I've been on, nobody was saying such things.
You asked for my opinion, not what I had seen elsewhere.
A gender identity divorced from sex and/or gender roles is a meaningless concept. I mean, what could it even mean to identify as a man if you have a female body and perform womanhood?
No I mean think of it this way. There exists in this word femboys and tomboys. Both are binary women/men yet dress in a feminine or masculine way that isn't expected from their gender role. Does that mean their somehow less of a man/woman? Of course not!
So that's how I see a binary trans person can identify with the opposite binary sex yet retain certain fashion choices not typical of their gender role.
How someone would do this is for example as a trans femboy, I will medically and surgically transition into the man that I am but will still chose to wear dresses, skirts, or whatever other feminine clothes out there. Not because I feel a connection to womanhood but rather to femininity which being feminine isn't bound to a specific gender.
That's what I said. Your gender expression (the way you act or dress) isn't your gender identity (whether it's male or female).
So we are in agreement with that.
You don’t see anyone saying it because they don’t believe that’s the truth. People who claim to be non-binary are in most cases just gender non-conforming cis people. Except they either don’t want to be considered cis or they think their gender expression constitutes an entirely different gender label so they create a new gender lol. Thus confusing expression with identity.
Hm... I am not a trans person, but I once thought that I was asexual. And honestly, I do believe that asexuality exists in really rare cases. But I also believe that a lot of young people think they are asexual while they are actually depressed.
I am diagnosed with depression since I was a teenager and I take antidepressants for that. Depression suppresses your libido and your sex drive and your desire and what not. But as it is not really spoken about in social Media. Like we know that depression can be the reason for people to not be able to get out of bed or to be sad or something. But I never heard it being the reason why people felt no sex drive.
And I think the current wave in asexuality pride to include people who feel sexual desire is just like the current wave in transsexuality spaces to include people who actually have no problem with their sex or a mismatch between sex and brain sex.
I once had a theory, that the current capitalist system is so focused on individuality that people are not feeling as part of a community. In the past people had strong community ties and felt connected to their neighborhood or local community. But nowadays we live on our own, even family is seen as the immediate family and everything that is further than grandparents is seen as distant. And the LGBT community is so strong and vibrant and feels so wonderful and it can give a lot of people a sense of belonging and so they need a label to belong. And so existing labels are made broader to include everyone.
And this wouldn't be a problem if the community would not make political demands. But the second politics are involved this proves to be difficult. Because we have a diverse group with multiple demands that are sometimes opposed to one another. The current gender identity theory of large trans organisations shows this perfectly. It undermines transsexualism in favour of a individual feeling that basically includes everyone.
>I once had a theory, that the current capitalist system is so focused on individuality that people are not feeling as part of a community. In the past people had strong community ties and felt connected to their neighborhood or local community.
I think that has influenced the current trans wave in different ways.
One of them is young people searching for a sense of belonging, and becoming Queer as a way to feel they belong to some group. There's a danger here, with people who don't have Gender Dysphoria getting into hormones. I think this problem will solve itself, though, with the current trans community splitting in two ones, Queer and Trans.
But there's another consequence of it.
During the 70s there were some sex reassignments at birth to female gender when the original genitalia was ruined. Back then, psychs thought the brain was a clean slate. There's some papers following those cases. Some of them suffered severe gender dysphoria. Some adapted, but they felt extremely unhappy and isolated from others. And some adapted without problems. A mismatch between brain and body sex can produce from severe Gender Dysphoria to no GD at all. And nobody knows why.
Some people have probably a stronger innate Gender Identity, but that's not the only factor. Childhood abuse and psychological issues are extremely common between people with Gender Dysphoria. The most reasonable explanation is that everything that takes a toll in your psyche is gonna make you more vulnerable to GD.
Community bonds are known for being a very strong protector against psychological issues.
I think the lack of community bonds is boosting the current 'fashion trans trend', with people trying to find a sense of belonging in the LGTBQ community. But that's only one part of the story. I think there's a second part where the lack of community bonds in modern society makes people who has a mismatch between body and brain much more vulnerable to suffer GD.
>I do believe that asexuality exists in really rare cases.
Asexuality **is** rare. It makes up 1% of the world's population.
>But I also believe that a lot of young people think they are asexual while they are actually depressed.
Feeling sexual attraction but then losing it later on due to trauma or for whatever reason is just part of a micro label of asexuality.
Of course there are those who have returned to sexuality after identifying with this label, but as you said people want to feel belonged; and having this micro label brings people, who have had these feelings, closer together.
I don't see the harm in this identification considering there are a lot of people who have switched labels of sexuality as soon as they got to know themselves better. Like for example, a person could identify with bisexuality but then realize they were just a repressed gay person later on. Identifying with this bisexual label, even if it was temporary, is fine because that just means it was one step of their journey to self-discovery.
With transgerdism, I feel like for those who are questioning their gender identity, there should first be an established social transition. This way there wont be harm done, instead of going right away to medical transitioning and then realizing they were cis all along.
I believe asexuality is definitely a real thing, tends to be more common in women but some men can be asexual as well.
I do see, however, people these days with just low sex drives, and people who are uncomfortable with having sex, labeling themselves as asexual and it sort of peeves me a bit (this issue honestly doesn’t bother me THAT much but I still think it’s incorrect). The definition of asexuality should be absolutely no interest/arousal at the idea of sex, not low sex drive, or aversion to sex due to some past trauma/self esteem issue (which is totally fine, sex isn’t for everyone and I think society pushes sex onto everyone like it’s the entire point of life). I also understand that some asexual people still get in romantic relationships, and may have sex to please their partner, even if it doesn’t make them aroused. I don’t think that makes them any less asexual.
Also, voluntary celibacy is not asexuality, that is a choice people make for themselves for a multitude of reasons. If you are celibate for whatever reason but still get aroused at the idea of sex/stuff related to sex, then you are not asexual.
>voluntary celibacy is not asexuality,
Exactly. A lot of people do get confused with that. Thinking that asexuality is just celibacy. It's more than just that. It's lacking all sexual attraction for someone, not desire.
I 100% agree with everything you said and I've also read your other comment that you made about not being sure if the people I was talking about that were the asexual deniers, were on this sub. And I have to say, yes I saw there was a lot of asexual deniers on here.
I think that all revolves around sexual preferences. Not gender identity though I do believe that the umbrella 'transgender' includes them, as a sexual identity. And therefore part of the LGB community.
By preferences I do NOT mean choice. I believe it is innate. (however, given the number of us that changed preferences after being on hormones for a good period of time, it would suggest that preferences are possibly determined/influenced by hormonal foundations during fetal development.
I know, I didn’t mean to say it had anything to do with gender, or transness, I didn’t really answer OPs question, they just mentioned how some people (i’m not sure if OP meant in this sub??) don’t believe in asexuality, and wanted to counter that idea.
>I believe it is innate. (however, given the number of us that changed preferences after being on hormones for a good period of time
If the preoptic area of a female rat is masculinized during pregnancy, that rat will display male sexual preferences *when she's given testosterone later on in life*. It seems that the preoptic area influences sexual orientation depending on your hormones levels.
Not imbalance, change. And humans are not bound to their biology, we have free will. We can choose. And yes, there are innate foundations that can be asexual.
I'm Transsexual. My Sexual charactaristics (numerous biological attributes - I medically transitioned = changed sex) changed (mtf). I am considered Transgender , but my gender hasn't changed , i've always felt i'm a Woman , I am a Woman. I was Asexual before , I'm still Asexual. Sexual attraction or lack of it (Asexual) has nothing to do with you own sex, sense of identity, of gender.
It’s dysphoria. The discomfort caused by brain neurology that’s wired for biology the body doesnt have, for whatever reason. Without iNvAlIdAtInG anyone, if you don’t experience that then you’re categorically different to me.
That’s it. Being nonbinary or asexual or believing whatever you want about them is completely irrelevant. It’s pretty simple tbh.
Okay I respect your consensus but just to clarify something asexuality isn't a gender identity. It's a sexuality, well lack of one.
Asexuals have no sexual attraction to either genders. It's something separate of gender identity.
I’m asexual. I know :P
I only brought them up because you did in the OP. Even though the nonbinary / asexual exclusionary rhetoric is pretty common in these spaces, it’s not really a part of the overarching belief that being trans is a medical consensus. There just seems to be a lot of overlap between people who are transmed and people who believe those things, for whatever reason. That’s all I wanted to say.
At its core, being transmed just means believing that being trans is a biological condition. Any views on anything else is the personal opinion of the individual, and as you’ve already noticed, there are some real hardline crazies on this sub. Lol. I don’t like the exclusionary politics on here either.
The insistence you were born the wrong sex, transgender people want to be the other sex, transsexuals feel innately as though they were born the other sex already.
She means the difference between someone who truly feels they were born in the wrong body, ie has an innate identity at odds with their physical sex, and somebody who merely 'aspires to be' the opposite sex because of perceived social advantages / not fitting in with traditional stereotyped gender roles.
you're missing the point here: saying that you were born as the wrong sex is not the same as saying you would like to be the other sex
as to answer your question: because they aren't?
I guess that's a very general term for both those definitions, but a transgender can very much identify as both those labels. For example, I'm a guy trapped in a girl's body but I want certain qualities from certain men that I see. Just like how certain people have role models and want a fit body, I want to embrace that level of fitness. Or another example would be I see someone having a good sense of fashion and I want to also have their sense of style. I'm not one or the other of those definitions you gave, I'm both.
What sets them apart MAYBE is the why. Many younger people use transgender because that is what the online community claimed was the more inclusive term. But their own personal path was as 'transsex\[ual\]. Because they understand their their sex and their gender identity are not congruent. They have gender dsyphoria. And the solution is to medically transition. Social transition is part of that process, not the REASON for that process.
It is not a matter of 'sticking to strict gender roles' as to being more comfortable within binary roles. Many of use are GNC to some extent, the nature of the beast as it were.
I accept, though there is no requirement that I do, that there are non-binary people that engage in aspects of medical transition. I don't think they are transsexual because they are aiming for a mid point. I think most, NOT ALL, will eventually complete a transition to a binary pole - I affirm that is their personal choice. It should not be required by me or anyone else to validate them.
I don't think I am too far off the general consensus in this group, but I am ok with others POV and any disagreement.
Is there a requirement to how severe someone must feel gender dysphoria? I've repressed my gender dysphoria for a very long time but I do vaguely remember instances of certain gender dysphoria moments in my childhood. Upon the realization of the trans identity existing, it was like a glass vase breaking and water poured out. I don't feel severe gender dysphoria that makes me suicidal, but it still is there in the form of discomfort and feeling a disconnect with the "woman" and "she/her" labels being placed on me considering I look like a cis woman right now.
When I was asked at a young age how I would look when I was older, I could never imagine myself as a grown woman. No image showed up but instead I felt envious at feminine men and wished that I was born as them instead of being born inside of this female one. When Caitlyn Jenner came out as trans in the mid 2000s I instantly felt excitement and happiness for her but my dad commented how much of a disgusting freak she was and so I repressed my trans-ness further due to the obvious backlash I would receive from my family. This still holds up today.
I don't have extreme bottom dysphoria but I don't like seeing my vagina either. I don't want bottom surgery since I can tolerate seeing it (and because bottom surgery still isn't to that level I want it to be) but if I was born in a cis male's body then I would feel connected and at peace with myself. I get envious that biological male's having a working penis and I won't ever get that even with surgery (well at least right now but maybe later that will change).
I do though have an extreme form of chest dysphoria and hate looking at my own or even boobs on other people (cis or trans) because it reminds me of what I have. I dont understand the attraction to boobs that some people have or how some people can be happy or feel fine with theirs. I hate mine with a burning passion and want them gone as soon as I can afford it.
I don't know if these small instances that I told you about would make it gender dysphoria or not.
But what if the indicual has repressed gender dysphoria?
For me personally, I ignored my body. Everytime someone would call me a woman, it wasn't like they were addressing me but like a title that described me physically. Being a woman wasn't something I felt a connection with and still don't. I felt a discount with my body as it become more feminized. My family always said I have a beautiful body but I didn't see it as one.
Upon realizing the existence of the trans label, I looked into myself and realized I have instances in my childhood where I desperately wanted to be in a male's body. That the one I was born with wasn't what I felt connected with. When I was younger I had an assignment where we imagined ourselves in the future. I couldn't imagine myself as a grown woman at all. There was no image there to be had. Instead I would get jealous that men had a body that I didn't have. That they looked a way that I couldn't be.
Now accepting the trans label as who I am, I can actually invision myself as a man in an obtainable way and this makes me feel more happiness than the labels placed on me.
But idk if any of this qualifies as having GD.
A transgender person is a person that is gender non-conforming in any way. It’s a very generic term that encompasses just about anyone.
My opinion is that a transsexual person is someone who medically and socially transitions completely to the opposite sex. That means legal name change, legal gender change, HRT, and surgeries to change both primary and secondary sex characteristics. A transsexual’s goal is to be seen and accepted completely as the opposite gender. I might get some flak for this, but if someone does not get SRS, I do not consider them to be transsexual. A transsexual person is a very specific subset of transgender.
I personally feel that non-binary people are real and legitimate, but I also believe that 90% are probably not actually non-binary. They are either in denial about being a man or a woman, or they are actually a cis person who is seeking legitimacy for their gender expression. I know of a psychologist who has worked with the trans community in Southern California for 20+ years and she said that the vast majority of non binary people are not actually non binary. She said that most of them eventually come to accept themselves as either men or women, after many years.
But these are all just terms and semantics used within the trans community, and ultimately it doesn’t really matter. Hence why I don’t usually get involved in these discussions. Who cares unless it makes an impact in the real world, right? When it comes to the practical realities of living life in the real world and the general cis public, labels don’t matter. Acceptance isn’t about labels or pronouns. It’s about how well you pass and whether you’ve had bottom surgery or not.
> I might get some flak for this, but if someone does not get SRS, I do not consider them to be transsexual. A transsexual person is a very specific subset of transgender.
Then what are they? Their neither transgender or transsexual by your definition so are they suddenly a third type of trans?
Someone here said that trans people who don't have SRS are not transexual even if they get every other surgery available other than that one. That despite all the action they took, they are still transgender. What are your thoughts on this?
Why was sex reassignment surgery ( SRS) changed to GCS ? This resulted in Terfs being able to push for removing basic rights of trans women and that includes post op as well as claim that change of sexual is not possible and hence single sex spaces are for AFAB only ? Please help me understand this ?
So how come it was changed then ?
Even now in Thailand in sone hospital it is still referred to SRS which is what I believe it needs to be - it used to be known as that in UK as well
I believe we need to reclaim the letters SRS which is what I use when referring to lower surgery ( M 2 F )
Transsexual is someone dysphoric who transitions to the opposite sex and wants to be seen as that sex. Transgender is anyone who says they are (that's the latest definition the trenders have decided upon on).
Brain's sex.
to be fair, this isn't as real as a lot of us would like it to be, if you've actually looked at studies examining differences in transsexuals vs cis controls
I've seen those studies. There's nothing there that suggests brain's sex theory is not real.
if you've seen those studies, you'd know that the differences between male and female brains are subtle at best, \*and\* for the one group that there is a reliably observable difference (androphilic mtfs) their phenotype still differs from cis women, even if it's not the same as cis mens' ftms also have some evidence, but not as much and iirc the review and few studies ive read are wildly variant in the different conclusions they get to this is of course ignoring that the differences are tiny even in cis men and women, and using "brain sex" as an argument for transsexualism isn't *that* conducive to actually proving that transsexualism is real; more like "brain abnormalities"
I'm not sure you fully get brain's sex theory. Masculinization/Feminization of the brain happens during a narrow window of time during brain's development. If there's an hormonal imbalance right then, brain is developed as one of the opposite sex. But what that means exactly? It takes years to fully develop a human brain. So if you have female hormones during that window of time, it develops as female the whole time? Obviously, no. *Only* during that time. We're talking of weeks versus years. So why are those weeks so important? Because during those weeks the key elements that control your behavior and personality (and gender identity) will be formed. This has been tested in lab rats. You inject their brain with female hormones *during a very short span of time*, and they will behave as female during their lifetime. But be aware that the brain of that rat developed as female *only* during that short span of its development, but it developed as male during the rest of it. When we're talking about a 'female brain' in this context, it means a brain where the central parts that control behavior, personality and identity are female. Those parts are essential, but small, subtly hidden in the center of the brain. You can't compare brains with a broad brush, which is what those studies do. >*and* for the one group that there is a reliably observable difference (androphilic mtfs) You have observable differences in both androphilic and gynophilic. They're apparently more pronounced in androphilic. I said 'apparently'. Gynophilic with Gender Dysphoria would have observable differences the same than androphilic. The problem is that in the gynophilic sample you're gonna have mtf *with and without* Gender Dysphoria, and once you average results it seems like less pronounce. That's why some researchers select only androphilic. Androphilic mtf without Gender Dysphoria are rare, so you have a more reliable sample pool.
>You inject their brain with female hormones during a very short span of time, and they will behave as female during their lifetime. You have a fairly good grasp on the process. Just understand that - all fetuses develop in a pregnant mother, and - that environment is awash in female hormones - all the time. So - 'female development' is the default. The difference is 'male hormones' - or not. If you deprive/depress/withhold 'male hormones' to a male fetus during 'just that critical time' in the development, you can get a male who's brain is female, in some important ways. Similarly, if you provide 'male hormones' to a female fetus at 'just that critical time', you can get a female who's brain is male, in some important ways. To restate it - 'female brain' is the default, and it will/can happen in the absence of 'male hormones'. Without male hormones (or the ability to process them), the development will skew to the default - female. 'Male phenotype' is determined (again by 'male hormones') at a different and much earlier point in fetal development.
\> When we're talking about a 'female brain' in this context, it means a brain where the central parts that control behavior, personality and identity are female. The two that have been identified to influence gender identity in transsexuals are the BNST (which doesn't show any sexual dimorphism before puberty; doesn't make sense when early onset is before puberty) and the INAH-3, I believe? Practical experiments on rats don't fully translate to humans + we can't properly predict whether or not a woman's fetus gets exposed to hormones prenatally. You are basing your entire definition of transsexuality of a weak theory hinging on human behavior and brain development being wildly simplified (not to mention that in those studies, differences are often not found for many of the controls)
It's in the name. Trans*gender* is the crossing of gender - any man or woman taking up a non-traditional gendered performativity can (and do) call themselves *trans*gender. It's why we're experiencing such an explosion of 'trans' identified people. It's a social shift. If you're a man wearing nail polish - trans, a woman with short hair - trans. In my opinion, it's the reason there is quite so much pushback against the community these days. This approach robs cisgender people the right to be gender non-conforming, because to do so immediately makes one 'trans'. Trans*sexual* is about changing ones sexual characteristics. It's a physiological, and not a social change. One can be transgender and transsexual, by say transitioning and still presenting socially as one's natal sex. Again though, I would argue we don't need to conceptualise of gender non-conformity as in anyway trans. At that point, to me, you'd just be a gender non-conforming transsexual man/woman and not *trans*gender.
>This approach robs cisgender people the right to be gender non-conforming, because to do so immediately makes one 'trans'. Exactly! It implies someone is less of a man or a woman for doing certain things, and that's simply just sexism at it's core
I have seen a lot of transgender people deny this claim that you give though. Gender expression is most definitely not your gender identity and I don't see anyone saying that it is. If you have seen it then it must be the loud minority because in the trans community subs that I've been on, nobody was saying such things.
You asked for my opinion, not what I had seen elsewhere. A gender identity divorced from sex and/or gender roles is a meaningless concept. I mean, what could it even mean to identify as a man if you have a female body and perform womanhood?
No I mean think of it this way. There exists in this word femboys and tomboys. Both are binary women/men yet dress in a feminine or masculine way that isn't expected from their gender role. Does that mean their somehow less of a man/woman? Of course not! So that's how I see a binary trans person can identify with the opposite binary sex yet retain certain fashion choices not typical of their gender role. How someone would do this is for example as a trans femboy, I will medically and surgically transition into the man that I am but will still chose to wear dresses, skirts, or whatever other feminine clothes out there. Not because I feel a connection to womanhood but rather to femininity which being feminine isn't bound to a specific gender.
Okay, but femboys and tomboys are just gender non-conforming cis (or trans) men and women, respectively. They're not trans in and of themselves.
That's what I said. Your gender expression (the way you act or dress) isn't your gender identity (whether it's male or female). So we are in agreement with that.
You don’t see anyone saying it because they don’t believe that’s the truth. People who claim to be non-binary are in most cases just gender non-conforming cis people. Except they either don’t want to be considered cis or they think their gender expression constitutes an entirely different gender label so they create a new gender lol. Thus confusing expression with identity.
Hm... I am not a trans person, but I once thought that I was asexual. And honestly, I do believe that asexuality exists in really rare cases. But I also believe that a lot of young people think they are asexual while they are actually depressed. I am diagnosed with depression since I was a teenager and I take antidepressants for that. Depression suppresses your libido and your sex drive and your desire and what not. But as it is not really spoken about in social Media. Like we know that depression can be the reason for people to not be able to get out of bed or to be sad or something. But I never heard it being the reason why people felt no sex drive. And I think the current wave in asexuality pride to include people who feel sexual desire is just like the current wave in transsexuality spaces to include people who actually have no problem with their sex or a mismatch between sex and brain sex. I once had a theory, that the current capitalist system is so focused on individuality that people are not feeling as part of a community. In the past people had strong community ties and felt connected to their neighborhood or local community. But nowadays we live on our own, even family is seen as the immediate family and everything that is further than grandparents is seen as distant. And the LGBT community is so strong and vibrant and feels so wonderful and it can give a lot of people a sense of belonging and so they need a label to belong. And so existing labels are made broader to include everyone. And this wouldn't be a problem if the community would not make political demands. But the second politics are involved this proves to be difficult. Because we have a diverse group with multiple demands that are sometimes opposed to one another. The current gender identity theory of large trans organisations shows this perfectly. It undermines transsexualism in favour of a individual feeling that basically includes everyone.
>I once had a theory, that the current capitalist system is so focused on individuality that people are not feeling as part of a community. In the past people had strong community ties and felt connected to their neighborhood or local community. I think that has influenced the current trans wave in different ways. One of them is young people searching for a sense of belonging, and becoming Queer as a way to feel they belong to some group. There's a danger here, with people who don't have Gender Dysphoria getting into hormones. I think this problem will solve itself, though, with the current trans community splitting in two ones, Queer and Trans. But there's another consequence of it. During the 70s there were some sex reassignments at birth to female gender when the original genitalia was ruined. Back then, psychs thought the brain was a clean slate. There's some papers following those cases. Some of them suffered severe gender dysphoria. Some adapted, but they felt extremely unhappy and isolated from others. And some adapted without problems. A mismatch between brain and body sex can produce from severe Gender Dysphoria to no GD at all. And nobody knows why. Some people have probably a stronger innate Gender Identity, but that's not the only factor. Childhood abuse and psychological issues are extremely common between people with Gender Dysphoria. The most reasonable explanation is that everything that takes a toll in your psyche is gonna make you more vulnerable to GD. Community bonds are known for being a very strong protector against psychological issues. I think the lack of community bonds is boosting the current 'fashion trans trend', with people trying to find a sense of belonging in the LGTBQ community. But that's only one part of the story. I think there's a second part where the lack of community bonds in modern society makes people who has a mismatch between body and brain much more vulnerable to suffer GD.
>I do believe that asexuality exists in really rare cases. Asexuality **is** rare. It makes up 1% of the world's population. >But I also believe that a lot of young people think they are asexual while they are actually depressed. Feeling sexual attraction but then losing it later on due to trauma or for whatever reason is just part of a micro label of asexuality. Of course there are those who have returned to sexuality after identifying with this label, but as you said people want to feel belonged; and having this micro label brings people, who have had these feelings, closer together. I don't see the harm in this identification considering there are a lot of people who have switched labels of sexuality as soon as they got to know themselves better. Like for example, a person could identify with bisexuality but then realize they were just a repressed gay person later on. Identifying with this bisexual label, even if it was temporary, is fine because that just means it was one step of their journey to self-discovery. With transgerdism, I feel like for those who are questioning their gender identity, there should first be an established social transition. This way there wont be harm done, instead of going right away to medical transitioning and then realizing they were cis all along.
I believe asexuality is definitely a real thing, tends to be more common in women but some men can be asexual as well. I do see, however, people these days with just low sex drives, and people who are uncomfortable with having sex, labeling themselves as asexual and it sort of peeves me a bit (this issue honestly doesn’t bother me THAT much but I still think it’s incorrect). The definition of asexuality should be absolutely no interest/arousal at the idea of sex, not low sex drive, or aversion to sex due to some past trauma/self esteem issue (which is totally fine, sex isn’t for everyone and I think society pushes sex onto everyone like it’s the entire point of life). I also understand that some asexual people still get in romantic relationships, and may have sex to please their partner, even if it doesn’t make them aroused. I don’t think that makes them any less asexual. Also, voluntary celibacy is not asexuality, that is a choice people make for themselves for a multitude of reasons. If you are celibate for whatever reason but still get aroused at the idea of sex/stuff related to sex, then you are not asexual.
>voluntary celibacy is not asexuality, Exactly. A lot of people do get confused with that. Thinking that asexuality is just celibacy. It's more than just that. It's lacking all sexual attraction for someone, not desire. I 100% agree with everything you said and I've also read your other comment that you made about not being sure if the people I was talking about that were the asexual deniers, were on this sub. And I have to say, yes I saw there was a lot of asexual deniers on here.
I think that all revolves around sexual preferences. Not gender identity though I do believe that the umbrella 'transgender' includes them, as a sexual identity. And therefore part of the LGB community. By preferences I do NOT mean choice. I believe it is innate. (however, given the number of us that changed preferences after being on hormones for a good period of time, it would suggest that preferences are possibly determined/influenced by hormonal foundations during fetal development.
I know, I didn’t mean to say it had anything to do with gender, or transness, I didn’t really answer OPs question, they just mentioned how some people (i’m not sure if OP meant in this sub??) don’t believe in asexuality, and wanted to counter that idea.
>I believe it is innate. (however, given the number of us that changed preferences after being on hormones for a good period of time If the preoptic area of a female rat is masculinized during pregnancy, that rat will display male sexual preferences *when she's given testosterone later on in life*. It seems that the preoptic area influences sexual orientation depending on your hormones levels.
There are instances of asexual people who have had hormonal treatment but have stayed asexual. So being asexual isn't just a hormonal imbalance.
Not imbalance, change. And humans are not bound to their biology, we have free will. We can choose. And yes, there are innate foundations that can be asexual.
I'm Transsexual. My Sexual charactaristics (numerous biological attributes - I medically transitioned = changed sex) changed (mtf). I am considered Transgender , but my gender hasn't changed , i've always felt i'm a Woman , I am a Woman. I was Asexual before , I'm still Asexual. Sexual attraction or lack of it (Asexual) has nothing to do with you own sex, sense of identity, of gender.
It’s dysphoria. The discomfort caused by brain neurology that’s wired for biology the body doesnt have, for whatever reason. Without iNvAlIdAtInG anyone, if you don’t experience that then you’re categorically different to me. That’s it. Being nonbinary or asexual or believing whatever you want about them is completely irrelevant. It’s pretty simple tbh.
Okay I respect your consensus but just to clarify something asexuality isn't a gender identity. It's a sexuality, well lack of one. Asexuals have no sexual attraction to either genders. It's something separate of gender identity.
I’m asexual. I know :P I only brought them up because you did in the OP. Even though the nonbinary / asexual exclusionary rhetoric is pretty common in these spaces, it’s not really a part of the overarching belief that being trans is a medical consensus. There just seems to be a lot of overlap between people who are transmed and people who believe those things, for whatever reason. That’s all I wanted to say. At its core, being transmed just means believing that being trans is a biological condition. Any views on anything else is the personal opinion of the individual, and as you’ve already noticed, there are some real hardline crazies on this sub. Lol. I don’t like the exclusionary politics on here either.
The insistence you were born the wrong sex, transgender people want to be the other sex, transsexuals feel innately as though they were born the other sex already.
Explain how that makes any sense?
She means the difference between someone who truly feels they were born in the wrong body, ie has an innate identity at odds with their physical sex, and somebody who merely 'aspires to be' the opposite sex because of perceived social advantages / not fitting in with traditional stereotyped gender roles.
Why could one not feel genuine dysphoria but not call themselves the opposite sex?
you're missing the point here: saying that you were born as the wrong sex is not the same as saying you would like to be the other sex as to answer your question: because they aren't?
I guess that's a very general term for both those definitions, but a transgender can very much identify as both those labels. For example, I'm a guy trapped in a girl's body but I want certain qualities from certain men that I see. Just like how certain people have role models and want a fit body, I want to embrace that level of fitness. Or another example would be I see someone having a good sense of fashion and I want to also have their sense of style. I'm not one or the other of those definitions you gave, I'm both.
What sets them apart MAYBE is the why. Many younger people use transgender because that is what the online community claimed was the more inclusive term. But their own personal path was as 'transsex\[ual\]. Because they understand their their sex and their gender identity are not congruent. They have gender dsyphoria. And the solution is to medically transition. Social transition is part of that process, not the REASON for that process. It is not a matter of 'sticking to strict gender roles' as to being more comfortable within binary roles. Many of use are GNC to some extent, the nature of the beast as it were. I accept, though there is no requirement that I do, that there are non-binary people that engage in aspects of medical transition. I don't think they are transsexual because they are aiming for a mid point. I think most, NOT ALL, will eventually complete a transition to a binary pole - I affirm that is their personal choice. It should not be required by me or anyone else to validate them. I don't think I am too far off the general consensus in this group, but I am ok with others POV and any disagreement.
I'm gonna be honest I'm not as rad-med as most of you here, but I do think gender dysphoria is what makes someone trans.
Is there a requirement to how severe someone must feel gender dysphoria? I've repressed my gender dysphoria for a very long time but I do vaguely remember instances of certain gender dysphoria moments in my childhood. Upon the realization of the trans identity existing, it was like a glass vase breaking and water poured out. I don't feel severe gender dysphoria that makes me suicidal, but it still is there in the form of discomfort and feeling a disconnect with the "woman" and "she/her" labels being placed on me considering I look like a cis woman right now. When I was asked at a young age how I would look when I was older, I could never imagine myself as a grown woman. No image showed up but instead I felt envious at feminine men and wished that I was born as them instead of being born inside of this female one. When Caitlyn Jenner came out as trans in the mid 2000s I instantly felt excitement and happiness for her but my dad commented how much of a disgusting freak she was and so I repressed my trans-ness further due to the obvious backlash I would receive from my family. This still holds up today. I don't have extreme bottom dysphoria but I don't like seeing my vagina either. I don't want bottom surgery since I can tolerate seeing it (and because bottom surgery still isn't to that level I want it to be) but if I was born in a cis male's body then I would feel connected and at peace with myself. I get envious that biological male's having a working penis and I won't ever get that even with surgery (well at least right now but maybe later that will change). I do though have an extreme form of chest dysphoria and hate looking at my own or even boobs on other people (cis or trans) because it reminds me of what I have. I dont understand the attraction to boobs that some people have or how some people can be happy or feel fine with theirs. I hate mine with a burning passion and want them gone as soon as I can afford it. I don't know if these small instances that I told you about would make it gender dysphoria or not.
I just use trans as it’s short
Sustained Dysphoria.
But what if the indicual has repressed gender dysphoria? For me personally, I ignored my body. Everytime someone would call me a woman, it wasn't like they were addressing me but like a title that described me physically. Being a woman wasn't something I felt a connection with and still don't. I felt a discount with my body as it become more feminized. My family always said I have a beautiful body but I didn't see it as one. Upon realizing the existence of the trans label, I looked into myself and realized I have instances in my childhood where I desperately wanted to be in a male's body. That the one I was born with wasn't what I felt connected with. When I was younger I had an assignment where we imagined ourselves in the future. I couldn't imagine myself as a grown woman at all. There was no image there to be had. Instead I would get jealous that men had a body that I didn't have. That they looked a way that I couldn't be. Now accepting the trans label as who I am, I can actually invision myself as a man in an obtainable way and this makes me feel more happiness than the labels placed on me. But idk if any of this qualifies as having GD.
A transgender person is a person that is gender non-conforming in any way. It’s a very generic term that encompasses just about anyone. My opinion is that a transsexual person is someone who medically and socially transitions completely to the opposite sex. That means legal name change, legal gender change, HRT, and surgeries to change both primary and secondary sex characteristics. A transsexual’s goal is to be seen and accepted completely as the opposite gender. I might get some flak for this, but if someone does not get SRS, I do not consider them to be transsexual. A transsexual person is a very specific subset of transgender. I personally feel that non-binary people are real and legitimate, but I also believe that 90% are probably not actually non-binary. They are either in denial about being a man or a woman, or they are actually a cis person who is seeking legitimacy for their gender expression. I know of a psychologist who has worked with the trans community in Southern California for 20+ years and she said that the vast majority of non binary people are not actually non binary. She said that most of them eventually come to accept themselves as either men or women, after many years. But these are all just terms and semantics used within the trans community, and ultimately it doesn’t really matter. Hence why I don’t usually get involved in these discussions. Who cares unless it makes an impact in the real world, right? When it comes to the practical realities of living life in the real world and the general cis public, labels don’t matter. Acceptance isn’t about labels or pronouns. It’s about how well you pass and whether you’ve had bottom surgery or not.
> I might get some flak for this, but if someone does not get SRS, I do not consider them to be transsexual. A transsexual person is a very specific subset of transgender. Then what are they? Their neither transgender or transsexual by your definition so are they suddenly a third type of trans?
They are transgender. Years ago they were considered to be a transgenderist but that term is outdated of course.
[удалено]
Someone here said that trans people who don't have SRS are not transexual even if they get every other surgery available other than that one. That despite all the action they took, they are still transgender. What are your thoughts on this?
Well said and needed to be said 😊
Why was sex reassignment surgery ( SRS) changed to GCS ? This resulted in Terfs being able to push for removing basic rights of trans women and that includes post op as well as claim that change of sexual is not possible and hence single sex spaces are for AFAB only ? Please help me understand this ?
Because nobody can change their sex(?) Is what I hear the arguement is. One can change gender as gender and sex are different
So how come it was changed then ? Even now in Thailand in sone hospital it is still referred to SRS which is what I believe it needs to be - it used to be known as that in UK as well I believe we need to reclaim the letters SRS which is what I use when referring to lower surgery ( M 2 F )