Renewed efforts underway to divide our LGBT community....

[LeftHander]

"T" will be the first to go. With changes in the "Big Book of Mental Health" or that diagnostic reference thingy for psychiatric care, trans is being removed. To some this is desirable for removing the stigma of being declared mentally ill, to others it places them in a position of being unable to obtain medical supervision of the transition.

A non-trans inclusive ENDA was the first really tipping of the hat by conservatives. Who ultimately pretended to support the bill for LGB if the T was off the table. But everyone knew the bill would not be signed.

In the end it was all window dressing as Bush promptly vetoed the bill. What was accomplished was a recognition by all conservative activists that transgender was to be "culled from the herd" first.

Now the conservative Pope is attacking trans. Like lions at the water hole they have targeted us for demonization because they felt threatened that trans was becoming too widely accepted.

The results will be seen as after years of getting people to use GLBT or LGBT to describe our communities will be for naught, the T is being dropped by editors in a purposeful effort to make the disconnection more real. The Church and the lawmakers and health professionals have made it very clear.

We, many times are the visible stereotype in the greater LGBT community and thus we become the first target.

But keep in mind as our community is marginalized and pushed further away from the greater gay community the result will be further victories by social and religious conservatives.

Fight to keep the T in LGBT. We have no place else to go.

[sui generis]

hey, WE define ourselves.

When you let THEM define us, you've lost.

that's always ever been the point.

They've defined us as immoral, unnatural, illegal. If we had just gone along with that without protest we'd all still be living in the closet for our own safety.

And I ain't just talking about T.

[patrice]

1. That's the Diagnostics and Statistics Manual, the DSM, I think V now. Interesting . . .

how often it changes.

[SteppingRazor]

2. And I would certainly fall on the side that removing the "T" from it is a good thing...

after all, homosexuality itself used to be listed as a disorder in the DSM, and I doubt any DUers would be arguing against its removal.

[Creideiki]

4. I'm sorry, can't parse this. Could you please be more clear?

[SteppingRazor]

7. I'll try.

The OP mentions that the "T" will soon be dropped from the DSM, then goes on to say there are two sides to this issue.

I then write that I am all for dropping the "T" from the DSM, because:

Homosexuality was once listed in the DSM, but was eventually dropped (I beleive at the time they published the DSM-III)

Homosexuality didn't belong in the DSM, neither does transgenderism.


That better? :)

[Creideiki]

8. Thanks. :)

[LeftHander]

9. I am not...

As of right now many insurance companies will pay for cross-sex hormone therapy and primary care because it is associated with a diagnosis and recognized treatment. Part of being T usually includes this.

It is already difficult to navigate the world of gender change as it is this will make it very difficult and is at odds with the AMA who recognize that it is better for the individual to treat gender dysphoria or gender identity disorder than to ignore it.

Transgender people who cannot safely transition risk numerous other mental health issues, depression, drug and alcohol abuse, suicide...

How else? Do the Nike thing....and "Just do it."?

[SteppingRazor]

11. I'll grant you that it's a dicier situation because it requires medical treatment whereas...

homosexuality does not.

But the trade off is, of course, that transgendered people are considered mentally ill. Is that an acceptable trade? It strikes me as being the same sort of poison pill as "civil unions" instead of marriage.

Mind you, I'm not hard and fast about my opinion on this, and I certainly see your point. I'm sure other people can defend either side of the issue better than me, as I don't have firsthand experience here, not being a T (or L, B or G, for that matter). In any case, I'd be curious what transgendered folks have to say about the issue.

[LeftHander]

14. well...my position....

It is hard to describe how much life has become better for me by simply presenting as non-masculine, suppressing androgens and taking female hormones.

But one thing I can describe is the clarity and calm it has brought. Because of mental health professionals I was able to find the help I needed to live my life honestly.

The stress of maintaining a masculine identity was ultimately going to kill me.

I still don't fully understand why I am like I am. But I have learned I can't deny it anymore.

Some people may not require any mental health intervention but with transgender removed then we open the door to go back to old methods of trying cure the symptoms that trans people often exhibit.

substance abuse, depression, anger...etc...

So we would return to rubber rooms, lobotomies and shock treatment or large doses of powerful psychotropic drugs that do nothing to resolve the root conflict.

With it gone then we can be really called crazy...

[Bluenorthwest]

3. From day one.

I have stood with the T in our community. Or rahter, the T has stood with me, from day one. And until the last it will be thus. We are one community in my eyes, always were and always will be.

[bunnies]

5. I refuse to consider trans people "mentally ill"

Sorry. Thats exactly what the fundies do. And thats what you want? :shrug:

Picture it: 'See, they ADMIT its a mental illness' aka 'the fundies were right all along'. And thats what you want? Really?

[LeftHander]

10. Well....there needs to be some justification....somewhere

For medical professionals, insurance companies to recognize that the treatment and care of transsexual people includes monitoring transition and treatment/surgery to effect a successful and safe transition.

Harry Benjamin created the structures so that trans people COULD live better lives.

Right now we are recognized some places some places not....

I mean how much medical care and treatment is needed to be gay, lesbian or bi?

none....really.

If you are transitioning M2F, F2M then medical supervision is pretty much required to lower risk serious complications....

My take is the opposite....The conservatives want to remove it so they can ignore us.

[bunnies]

13. You may be right...

But I think the medical side of the argument is extremely complicated. I think here definitely needs to be medical monitoring which (imho) should include the psychological. I can imagine that, even for the most well adjusted person in the world, going through a transition like that would be easier with some sort of counseling.

But do you *really* want to be labeled as mentally ill in order to get treatment? Is there any insurance company that provides this treatment anyway? Isnt it currently considered an elective surgery? Would the surgery be considered a cure for the 'illness'?

I may just be confused about how it would all work out, ultimately. :shrug:

[LeftHander]

15. With a diagnosis of GID....

Gender Identity Disorder...

the treatment is to transition to the other gender.

Some insurance recognizes, others do not. the AMA does. But the diagnostics standards organization now does not. So now insurance companies are likely to drop any coverage. Putting effective transitions out of reach of many trans individuals and opening the door for the host of mental issues that come from ignoring transgenderism.

Me I do not care if I am considered "mentally ill" as long as I am receiving the proper treatment.

Alcoholism is as much a mental health issue as it is a disease...

Being transgender is simply being but still requires appropriate medical labeling for successful treatment.

What if doctors treated alcoholism with anti-depressants? And failed to recognize that the continued consumption of alcohol was the real root cause.

[bunnies]

17. Thanks for explaining it to me.

I figured there was much about it that I didnt know. Now - I completely understand where youre coming from re: leaving the T in. The ability to get the treatment is way more important than whatever 'stigma' goes along with it.

Hey, and its not like LGBT people are strangers to stigma!

The real danger would be in deleting the disorder - thereby deleting the treatment. It seems an incredibly evil thing to do.

[MuseRider]

6. Drop the T?

Never. The T will remain in my vocabulary and my life and my work as long as I can say it. I hate any indication that anyone is ready to drop the T for the purpose of gaining for GLB but then since I am an ally I have little to say about it. I will however speak for myself and the T stays.

Define yourselves, don't let them do this. If we all hang together we will accomplish all that we want.

[TechBear_Seattle]

12. Do you have any links?

As far as I know, being transgender has never been classed as a mental disorder. Rather, the DSM included Gender Identity Disorder (GID), also known as gender dysphoria, which was the depression and inability to deal with their birth gender. While many people with GID do transition gender, many transgendered individuals do not have GID.

It would be nice to know what, exactly, is being removed.

[LeftHander]

16. GID is being removed....is my understanding...link

Transgender is a relatively new term used to encompass all those with some sort of gender identity that is opposite of birth sex.

It includes those diagnosed with GID and seeking transition to the other sex...in my experience trans people live and present as the opposite gender to birth as a rule rather than the exception.

It is not like non-operative transgender individuals are forced to have surgery....

Typically to receive any Rx for cross-sex hormone therapy or gender reassignment surgery it is first okay'd by a Mental Health pro after a diagnosis of GID.

You can do all this without aid of domestic medical care...but it is expensive and has risk of complications.

The cost alone is why insurance companies lobby to keep denying treatment.

http://www.gidreform.org/

Good site...taking the reform side rather than outright removal....is my guess...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transgender

More info and current debate...

ACK! it all makes my head spin....regardless it seems there is a renewed attack on T people.

[keepCAblue]

18. We can thank Barney Frank & HRC for throwing the Ts under the ENDA bus

"The most recent version of the bill, introduced by Representative Frank, no longer includes language regarding protections for transgender people and has been protested by many LGBT rights organizations in the United States, with the exception of the Human Rights Campaign.<3>"

For their actions, I can not with good conscience support either of them (Frank or HRC). HRC has not received a penny from our family since stooping so low.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Employment_Non-Discrimination_Act

That it is members of our own community doing this is despicable. How can we ever hope to win our civil rights when we have influential members of own community refusing to stand in solidarity?

[dbackjon]

19. The T stays, thank you very much

This is one positive aspect of this forum, for me, connecting with T's.


I am especially indebted to MaddieJoan, who helped educate me on something I had ZERO exposure to.

For MaddieJoan, and all other DU transgendered, I will fight this...

[Ioo]

20. Fine, I will Voice the unpopular position (flame Suit On)

I am going to voice a truth that, while you may not want to hear, I think is worth saying. I am NOT, IN ANY WAY, Condoning the removal of the T, but I understand those that do...

I think that the T is something all together different, and far more complicated then even the G&L debates. I have read in many places that "Transgender" does not imply any form of sexual orientation. I know this from my own life, one of my best friends in named Victor left high school, lived as a women, and dated women. He knew he was not a man, he did not feel like a man, he hated his penis, but he loved females. What is she?

As much as I am able to understand from the outside looking in the fact that the need to express ones gender is as complicated and proplexing as expressing the person you are attracted to sexual, I think that there are times when the conundrums that the transgender community bring up force people to walk away from the issue all together. I think that when you look at the Gay issue, the mechanics are cut and dry, the issues are, at there core, easy to define, and simple to rectify. I do not think that is the case when you put transgender into the mix, that adds a level of complexity that makes a lot of would be supporters turn tail and run. It is right, HELL NO, is it a fact, sadly YES.

My 74 year old grandmother once told me (she dies 3 years ago) "I support what you are and where you want to be Mark, but I just do not understand those people who want be a women when they are men. I just can't wrap my brain around that. Where do they use the bathroom? You don't want to dress like a girl do you?"

I give you my grandma's quote because that was the end of her long road coming to terms with her ONLY grandson in a very small family coming out of the closet. After a lot of thought, and some very personal questions, this was her conclusion... Gay is okay, transgender is odd and uncomprehending. It took her over 2 years of not really talking to me to get to that point.

Before you go and burn me to the ground I will repeat, I am okay with the T, but I am also a realist here and know from my own life what people are thinking. I love all my GLBT people, and I want us all to get the rights that are coming to us, and I want them all sooner rather than later... but I suspect that will not be the case...

[Zuiderelle]

21. I'm not going to flame you, but I don't understand how the exclusion of the transgendered helps us.

I understand people not understanding it and people having a more difficult time coming to terms with it, but I don't understand how excluding the transgendered helps our cause. We are talking equal rights for everyone, whether male or female or gay male or gay female, or transgendered male or transgendered female. I don't see how excluding the last two helps us.

Is it just to get people to empathize with us, and that you think that they would do that more easily, willingly, without having to understand the transgendered? We might as well exclude masculine women and effeminate men, and only put forth the case for equal rights for straight-looking, -acting, -seeming people. But that would be kind of ridiculous.

[Ioo]

23. You are setting up a straw man. There are some REAL issues here that are not present accross ...

the board.

I do not advocate excluding transgender people, but from a political stance (not a moral one) I do think that it is holding back gay rights, and we can see it play itself out RIGHT NOW in the employment bill, and times in the past, adding transgender to the mix is a poison pill. I am not saying this to be mean, I am pointing out a political reality. We do want equal rights for everyone, but history has shown us that each step forward does not bring all people ahead. Women's suffrage did not mean ALL Women. The blacks did not let us go along for the ride... I think it is naive to demand in one sweeping event the rights for ALL PEOPLE ALL AT ONCE, when history has shown us that is not how it works here

Gays and transgender people are not the same, the issues are similar in some ways, and in others not at all.

Examples

- Accommodations in public spaces
- Healthcare, what is treated and what is not. If being transgender is not a health condition, can a health care insurer deny coverage for hormone treatments. If not, then why?

These are NOT issues that are found across the rest of the gay community. My company covers me and my husband, we are both men. effeminate men are still men, and live as a man and get medical treatment just as other men do... I think that this opens up a box that makes many would be supported jump ship because it is not as easily explained to the voters...

I am not speaking on what is MORAL here, I am speaking to the political reality of our times and fight.

Would you rather get NO BILL AT ALL if it means transgendered is left out?

[keepCAblue]

25. " Would you rather get NO BILL AT ALL if it means transgendered is left out? "

Yes, yes, yes.

Absolutely, YES.

[Ioo]

28. Well I would rather take a small step forward then no step at all. Just silly

You never thought about the fact that it is baby steps? So you would rather NO ONE get ANYWHERE unless ALL OF US go at once... that is ignoring the political reality that is this nation.

I understand on the moral issue, yes we should ALL expect our rights... but if it is ALL OR NOTHING, WE WILL GET NOTHING.. I will pass.

[Zuiderelle]

31. It's a bit like saying, would you be happy with civil unions?

Well, no, actually, because if we accept civil unions, then we may NEVER get full equality, with full federal benefits. So, no, I would not be happy with civil unions. And to answer the question you asked me above, no, I would not be happy with ANY bill at all if it does not include transgendered people. It doesn't have to be comprehensive in regard to all the issues they need addressed, such as in the areas of public accommodation and details of what's covered by health insurance, but to exclude them entirely is not acceptable and it makes no sense.

[Ioo]

40. Your solution is not a solution at all, just pandering... Another straw man

You say that you want the WORD "transgender" included in whatever bill/act congress passes, even if it is JUST the word, and does nothing for that community. Just like DADT you would rather pander and give transgender people nothing, just leaves more questions than answers.

In fact, I dare say that your solution to the issue, "It doesn't have to be comprehensive in regard to all the issues they need addressed, such as in the areas of public accommodation ..." is doing the very thing you say you do not want to happen. If you just add the word "transgender" for the sake of "inclusion" and NOT addressing the issues specific to that community (your words not mine), then you are in fact, just like your civil unions straw man, blocking them from real equality, because transgender issues have been "addressed" in the minds of those that pass bills, even is they have not.

Your position, if allowed to play out, would harm the transgender community.

I am sorry, your position is just nuts... I can help people more when I am pulling from a position of higher ground.

I love your commitment to the community, and I promise that I will, for my whole life, fight for equality for all Americans, but we need to take equality as we can get it, and saying "thanks but no thanks" is a bad move.. set the WHOLE community back for god knows how long.

[Zuiderelle]

41. I never said we should just include it as a word,

...my point is that we cannot EXCLUDE it. I am not saying to give "them" nothing, I'm saying to give them exactly what we get.

How on earth would my position harm the transgender community more than your position of excluding them entirely would?

[Ioo]

43. You said include, without addressing the issues that need to be addressed...

Again, read your own post about Civil Unions... From what I read you said in a nutshell, If we accept civil unions we will never get marriage because as far as the public is concerned it is a done deal, no longer an issue...

If you include transgender people WITHOUT addressing the issues that are specific to that community (your words not mine) then you have done the same thing to the transgendered community as "civil unions" do to the whole GLBT community.

So it is a binary, we include them and address all the issues, or not at all. You are willing to accept a half assed solution, and that will do more harm than good. It is not easy to go back and fix a bill, there is no political will to do that.

So we are back to my main point, one we see playing out as we speak, the inclusion of transgender in any bill makes would be supporters flee... I would rather take a step forward, and reach and grab the rest of us, then all of us sit under the bus. Sorry to sound crass, but to say "all or nothing" is throwing the baby out with the bathwater.

Again, I am living in the USA on 2009, not 2034, and not in imagination land. Look, I would rather us address the issue of EVEY American being left behind, but that is not the reality of the world we live in... reality check, that is all I am talking about.

[Zuiderelle]

46. I disagree completely. We include them and address all the issues that affect all of us.

It's odd that you argue for removing them completely and going for a half-assed solution, but then criticize my saying to include them in what you claim is a half-assed solution.

I do agree that it would be good to address EVERY issue for every American, but we can at least address the issues that affect all GLBT Americans without specifically addressing right now the more controversial issues of what is covered by health insurance for the transgendered of us.

[Ioo]

51. I do not argue to remove them, they have been removed... Read what I said.

I am going to ask that you read what I post and not put words in my mouth.

I have not argued at all that they SHOULD be removed... you are just making that up. I stated that they have been removed, and when added back WOULD BE supporters of Gay rights LEAVE and the bill fails...

I went on to state that your solution of adding the word "transgender" to the bill, but FAIL to address the unique issues that need to be addressed for that group of people DOES IN FACT HARM THEM MORE. Go read your argument on Civil Unions above, the same thing applies...

My point is, I would rather NOT ADDRESS the issue at all and get a bill passed, than to half ass address the issue and put the transgender community in legal limbo, or threaten the bill that was passed to be struck down by a court because of the conundrum it would present if we went with your desire to add them and not address the needs (YOUR WORDS NOT MINE), that assumes we can get the bill passed, which history (the last week or so) has shown us WOULD FAIL. I would instead argue that we get a bill passed even if it is not ideal for ALL of us because we now fight from a position of higher ground. One step forward is better than no step at all... and a bill that does not address the transgender thing our-right would still be a help to ALL OF US, because at the end of the day, no matter how you express your gender, you are gay or straight (you sleep with the same sex or not)... and one is protected (M/F) and another not (M/M F/F)... under the bill passed right now (not including protection for transgender), it would take ONE reason away from the person who wants to fire you... THAT IS A STEP FORWARD.

I argue that the WHILE I WOULD LOVE FOR US ALL TO MOVE AHEAD IN LOCKSTEP, the political reality is that is not going to happen. That to many politicians "transgender" is a poison pill. Is it right, NO, is it the truth, YES. I think it is a absolutely backwards stance to take that it is all or nothing... LOOK AT HISTORY...

Civil Rights Act of 1964
Executive Order 11246
Civil Rights Act of 1968
Civil Rights Act of 1991

Had our African American brothers and sisters taken your stance, who knows where history would have the Civil Rights Moment.

Again and again we have seen that it is easier to get from the 0 to 2 to 5 to 8 to 10 than 0 to 10, you need look no further than history.

SO, I will end this because I do not think that you are even reading my posts, if you are, you are grossly mischaracterizing my comments. I will not apologies for being political realist, and not an ideolog. The Political reality sucks, but it is what we are working in.

[keepCAblue]

24. LGBTQI ...we all fall under the umbrella of "sexual minority"

...be it based on orientation (gay, lesbian, bi), gender identity (trans or intersexed), or just questioning or queer (an alternative label for those who reject...labels)

Complexity? Each individual that falls under the "sexual minority" umbrella has their own level of complexity -- Trans folk cannot uniquely claim their situations as more complex than someone who struggles with an orientation issue. The level of complexity changes as individuals evolve within their own journeys toward self-discovery.

What is more important, and more relevant, is that we all face similar persecution and oppression by the majority. I believe Trans folk face the greatest amount of persecution and that is why it even more important for us to stand together to support and defend each other. In a perfect world, we under the LGBTQI umbrella should receive that same level of reciprocity from other minorities -- racial, ethnic and religious. But, alas, this world is far from perfect -- we are, time and time again, thrown under the bus by other minorities who find it "offensive" that we dare compare our fight for equality and demand for first class citizenship to theirs -- as if their right to equality somehow invalidates our own.

I refuse to take that kind of stand against those within our own class of minority and anyone who does, does so at the expense of losing respect and integrity. Either we fight this fight together, or we shall all fail miserably.

[LeftHander]

47. Good points actually....highlights the confusion we cause...

When you try to define gender by adding sexual preference to the definition.
Things get really confusing when trans is added.

Many people tie sexual orientation to gender by default.


For many transgender people sexual orientation is as fluid as gender is.

[mitchtv]

22. All in this together, All of us

even partner, a big macho man, insists that we all stick together. If not the T's , then who?

[yardwork]

26. I support full and equal rights for all transgender people and anyone who identifies as different.

I really prefer the term "queer" because it's all-encompassing and non-specific. Unfortunately, the word freaks out straight people. I thought my (straight) boss was going to faint one day when I used it.

Not that that stops me from using it. It's just one more misunderstanding.

[Mike 03]

27. Sorry, I'm sort of out of it, but is this the DSM diagnosis of "mental illness"?

I thought we had gone way beyond diagnosing GLBT as illness.

[foxfeet]

30. Yes, this refers to the newest version of DSM.

Not yet published, as I understand it. Anyone know differently?

Oh, BTW, I'm in support of keeping the trans community as part of our larger community.

[Jamastiene]

34. For transgendered people, it is still considered a mental illness.

There are pros and cons to that though.

The pros are that by considering it a mental illness, many medical insurance companies will cover the costs or at least help with the costs (most likely scenario) of gender reassignment, such as hormones, surgery (in some cases) and transition in general.

The cons to removing it as a mental illness, is that it leaves that insurance coverage in the dust and provides little to no support for TS/TG people who are trying to learn to deal with a trans-phobic society.

So, not only is our society far behind in terms of the GLB, it is down right superstitious when it comes to the TS/TG part of the picture. There is way more to it than what I have mentioned here, but it might be better to discuss it privately. Many people might not be ready to hear the truth about it all. I said it in my reply to the OP below, but that post is likely to get scrubbed because it tells the truth about the attitude people have in our society and just how fucked up it all is. People just are not ready to understand that TS/TG people are perfectly normal and natural, just not easily classified in our binary system.

[Ms. Toad]

37. How about defining T as a physical birth defect?

In other words, there is nothing wrong with the brain - it is just that the body just doesn't match and needs to be (or should be eligible for) medical treatment for those who choose to correct the mismatch. That might permit access to insurance/gender reassignment treatment without the stigma associated with being classed as a mental illness.

[Jamastiene]

39. That might work.

Considering the fact that scientists have actually studied "male" and "female" brain functions and have determined that some males have more of a female brain and some females actually have more of a male brain, there is a scientific basis to build on there.

I certainly wish there was some happy medium where people could be free to be who we want to be without it being stuffed into the confines of being counted as a "moral" issue when it really is not a moral issue. TS/TG people cause no harm, no foul. It's really an issue of that person feeling "more like themselves" than the unruly body they were born into due to a mere formation of cells that didn't match the brain's wiring.

[ThomCat]

29. Yet another effort by straight people to define us an our communities?

:(

This should fail horribly. I know I'm abandoning anyone.

[Brooklyns_Finest]

32. Interesting

This is all very interesting to me. I work for the social security administration. Over the course of my career I have interviewed many transgendered people for disability claims. Most of the illnesses that they claim are schizophrenia, bi polar disorder and depression. Is this someting that is common amongst the transgendered community or are the pool of the people I have interviewed skewed? I would say that half of all people who apply for disability benefits are claiming a mental disability, but when I take my own experience with the transgendered the percentage is much higher.

I am just asking an honest question and not trying to push an untrue stereotype. I worked in Los Angeles, where everyone is suffering from something, so maybe that was the issue :)

[Jamastiene]

35. Well, I can only speak from my own personal experience and offer a

little insight into why they/we may be suffering from a host of mental problems.

The best way to describe living in a transphobic society is literally akin to saying, "They are driving my crazy." That's no joke. With the binary system of gender classification that our society has forced on us, it leaves no room for people who are born into one body when they know they should have another body. Society forces us into the gender roles that may not always be right for us. There are many who cannot be conveniently stuffed into those roles. It is just not right for them. Living in a world where no one understands and trying to discuss things that are pretty complicated within the narrow confines of our gender based role classification is beyond nerve racking.

There is a wealth of information that goes even beyond TS/TG but people tend not to be ready to discuss gender outside of the binary (Male and Female only) system. In a million years when people finally open their minds and start learning, our society is going to have to finally accept the fact that there are more than just two genders in nature and that includes human beings.

I'm glad you asked. Like I said, I can only give my personal experiences in life and why I suffer with my own mental illness. It would not be that way if our society would learn to lay off people they do not understand and just ask and learn instead.

[Brooklyns_Finest]

36. Thanks

I want to point out that the people filing for disability were not filing because they were confused about their gender. I guess trying to fit in to our social construct can drive the transgendered person towards a mental illness.

My younger brother has had a social phobia all his life. He has gone from being shy to depressed to being diagnosed with schizophrenia and bi polar disorder. TO me he is just a normal cool guy, but he has never been able to fit in to "normal" society. I think his inability to fit in has lead to his downward spiral. Sounds like that is a little bit like what you are explaining.

Thanks for sharing.

[Jamastiene]

38. I can probably understand, from my perspective, where your brother is coming from.

I have an anxiety disorder and have panic attacks. When I am in a large crowd or even in a somewhat mildly crowded place like a department store, I have panic attacks. It affects me pretty badly. During one of those attacks, I cannot even tell where I am any more. It's so disorienting and confusing. I hope your brother finally finds something that works for him to co-exist with our society even if he feels as I do; as if he cannot find a way to "fit in." That's how I feel a lot of the time. He's already got a good start with you seeing him as a cool guy. Love and support from some family members is important, very important. It means all the difference in the world. :hug:

[LeftHander]

49. excellent....GENDER defintion understanding is key....

The Pope recently tried to narrow that definition based on biblical terms...

Great another 2000 year old highly edited religious text to guide all behavior.

[Jamastiene]

33. You know what's really fucked up about that attitude some people have toward TG/TS people

is that as many as 1 in 1000 children are born with genitalia that is classified as ambiguous. Most of the time, the doctors chop off any part of the child that they deem "not normal looking" and make the child a female without waiting to see what they child grows up to be. I don't care what anyone calls it. Unless that child is having medical troubles that risk their lives or make their lives physically painful, sex reassignment surgery at birth with no consent from the human being involved is mutilation.

That attitude toward TS/TG people is exactly the same kind of attitude. As far as I am concerned, if people can buy colored contact lenses to change their eye color, get bigger boobs just because they want to, put artificial testes in dogs that have been neutered, and a host of other silly shit people do, then certain factions need to STFU and stop directing moral judgments at TS/TG people who want to live their lives free and be who they want to be.

It should not be classified as a mental illness, because it is not. There should also be NO ROADBLOCK to sex reassignment surgery if the patient has consented and wants the surgery done.

I am saying this in regards to this fact pointed out in the OP.

"A non-trans inclusive ENDA was the first really tipping of the hat by conservatives. Who ultimately pretended to support the bill for LGB if the T was off the table."

I'm sick of the phobia and yes, hate, against TS/TG people being ignored or not even acknowledged by so many people.

Thank you for pointing that out in your OP. :hug:

[bluedawg12]

42. I support equal rights for all people- I stand in solidarity w/ teh "T"!

[Chovexani]

44. I fight for Ts for selfish reasons

Because the same people who want to throw out the Ts always start talking about throwing out the Bs in the next breath if given the chance. Always. Funny how the fundies and knuckledragging Repukes are always inclusive of all queers when our own community isn't half the time.

Aside from selfish reasons it's just the right thing to do, seriously. And because IMO the reason Ts have it so hard is the root of why all queer people have it so hard in a hetero, cisgendered society, we challenge stubbornly held beliefs about gender and what it means to be male and/or female.

[Ayesha]

45. Trans doesn't belong in the DSM!

It's a *physical* disorder, a birth defect if you will, not a mental disorder. A person born with extra fingers or toes, or a hormonal deficiency, or a club foot, doesn't have a DSM-listed condition. They have a physical problem that is corrected through surgery and/or medications. Likewise, a trans person is born with the wrong body parts, and that can be treated. This change de-stigmatizes being trans, IMO.

[LeftHander]

48. Good point...as long as it is defined somewhere...and accepted

By someone...so we can get help from the medical establishment.

[Spectral Music]

50. I'm sorry I am too late to recommend this.

Why is recommending time limited?