Having difficulty understanding transgendered people? I'll try to help.

[KyuubiNoKitsune-Hime]

So what does identifying as a gender mean? Most people identify as a gender but I get confused what that means. As a cis straight man I don't think about my gender much. Maybe that's because I'm not ridiculed for it so I don't think about it but I assume I identify with my gender but basically does gender it entail personality traits, preferences in general life, appearance? What does it mean to identify?

But basically all self identity is the reference point for how your see yourself, people can identify with fictional characters, it's all about who you are in your own mind. Now when identifying as a member of the opposite sex, that's part of that reference point. A trans person may not fit all the opposite gender's gender roles, wear the same clothes, or behave the same way, though many do. Where it comes in as, well people have refereed to it as being similar to Phantom Limb/Phantom Itch/Phantom Pain amputees often feel, the limb is gone but you could swear you still feel it. For a trans person, it means being born in to what in your mind is the wrong gender.

 

[Dark Knifer]

So what does identifying as a gender mean? Most people identify as a gender but I get confused what that means. As a cis straight man I don't think about my gender much. Maybe that's because I'm not ridiculed for it so I don't think about it but I assume I identify with my gender but basically does gender it entail personality traits, preferences in general life, appearance? What does it mean to identify?

But basically all self identity is the reference point for how your see yourself, people can identify with fictional characters, it's all about who you are in your own mind. Now when identifying as a member of the opposite sex, that's part of that reference point. A trans person may not fit all the opposite gender's gender roles, wear the same clothes, or behave the same way, though many do. Where it comes in as, well people have refereed to it as being similar to Phantom Limb/Phantom Itch/Phantom Pain amputees often feel, the limb is gone but you could swear you still feel it. For a trans person, it means being born in to what in your mind is the wrong gender.

So its a mindset basically? Well I can see how trying to actualize that would be difficult. If it makes people happy I'm glad but I'd like to learn more about it. So its something that bothers people and they can't put their finger on until until they make this realization and that puts it into perspective? Hope I'm understanding this right.

 

[Addendum_Forthcoming]

So its a mindset basically? Well I can see how trying to actualize that would be difficult. If it makes people happy I'm glad but I'd like to learn more about it. So its something that bothers people and they can't put their finger on until until they make this realization and that puts it into perspective? Hope I'm understanding this right.

It's more a sense of despair in the face of lacking a means to marry flesh and mind from the beginning. About authentcity of character and shaping the self. Allowing oneself to be open with others in how they wish to be, and how they wish others to associate. Being true unto oneself. It's hard to articulate, primarily because it's like an existential crisis for most since their earliest thoughts. They know they are wrong, and want to correct that wrongness. That deficiency. So that they can be owners of, and embody, truth of character and self.

 

[NoeL]

Dude, I never called PaulH anything, if you're going to say I said something, please at least make an attempt to use what I wrote.

I was referring to this:

Siiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiigggggggggggggggghhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh.

This is sorta the attitude and mentality I'm talking about.

You made a claim that "the majority" of out trans people (specifically MtF) "go apeshit over simple things", that "alot"[sic] of them "don't have a sense of humor when it comes to them", and implied that they're mostly "intolerable douches". When PaulH justifiably took offence to this (even if their response was out of proportion) you dismissed them as just another crazy with a bad attitude instead of bothering to consider why you got that reaction. It's like strolling around calling all black people niggers then saying "Boy, black people sure are intolerable douches!" when they act hostile towards you.

Now, can you contribute to answering any of the questions I've yet to have answered? Because that's all I'm interested in here.

I'm not trans so can't really speak for them there, but I will say in response to your dating question that it would be pretty unreasonable for a trans person to get offended by you declining a date because of their genitals, and I don't think that many trans people would hold it against you if you weren't into it. And no, I doubt they'd think you obligated to do it anyway - no one wants to be with someone that finds them unattractive.

 

[KyuubiNoKitsune-Hime]

No questions here, really. Though that might just be experience with having a good friend who's trans. I thought your post was quite nice as an attempt of inviting discussion.

At the same time we have the freedom to not acknowledge an identity choice for our own conclusions, and I'm uncomfortable with trannies being allowed into bathrooms that don't match their biological sex.

She acknowledges that in her post, but is it really that difficult if you just happened to know someone was trans to refer to them as their preferred gender identity for the prospective few seconds you'd actually have to interact with them? It's really not that horrible. People seem to just take something being separated from their definition of 'normal' as somehow wrong, and then view that as grounds to be an asshole. It's not.

Why are you uncomfortable with trans people using the bathrooms associated with their gender identity? What makes you think that's an issue? Hell, someone could easily pass for a woman and you'd never fucking know she was trans. Also, gender and biological sex are different concepts that get completely associated with each other far too often.

And for Christ's sake, she said in her post that tranny is typically a frowned-upon term and you used it anyway. I think that's not really setting a good standard for any manner of discussion.

"She"

You mean it.

I don't care, they don't belong in those bathrooms because it opens many legal pathways of which shouldn't be "I'm genderfluid so I can use whatever I want" and other shit like that.

By your line of thought which bathroom should I use? I present as female even better than male, wouldn't you have just as much of an issue with me using the Men's Room as the Women's? Should I just be banned from public restrooms as a general rule? In the case it'd freak men right out if I just waltzed in to a Men's restroom, that'd cause a problem. Banning me from public restrooms would be massive discrimination, and in all honestly would be more bullshit than the argument you posed. The sets a legal precedent arguement is more than a bit dumb in this case, because if someone is abusing such protections, they'll get called on it.

Also haven't we already made it perfectly clear that using words like tranny, or referring to trans people as "it" us pretty much universally unacceptable?

 

[Sleepy Sol]

"She"

You mean it.

I don't care, they don't belong in those bathrooms because it opens many legal pathways of which shouldn't be "I'm genderfluid so I can use whatever I want" and other shit like that.

Lemme set something straight here.

You are referring to a human being, just like you and me, as an 'it.' Do you not realize how insulting that can be after someone's expressed over and over that they feel that they're a woman in spite of their birth sex? How is it a big deal to at least try to respect that? Or be polite about how you disagree? I suppose I could call you an it based on part of your identity that you can't change, because I guess that's the standard of discussion we've set here.

I don't even understand how the bathroom thing has ever been an issue. Transpeople aren't rape-crazy or something. They're normal people in the sense that they have to deal with biological processes like the rest of us, and that they're humans with their own feelings, desires, general...adherence to regular behavior that would go on in a bathroom. What the hell is the issue here?

I'm not going to get into genderfluid stuff because I have little knowledge about the concept and am still rather skeptical of it at times. But in the case of transpeople, they still fall within pretty binary gender classifications. I don't see how that's some slippery slope to an apparent dystopia where people are changing their gender identity as they please to in some sort of manipulative bid to do...whatever it is you seem to be concerned about.

 

[Poetic Nova]

I do have one question, for you or anyone else knowledgeable: What, exactly, is the difference between bisexual and pansexual? I've never been able to get a clear answer from anywhere, including a friend of mine who is himself transgender and very active in the LGBT community. Thanks in advance.

Bisexuality mean that you don't mind if your partner is male or female. It's is either/both the character and/or looks that count. As for pansexual, someone needs to correct me on this if needed, and sorry if I sound blunt, a person can be attracted to someone who possibly doesn't fall under the gender binary but also to those who do. It's seen as a subset of bisexuality.

I do have to ask, why would anybody want to wear women's clothing if not just for a fun few hours if they don't have a woman's body though? Don't listen to Alex from LRR, dresses are supremely uncomfortable the couple of times I've worn them(very long stories) and I still have trouble understanding how most heels (and suits) have stayed around for so long.

Should've answered this one the first time around, anyway:
Getting back to your questions (and sorry if it took longer than expected). There are people who are cisgendered but feel more comfortable wearing clothes from the opposite gender. May it be for comfort, something that happend in their life or otherwise.

OT: So exactly what is your personal thoughts on transgenders(pre-op, transexual, whatever the correct word is for the ones that still their original junk) asking out straight, "normal", people and getting rejected once it comes to light? Transphobic or just sorta being a straight person and wanting genitals that don't look like their own? In addition, should a person feel obligated(wrong word, but I think I'm getting the idea out, just got off work, sorry) to date a transperson they have no sexual interest in because of the above because they're a "real" woman(not trying to be a dick here, just trying to be clear and differentiate) and there's not a substantial difference?

Personally, I would rather tell them beforehand. If they don't like it then I would pass up on them, even moreso if they suddenly decide to ***** that I'm not a real women or something alogn those lines. However If they respect me for who I am, there still might be a friendship. Though, I think it is understandable if they don't want to date someone who still has the genitals that goes against their 'taste' so to speak (sorry if this sounds wrong, folks, no mean to disrespect, just a lack for a better word atm). Since it can go against, well with a lack of a better word, their nature if they are straight. However, if we talk about post GRS then the story would be completely diffirent. But it might be me talking since I don't even like what I have between my legs.
I would rather date someone who is transgender aswell or bisexual to possibly avoid these kind of situations.

And my question from earlier, when do you think a transperson should "come out", in terms of age and pretending we live in the ideal world for trans persons, and what events lead up to it to hint and convince the person or if there is any indication you know of personally that would mean someone essentially just going through a phase and not actually trans? Vice versa goes without saying I think.

That's is all up to the person him/herself really, it is something that they have to find out themself.
From my own experience and from what my mother observed, there were already signs that I was born in the wrong body when I was 5/6 y/o. However, it took me untill puberty took place for me to finally put the so called puzzle together.

Well, rather large post that I do rarely. Hope I didn't skip any of your questions.

"She"

You mean it.

I don't care, they don't belong in those bathrooms because it opens many legal pathways of which shouldn't be "I'm genderfluid so I can use whatever I want" and other shit like that.

People like you are the reason why I'm afraid to come out (which I have to do anyway).
Have some respect, will ya?

 

[ToastiestZombie]

What are your thoughts on parents allowing their children to take hormone-altering drugs and possibly even undergo surgery before they turn 18? Do you believe that children can be coerced into becoming transgender when they're simply showing signs of being gender-confused? I'd like to know your thoughts.

 

[KyuubiNoKitsune-Hime]

What are your thoughts on parents allowing their children to take hormone-altering drugs and possibly even undergo surgery before they turn 18? Do you believe that children can be coerced into becoming transgender when they're simply showing signs of being gender-confused? I'd like to know your thoughts.

Some would argue that hormone therapy might be more advantageous when introduced around puberty, as that's often when a trans individual begins feeling gender dysphoria acutely enough to be diagnosed. The only benefit I can think of is that the child in question wouldn't have to go through the "wrong" puberty. But that would be something that would need to be addressed with a mental health professional, all the appropriate doctors, and with permission of the parents. Kind of something that's not likely to happen.

As for surgical treatment, on the other hand, I'm a bit dubious on it's worth early on. Since not all trans individuals actively seek surgery at all and many, like myself, find Gender Reassignment Surgery to be unnecessary for various reasons. I'd say wait on GRS until age 18, or later if possible, it's one thing that takes extremely careful planning and consideration, you don't want to be stuck with something you may hate more than what you had. Plus GRS has some potential risks that need to be carefully weighed.

As for being able to coerce someone into being trans? I don't think so. Gender identity issues need to be diagnosed before any treatment can start, which can take a while just to pin them down. I don't think it'd ever be a good idea to start pressing transition at any level on someone who hasn't at least reached puberty, if possible at a somewhat later stage. Since transgenderism is a complex enough subject in adults, I don't think you'd find medical professionals very keen on the idea of transition before adulthood, and most parents probably won't do it. That's assuming that said child is even "out," or has accepted that they might have gender identity issues, usually the latter comes around adulthood.

 

[Addendum_Forthcoming]

What are your thoughts on parents allowing their children to take hormone-altering drugs and possibly even undergo surgery before they turn 18? Do you believe that children can be coerced into becoming transgender when they're simply showing signs of being gender-confused? I'd like to know your thoughts.

Some would argue that hormone therapy might be more advantageous when introduced around puberty, as that's often when a trans individual begins feeling gender dysphoria acutely enough to be diagnosed. The only benefit I can think of is that the child in question wouldn't have to go through the "wrong" puberty. But that would be something that would need to be addressed with a mental health professional, all the appropriate doctors, and with permission of the parents. Kind of something that's not likely to happen.

As for surgical treatment, on the other hand, I'm a bit dubious on it's worth early on. Since not all trans individuals actively seek surgery at all and many, like myself, find Gender Reassignment Surgery to be unnecessary for various reasons. I'd say wait on GRS until age 18, or later if possible, it's one thing that takes extremely careful planning and consideration, you don't want to be stuck with something you may hate more than what you had. Plus GRS has some potential risks that need to be carefully weighed.

Oh, I don't know ... I've met many people who *really* hate what they have. Assuming we lived in a fantasy land where parents don't kick you out on street, assuming if every person was born into a warm, stable family dynamic. Certain proceedures are only electable after a certain amount of time on HRT, to begin with. So I totally would have bugged my parents for something like HRT, and then an orchiectomy back when I was a young to mid teen. You know, if it wasn't for the whole homeless thing.

It lowers the anti-androgens necessary in the drug regimen for the average patient. It's one less thing to worry about during teenage years. I can only talk from personal experience, but I would have loved if someone gave me the option for HRT and an orchiectomy well before 18. Internet is more of a thing than when I was a teenager, so teenagers are better clued in to what they want than ever before. If a kid shows increased psychological stability on HRT, and really wants some form of GRS (there are multiple types) .... ehhh. Seems cruel to say no. Particularly if it helps them be healthier, happier and safer.

For example, yes an orchiectomy is permanent. But then again, if someone has no desire to ever cease HRT then infertility is kind of a given after a year on it.

 

[Random Fella]

Gender is genetic.
Genetics plays a huge role in the sex development of people. That said not everyone is born with physical parts their genes suggest. For example I have "XX Male Syndrome" which means I am genetically female, but I was born male physically. Some women have XY chromosomes, more surprising is some people have more chromosomes for sex than others. Some men are born with two Y chromosomes and no X Chromosome. But that doesn't define how we identify. We're all humans, but some people identify as non-human animals, or objects, for example. While physical birth sex is often genetic, it doesn't control identity, or sexual preference for that matter.

Uhh, can you provide proof of this?
Because I'm quite sure that's not how genetics works.

 

[Lilani]

What are your thoughts on parents allowing their children to take hormone-altering drugs and possibly even undergo surgery before they turn 18? Do you believe that children can be coerced into becoming transgender when they're simply showing signs of being gender-confused? I'd like to know your thoughts.

Well, the entire point of hormone therapy to delay puberty is to put off and minimize all physical changes so the child can undergo therapy and get their feelings sorted out, so that later on they can make a more definitive answer. It isn't a step toward any change one way or another, merely a way of stalling for time while they get things sorted.

Sex change operations and hormone therapy aren't done merely as one-shot solutions. They happen over the course of many months or years, along with extensive therapy to make the person completely comfortable in whatever decision they make. There are degrees of "sex-change operations" just as there are degrees of gender. Sometimes they do the full operation and get all of their physical attributes "changed," sometimes they do not. Sometimes they do extensive hormone therapy, sometimes they do not. The goal is to reconcile their inner feeling of gender dysphoria with their outward appearance, and how much therapy or physical changes are necessary to reconcile this depends entirely on the person. Being transgender is that state of gender dysphoria or being "gender-confused," not simply having sex reassignment surgery.

As for whether or not a child can be "coerced" into becoming transgender, I guess the answer is that somebody can try, but my greater concern lies in all of the transgender children who are coerced into believing they are NOT transgender, and do not get the treatments and therapy they need. Given how tormented these children often become, I imagine the results would be the same as anybody else who tries to defy what their child believes their gender identity to be. At least with a child who is coerced into treatments for gender dysphoria, they are also seeing a therapist who will be able to determine whether or not they actually have gender dysphoria. This is a much better situation than the children who never get any therapy or helpful answers for what they're going through. But again, I've never heard of such a thing.

 

[KyuubiNoKitsune-Hime]

Oh, I don't know ... I've met many people who *really* hate what they have. Assuming we lived in a fantasy land where parents don't kick you out on street, assuming if every person was born into a warm, stable family dynamic. Certain proceedures are only electable after a certain amount of time on HRT, to begin with. So I totally would have bugged my parents for something like HRT, and then an orchiectomy back when I was a young to mid teen. You know, if it wasn't for the whole homeless thing.

It lowers the anti-androgens necessary in the drug regimen for the average patient. It's one less thing to worry about during teenage years. I can only talk from personal experience, but I would have loved if someone gave me the option for HRT and an orchiectomy well before 18. Internet is more of a thing than when I was a teenager, so teenagers are better clued in to what they want than ever before. If a kid shows increased psychological stability on HRT, and really wants some form of GRS (there are multiple types) .... ehhh. Seems cruel to say no. Particularly if it helps them be healthier, happier and safer.

For example, yes an orchiectomy is permanent. But then again, if someone has no desire to ever cease HRT then infertility is kind of a given after a year on it.

I understand your position, personally I believe that HRT's benefits outweigh the risks. There are lots of medical benefits for starting earlier, one is of course being on fewer anti-androgen, plus the added benefits it can have with mental health as well. Still it's something that requires therapy on the mental health side, doctors to sign off it, parental approval... In a perfect world it should be an option, but not before puberty, because starting too early can cause damage to a person's development.

Any surgical procedures have inherent risks, so they always need to be carefully and cautiously considered, you have to be absolutely certain the benefits out weigh the risks. Also it can be dangerous to make physical and cosmetic changes to a person while they're still developing, it's why I detest child beauty pageant participant getting cosmetic surgery. Their bodies are changing and rapidly, at the minimum they'll need more surgery to keep up with growth and surgical procedures are dangerous. There are potential moral issues for me on the whole subject. I still think it should be taken on a case by case basis.

On a final note, children and teens don't have the ability to consent to a contract before adulthood, there is an important reason for this. Children, adolescents, and teens are not responsible enough to make such life changing decisions. What they want, versus what is actually good for them can be worlds apart. Options should be present, but professionals and parents need to be involved to help identify what the best choice actually is.

If only we lived in a world where this was a general possibility, rather than in one where people, more often than not, completely loose their minds over transgenderism being inherently wrong.

Well, the entire point of hormone therapy to delay puberty is to put off and minimize all physical changes so the child can undergo therapy and get their feelings sorted out, so that later on they can make a more definitive answer. It isn't a step toward any change one way or another, merely a way of stalling for time while they get things sorted.

Sex change operations and hormone therapy aren't done merely as one-shot solutions. They happen over the course of many months or years, along with extensive therapy to make the person completely comfortable in whatever decision they make. There are degrees of "sex-change operations" just as there are degrees of gender. Sometimes they do the full operation and get all of their physical attributes "changed," sometimes they do not. Sometimes they do extensive hormone therapy, sometimes they do not. The goal is to reconcile their inner feeling of gender dysphoria with their outward appearance, and how much therapy or physical changes are necessary to reconcile this depends entirely on the person. Being transgender is that state of gender dysphoria or being "gender-confused," not simply having sex reassignment surgery.

As for whether or not a child can be "coerced" into becoming transgender, I guess the answer is that somebody can try, but my greater concern lies in all of the transgender children who are coerced into believing they are NOT transgender, and do not get the treatments and therapy they need. Given how tormented these children often become, I imagine the results would be the same as anybody else who tries to defy what their child believes their gender identity to be. At least with a child who is coerced into treatments for gender dysphoria, they are also seeing a therapist who will be able to determine whether or not they actually have gender dysphoria. This is a much better situation than the children who never get any therapy or helpful answers for what they're going through. But again, I've never heard of such a thing.

I agree with this sentiment. As I said to PaulH the options need to be present, but it's still up to professionals and parents to help decide what the right course of action is. Just because children and teenagers can't always make the best decisions about their life. Yeah we need to see more support for children and teens with gender dysphoria, sadly that starts with parents, who often have no clue how to handle the situation. So they find it easier to deny there is an issue, that their child is different from any other, and thus sweep it under the rug.

Edit: Well sweep it under the rug and deny it's existence in the best of times, usually. More often than not trans children are abused, to beat the trans/gay out of them. Other times they're sent away to have the behaviour corrected in counter productive ways.

 

[KyuubiNoKitsune-Hime]

Honestly, pls tell why why tranny is offensive.

I already partially explained this in the original post. It's a derogatory term, along with being heavily used by the pornography industry. It has no positive connotations to trans people anymore.

Except statistically 72%-96% of gender dysphoria cases cease at young adulthood.

Where did you get that statistic? Because I highly doubt that number, especially since most transgender people don't come out as trans until adulthood, or late teens.

Also remember the famous quote from Mark Twain: "There are three kinds of lies; lies, damned lies, and statistics."

 

[Addendum_Forthcoming]

I understand your position, personally I believe that HRT's benefits outweigh the risks. There are lots of medical benefits for starting earlier, one is of course being on fewer anti-androgen, plus the added benefits it can have with mental health as well. Still it's something that requires therapy on the mental health side, doctors to sign off it, parental approval... In a perfect world it should be an option, but not before puberty, because starting too early can cause damage to a person's development.

Any surgical procedures have inherent risks, so they always need to be carefully and cautiously considered, you have to be absolutely certain the benefits out weigh the risks. Also it can be dangerous to make physical and cosmetic changes to a person while they're still developing, it's why I detest child beauty pageant participant getting cosmetic surgery. Their bodies are changing and rapidly, at the minimum they'll need more surgery to keep up with growth and surgical procedures are dangerous. There are potential moral issues for me on the whole subject. I still think it should be taken on a case by case basis.

On a final note, children and teens don't have the ability to consent to a contract before adulthood, there is an important reason for this. Children, adolescents, and teens are not responsible enough to make such life changing decisions. What they want, versus what is actually good for them can be worlds apart. Options should be present, but professionals and parents need to be involved to help identify what the best choice actually is.

If only we lived in a world where this was a general possibility, rather than in one where people, more often than not, completely loose their minds over transgenderism being inherently wrong.

You wouldn't start before puberty anyways. And you certainly wouldn't consider it after afew years of HRT to begin with.

There's a difference between orchiectomy to reduce the effects of anti-androgen regimen or improving the mental health of having a depression-inducing aspect of themselves removed, and cosmetic surgery. I'm not saying all surgeries, just some surgeries make sense. FFS stuff, etc ... pretty sure that can wait until they have a more or less developed body in terms of muscle and bone. Removing of testes after a year or two on HRT? Well, reduction of drugs needing to be purchased, and less taxing on the body in general and better mental health. Seems like a win-win to me.

The thing is, I don't agree parents should have 100% control of their kids. Innoculations? Hygiene standards, health standards and basic standards of liberty. No decent doctor, educator, or social worker is going to tell you 'Authoritarian policing of children is better than authoritative guidance." Keywords, authoritative and guidance. It is not a fit parent who lords over their children's self-construction.

In the same way that a child should not be pushed by parents about rushing into a surgical theatre, neither should children be kept imprisoned by their families. I can understand financial reasons, I can't understand 'religious' or 'beliefs' used to dictate to their children the nature of their self identity. Particularly when it gets to the point of causing injury and illness. Any parent that says they are going to traumatise their children to 'abuse the out of them' should be seen as automatically unfit to pursue their duty of care as a parent to begin with.

Parents are there to raise their children. Not own them. Any society that places ownership of one's children above a duty of care of one's children is paralyzing any means for social workers to help rescue children from grievous injury from scumbag parents who should never have been considered fit to raise a child to begin with. If you're not allowed to starve your children, or otherwise act in a manner that can cause detrimental side effects or death, then why exactly does; "Well, <insert religious/social hatreds here>" justify further cases of neglect or direct abuse?

In my eyes, if you're a parent who actively denies the available means to find help your child, if only to uhold your beliefs over their wellbeing? You should no longer be a parent. End of story.

Oh, and 16 should be the cut off when parents can dictate over their children's health. Anything beyond that is merely gate-keeping, and most surgeons require a year or two on hormones to be even eligible. Besides, at that age your parents no longer can access your private medical records anyways (If I remember correctly, in NSW) ....

Teens may make poor decisions, but if they have attended multiple counselling sessions, and approved by an endocrinologist, doctor and therapist, why exactly is it an issue anymore? If I can entrust a 16 year old with a driver's licence, HRT after all those hoops seems like a marginal concern. I also have far less faith in parents making this decision. Maybe mine were just especially bad (and they were), but I'll place my faith in the kid, therapist, endocrinologist, and doctor they (the patient) elect to see. Far too many 'doctors' still running around saying; "GID."

 

[KyuubiNoKitsune-Hime]

You wouldn't start before puberty anyways. And you certainly wouldn't consider it after afew years of HRT to begin with.

There's a difference between orchiectomy to reduce the effects of anti-androgen regimen or improving the mental health of having a depression-inducing aspect of themselves removed, and cosmetic surgery. I'm not saying all surgeries, just some surgeries make sense. FFS stuff, etc ... pretty sure that can wait until they have a more or less developed body in terms of muscle and bone. Removing of testes after a year or two on HRT? Well, reduction of drugs needing to be purchased, and less taxing on the body in general and better mental health. Seems like a win-win to me.

The thing is, I don't agree parents should have 100% control of their kids. Innoculations? Hygiene standards, health standards and basic standards of liberty. No decent doctor, educator, or social worker is going to tell you 'Authoritarian policing of children is better than authoritative guidance." Keywords, authoritative and guidance. It is not a fit parent who lords over their children's self-construction.

In the same way that a child should not be pushed by parents about rushing into a surgical theatre, neither should children be kept imprisoned by their families. I can understand financial reasons, I can't understand 'religious' or 'beliefs' used to dictate to their children the nature of their self identity. Particularly when it gets to the point of causing injury and illness. Any parent that says they are going to traumatise their children to 'abuse the out of them' should be seen as automatically unfit to pursue their duty of care as a parent to begin with.

Parents are there to raise their children. Not own them. Any society that places ownership of one's children above a duty of care of one's children is paralyzing any means for social workers to help rescue children from grievous injury from scumbag parents who should never have been considered fit to raise a child to begin with. If you're not allowed to starve your children, or otherwise act in a manner that can cause detrimental side effects or death, then why exactly does; "Well, <insert religious/social hatreds here>" justify further cases of neglect or direct abuse?

In my eyes, if you're a parent who actively denies the available means to find help your child, if only to uhold your beliefs over their wellbeing? You should no longer be a parent. End of story.

Oh, and 16 should be the cut off when parents can dictate over their children's health. Anything beyond that is merely gate-keeping, and most surgeons require a year or two on hormones to be even eligible. Besides, at that age your parents no longer can access your private medical records anyways (If I remember correctly, in NSW) ....

Teens may make poor decisions, but if they have attended multiple counselling sessions, and approved by an endocrinologist, doctor and therapist, why exactly is it an issue anymore? If I can entrust a 16 year old with a driver's licence, HRT after all those hoops seems like a marginal concern. I also have far less faith in parents making this decision. Maybe mine were just especially bad (and they were), but I'll place my faith in the kid, therapist, endocrinologist, and doctor they (the patient) elect to see. Far too many 'doctors' still running around saying; "GID."

We have vastly different experiences with parents, so I can in many ways sympathize with your own biases. I may not have put it well but the abusive and traumatic methods of attempting to "correct" gender dysphoria should of course be heavily punished, same as for any other abuse. That includes loss of parental rights in cases that justify such action such as extreme neglect and abuse both mental and physical. Remember though foster care isn't an ideal solution either, as people who volunteer as foster parents, at least in the States, tend to do it for either finical reasons, or for faith based reasons. But that's also somewhat beside the point.

Now if it comes to mental abuse for being trans and a child's therapist gets wind of it, they had better damn well report it to child protective services, same goes for physical abuse and neglect. But this isn't always the case. Also for treatment the parents deserve a say if they're not actively trying to abuse their child, due in no small part as a means of attempting to protect the child's welfare. Since bullies will relentlessly target trans students, at least in my experience. Another consideration is who's paying for any treatment for their child, if it's the parents, then they have a say on a purely financial basis. Since treatments for trans are often seen as elective, most insurance, as far as I recall, doesn't have to cover it, but the Affordable Care Act might have changed that. I don't remember off hand. Either way the parents still have a financial stand there too as they're the ones paying for the policy and deductible.

If you're living in your parent's home, then it's not unreasonable for them to expect you to live by their rules, unless it's active abuse. You could argue that denial of treatment for gender dysphoria is abuse, but on the other hand it could be argued otherwise, especially on a case by case basis. Some kids may be fine not transitioning yet, many though hide the condition actively just to fit in.

In the US teens can emancipate themselves from their parents somewhere around age 16 in most states, so if they're that age, they can totally cut themselves and their medical records off from their parents. Which sadly might be the only option for quite a few trans people. Though one thing I do remember is that in most states you have to be 18 years of age to get a fully unrestricted driver's license. Even so I don't trust anyone under 21 years old behind the wheel of a car, younger people(hate to make my self sound old) are maniacs behind the wheel, and usually lack experience. Also in the US you have to be 18 years old minimum to consent to contract, without parental consent also. Though emancipated teens may get a exemption on that rule.

Anyways, as much faith as I may have in kids and I know they're not stupid, it's still a bit of a reach to expect them to make important medical decisions. We are talking about an age group that's well known for inflicting injury on themselves by making really dumb decisions. But hey, that's part of growing up. I'll trust them more as they get more information and experience under their belts. Still how many will out right defy even their own parents, when the parents give them some very commonsense advice.

Parent's don't own their children, but until they're grown up enough they are responsible for their well being and upbringing. So parents need control over their kids, not just to command them, but to make sure they're safe, healthy, clothed, fed, and generally taken care if. That often trades off to the kids not having full freedom, which honestly is a good things, too many kids end up in danger, dead, or in jail when not looked after.

 

[KyuubiNoKitsune-Hime]

I hope you're into weird (and somewhat shameless) questions because I have a few:

I guess I'm game, sounds like fun.

Would it be gay for a straight CIS male to find a feminine transgendered person attractive? Or is it a different kind of straight?

That's entirely a personal question based on how the person who find trans people attractive feels them selves. I don't generally classify things in binary sexuality personally.

What's your opinion of futa (Hermaphrodite) porn?

I find it generally unattractive(see below), but if someone else is into it, I won't judge them for their stance.

Do you prefer CIS gendered individuals or other trans when comes to sex or pornography?

For sex it has to be someone I'm emotionally and romantically attracted, gender doesn't matter. For porn I find the female genitals unattractive to look at, but I don't have much use for porn anyways.

What do you think of traps in anime and Japanese games? Are you okay with them or do you find them offensive?

Well this is an interesting question. First they tend to pop up in really kinda morally grey subject matter, you know the kind I'm talking about. Second I think it's offensive as an idea and wrong for someone to deceive anyone else into sex on false pretences. In a fictional setting I'm a bit more liberal on the idea, still find the act of "trapping" someone to be both offensive and wrong. As for people fictional or real who like to cross dress, are convincing, and enjoy doing it for reasons other than deception and sex. More power to them.

Do you praise the sun?

Only casually, the sun hurts my eyes and I sunburn easily. Mostly I pray for overcast and rainy days, along with pleasantly bright nights.

This was very silly, nice way to break the tension this thread has picked up though.

 

[CaptainMarvelous]

Where did the term "Cis" come from? Trans/bi/gay/decpticon, all those I remember being around for a long time, but then Cis came along and no one has told me yet where it comes from. What happened to njust being g called straight? I was fine with that.

It's from Latin, the opposite of trans. By comparison, the Romans divided Gaul into Transalpine Gaul, Gaul on the other side of the Alps, and Cisalpine Gaul, Gaul on this side of the Alps. Swap gender for mountains and people for Gaul, and there you go.

As mentioned, straight refers to sexuality, not gender. So, we have terms like "cishet" meaning cisgender and heterosexual. Having said that, the T in LGBT is for trans, of course, which confuses things.

so, at the risk of being a dick, I still think that Cis is not the best way to put it. If it was trans- as in from trans-form or trans-port as in taking an action to move to the other side then it makes sense with how transgender is about going from MtF or FtM or some step in between, but we don't have cisform or cisport because... well, it's just being non-mobile. You'd want to use stativus or stabilis as the root Latin as they mean non-moving since transgender isn't about being on 'the other side' of gender, it's about transitioning between them from one you aren't comfortable with to one you are.

Plus, and this is actually quite important, it LITERALLY is saying that trans and cis people are on opposite sides and if your trans and meet someone else who is trans (of the same type, so FtM or something) then they'd be 'Cis' as they'd be on the same side. If it's just Statisexual or Statigender or something then it means you're staying where you are, you've reached the gender and sexuality you're comfortable with.

 

[Thaluikhain]

since transgender isn't about being on 'the other side' of gender, it's about transitioning between them from one you aren't comfortable with to one you are.

Not sure about that.

Plus, and this is actually quite important, it LITERALLY is saying that trans and cis people are on opposite sides and if your trans and meet someone else who is trans (of the same type, so FtM or something) then they'd be 'Cis' as they'd be on the same side.

Not seeing how that is important, TBH.

Anyway, Transalpine Gaul wasn't on the other side of the Alps from Transalpine Gaul.

If it's just Statisexual or Statigender or something then it means you're staying where you are, you've reached the gender and sexuality you're comfortable with.

If it was Statigender, you'd still have people arguing that the word is wrong and/or offensive for any number of reasons.

 

[KyuubiNoKitsune-Hime]

Some college survey I think, tried looking for it. Not in my history. Also couldn't give a shit less what twain had to say.

A College survey? Not a study, but a survey? That's hardly compelling evidence, especially with no source, essentially making the statement about the statistic totally irrelevant. To put it mildly, if someone presented most transgender people with a survey asking if they were trans, or gender dysphoric, I doubt you get an honest answer. That would be outing yourself for a trans person and as we've established; being outed can be extremely dangerous.

Where did the term "Cis" come from? Trans/bi/gay/decpticon, all those I remember being around for a long time, but then Cis came along and no one has told me yet where it comes from. What happened to njust being g called straight? I was fine with that.

It's from Latin, the opposite of trans. By comparison, the Romans divided Gaul into Transalpine Gaul, Gaul on the other side of the Alps, and Cisalpine Gaul, Gaul on this side of the Alps. Swap gender for mountains and people for Gaul, and there you go.

As mentioned, straight refers to sexuality, not gender. So, we have terms like "cishet" meaning cisgender and heterosexual. Having said that, the T in LGBT is for trans, of course, which confuses things.

so, at the risk of being a dick, I still think that Cis is not the best way to put it. If it was trans- as in from trans-form or trans-port as in taking an action to move to the other side then it makes sense with how transgender is about going from MtF or FtM or some step in between, but we don't have cisform or cisport because... well, it's just being non-mobile. You'd want to use stativus or stabilis as the root Latin as they mean non-moving since transgender isn't about being on 'the other side' of gender, it's about transitioning between them from one you aren't comfortable with to one you are.

Plus, and this is actually quite important, it LITERALLY is saying that trans and cis people are on opposite sides and if your trans and meet someone else who is trans (of the same type, so FtM or something) then they'd be 'Cis' as they'd be on the same side. If it's just Statisexual or Statigender or something then it means you're staying where you are, you've reached the gender and sexuality you're comfortable with.

Well if you're going to be totally literal about it. But at it's core being cisgender is having ones gender identity and physical sex match up, being transgender is actually the opposite of that. Beside cisgender is easy to say, easy to remember, and shouldn't hold any particular negative attachments. Then again transgender can be used as a negative term. But shouldn't allow reactionary idiots like people who use terms "cis het scum" and "transgender scum" dictate the English language, and it's use, because that's like allowing Luddites to dictate technological advancement.