SRS - must you mutilate your self to become a "real" woman?

[hankhavelock]

We began this discussion in another thread.

Is it fair that under certain countries' laws you can only become a legal gender woman if you undergo SRS?

I find this as extraordinarily undemocratic and as horrible as the death-penalty.

Why does the hetero society force a trans*woman (or man) to mutilate her (or his) genitalia to be elligable for a new passport... and for the gender identity she really wants?

Why does the hetero society, even in socalled democratic countries, lack the complete realization that gender issues are above the grasp of "normal" politicians and people?

Why can't it just easily be legalized for a trans*woman to be a legal woman without having to undergo SRS if she doestn't want SRS?

Nobody can change her cromosones anyway, so why not focus on her mind instead of on her genitalia?

I challenge the current policy of being evil and undemocratic.

The negros and the gays found a way through hard fight... nobody fought the fight for the transsexual people.

It's time we change the mindset of the hetero politicians.

Transsexuality is a matter to take seriously and to respect. As said, it happens between the ears, not between the legs.

My belief is that any trans*woman who may feel so, should without any hassle from "Jim Crow" be given a legal female gender. And with such a legal female gender, she should have all the rights of any woman - including marrying a man with full rights.

In a true democratic society, she should be able to be a legal woman without anyone forcing her through barbaric physical mutilation - unless she chooses it.

In a true democratic society, she should simply be allowed to be a she if she wishes to.

That's the agenda.

H

[transjen]

I agree with most of what you are saying but i find your comment about being mutilated to be insulting, I do not feel i was mutilated i only had a birth defect taken care off and no mutilation was done Jennifer

[hankhavelock]

Originally Posted by transjen

I agree with most of what you are saying but i find your comment about being mutilated to be insulting, I do not feel i was mutilated i only had a birth defect taken care off and no mutilation was done Jennifer

alright, then i rephrase it to being "altered" - or please give me the term you find appropriate?

[Rambam]

where or what is a democratic country?

[transjen]

Originally Posted by hankhavelock

alright, then i rephrase it to being "altered" - or please give me the term you find appropriate?

Thank you i can accept the term altered Jennifer

[Bionca]

Originally Posted by hankhavelock

alright, then i rephrase it to being "altered" - or please give me the term you find appropriate?

I'll have to second Jen's comment above - "mutilated" is probably the worst word to use for SRS, and is quite often used by anti-trans folks to discount the lives of trans*women. "Altered is probably only marginally better, since some feminists have decided to call natal women "FAAB" (Female Assigned At Birth) and trans* women as "SCAMs" (Surgically and Chemically Altered Males).

Although I support your sentiments 100% as far as legal recognition goes. I was born in a place that won't change my birth certificate no matter what I do - this means that any time I get a job, travel out of the country, etc I get to tell random strangers I'm trans*.

[transjen]

Originally Posted by Bionca

I'll have to second Jen's comment above - "mutilated" is probably the worst word to use for SRS, and is quite often used by anti-trans folks to discount the lives of trans*women. "Altered is probably only marginally better, since some feminists have decided to call natal women "FAAB" (Female Assigned At Birth) and trans* women as "SCAMs" (Surgically and Chemically Altered Males).

So now there are FAAB and SCAM. I never heard these thrown around before, I hope it never catchs on but sadly i'm sure the far right bible nuts will be pitching these out there in 10 and 12 Jennifer

[kyle212]

G'day

Interesting discussion. I'm quite uninformed of the struggle and politics that Transgender people face. But for what it is worth, i'm quite open minded and if a person feels they should be identified as the opposite sex then they SHOULD have the right to do so.

It's bullshit that a government or a certain majority have the power to determine a persons gender when it's obvious they have NO idea what that person feels, thinks and believes.

Personally for me, when i look at a TG woman the though never even crosses my mind that they were born male. All i see is a woman. Simple.
Too bad its not the same in the buracratic real world.

peace

[Kimmy_t]

Originally Posted by transjen

So now there are FAAB and SCAM. I never heard these thrown around before, I hope it never catchs on but sadly i'm sure the far right bible nuts will be pitching these out there in 10 and 12 Jennifer

Bah... feminists. I apologise if I offend any feminists on the forum, but the feminists I respect mainly are the ones that protestingly wore pants half a century ago.

Besides, the ones that have problems with trans people... bah not worth my time. Look at, giggle, and walk away, works for me.(flicking bubble gum into their hair works a treat too!)

And yeah I'm never gonna use that faab-scam thingy coz it might become more widespread.

Kimmeh!

[hankhavelock]

Originally Posted by Bionca

I'll have to second Jen's comment above - "mutilated" is probably the worst word to use for SRS, and is quite often used by anti-trans folks to discount the lives of trans*women. "Altered is probably only marginally better, since some feminists have decided to call natal women "FAAB" (Female Assigned At Birth) and trans* women as "SCAMs" (Surgically and Chemically Altered Males).

Although I support your sentiments 100% as far as legal recognition goes. I was born in a place that won't change my birth certificate no matter what I do - this means that any time I get a job, travel out of the country, etc I get to tell random strangers I'm trans*.

Mizzy B

As you obviously know, I'll be the last to insult any trans*woman here. How ever, I do believe the term "mutilation" has merit when you consider, that some girls have said to me: "I'll do what ever my man wants me to do..."

Not only does that break my heart, but it also makes it a political thing for me. When ever a little tranny is more or less talked into doing such a serious thing, then it quickly becomes mutilation, if her own heart is not into it. I've met and befriended my share of trans*woman, most likely quite a few more than most of you. And I've NEVER truly met what I would consider a "true post-op wannabe".

Besides, I've had good and deep debates with Danish trans*women about this issue - and not least my old friend Solvejg is fighting a hairless thing against the danish law makers to make them recognize the fact that gender identity is not a matter of genitalia.

If a woman decides on her own that SRS is what it takes to make her feel more comfortable with her self and within her self, then I will support her 100%. The sad fact is, however, that girls feel the pressure and go ahead embarking on a terrible route that can only in the end be labelled "mutilation".

That's why in Denmark you cannot be granted SRS until many years of heavy psychological tests to determine your motivation. I agree to such a strenuous regiment. SRS is not to be taken lightly.

Disagree all you want, ladies...

H

[wenndwong]

I disagree with the term "mutilate." Mutilation is when someone does a DIY job on themselves, but when a surgeon does it, it's an "alteration."

I can see the rigid Dr. Benjamin Guildlines for minors, but why should I as someone in their late 40's, no wife, no kids, should go through hoops and bucks, which would be better spent on surgery and transitioning.

Too bad no one has replaced Dr. Kimmel as the only surgeon "willing" to removed a guy's balls, gonads, nuts et al, without all the BS. We all know that castration is permanent.

If a guy wants to become a girl, why not. If surgery makes them fell more like a "real" women, why not! It's nobody's business!-WDW

[The Conquistador]

Originally Posted by hankhavelock

The negros and the gays found a way through hard fight... nobody fought the fight for the transsexual people.

Nobody has...YET. Never give up, Never surrender.

[transjen]

Originally Posted by TheAngryPostman

Nobody has...YET. Never give up, Never surrender.

Everything takes time from what i hear there is a lot of support from the younger gen, All fights for rights takes time and the time usually comes when the old dinosaurs pass away and the next gen takes over but till that day comes we just need to keep going and let the old dinosaurs know we will not just fade away Jennifer

[crossingoceans]

Originally Posted by transjen

Everything takes time from what i hear there is a lot of support from the younger gen, All fights for rights takes time and the time usually comes when the old dinosaurs pass away and the next gen takes over but till that day comes we just need to keep going and let the old dinosaurs know we will not just fade away Jennifer

You're right, but I think this should also be taken in our hands, maybe the easiest and most effective way to achieve this is through education, to let people know what this is all about so they don't make any misinterpretation and we can make things better for our community.

[megawatty101]

Originally Posted by hankhavelock

We began this discussion in another thread.

Is it fair that under certain countries' laws you can only become a legal gender woman if you undergo SRS?

I find this as extraordinarily undemocratic and as horrible as the death-penalty.

Why does the hetero society force a trans*woman (or man) to mutilate her (or his) genitalia to be elligable for a new passport... and for the gender identity she really wants?

Why does the hetero society, even in socalled democratic countries, lack the complete realization that gender issues are above the grasp of "normal" politicians and people?

Why can't it just easily be legalized for a trans*woman to be a legal woman without having to undergo SRS if she doestn't want SRS?

Nobody can change her cromosones anyway, so why not focus on her mind instead of on her genitalia?

I challenge the current policy of being evil and undemocratic.

The negros and the gays found a way through hard fight... nobody fought the fight for the transsexual people.

It's time we change the mindset of the hetero politicians.

Transsexuality is a matter to take seriously and to respect. As said, it happens between the ears, not between the legs.

My belief is that any trans*woman who may feel so, should without any hassle from "Jim Crow" be given a legal female gender. And with such a legal female gender, she should have all the rights of any woman - including marrying a man with full rights.

In a true democratic society, she should be able to be a legal woman without anyone forcing her through barbaric physical mutilation - unless she chooses it.

In a true democratic society, she should simply be allowed to be a she if she wishes to.

That's the agenda.

H

I'm starting to think that many transgendered folks are mentally ill and need to disfigure their face in order to fully escape from their former self. It reminds me a little of anoerexics, how they will look in the mirror and see a fat person, and when they are a skeleton, they feel attractive. When someone has scarred their face up like the joker, in their heads they may think they look like a particular celebrity. It's sad, and a little gross.

[cheersm8]

Whilst I agree with most of your points hankhavelock, I also feel that there must be some legeslative intervention and/or control in this matter. Our society would become a joke, if a person could become another, selected gender, on a whim, and then two years down the line, wish to change back again and so on and so on. That is where doctors, support groups, councellors, the legal system, and the politicians, should all work hand in hand.

[Bionca]

Originally Posted by cheersm8

Whilst I agree with most of your points hankhavelock, I also feel that there must be some legeslative intervention and/or control in this matter. Our society would become a joke, if a person could become another, selected gender, on a whim, and then two years down the line, wish to change back again and so on and so on. That is where doctors, support groups, councellors, the legal system, and the politicians, should all work hand in hand.

That's pretty much the situation as we have it. What actually would be the issue with the theoretical people switching gender on a whim?

As it stands, you have doctors, councilors etc. acting a gatekeepers - the thought being that Trans*-ness is so horrid that any and all opportunities to avoid it should be exhausted. Making being a Trans* woman simply a "failed man". Add to that the vague ways laws are written and even when/if we pass muster but don't want/ can't afford SRS we live with conflicting documentation and very limited access to social servises and jobs.

[cheersm8]

Originally Posted by Bionca

What actually would be the issue with the theoretical people switching gender on a whim?

Answer: Fundamental issues, ie a person being in the national womens athletic team for one season, the male team the next and back to the womens for the third season, etc. A woman recieving her pension at 60 ( as it is in the UK ) but a year later, the pension ceases because a mans pensionable age is 65 ( again, as it is in the UK ) Basic issues like that.

[hankhavelock]

Originally Posted by cheersm8

Answer: Fundamental issues, ie a person being in the national womens athletic team for one season, the male team the next and back to the womens for the third season, etc. A woman recieving her pension at 60 ( as it is in the UK ) but a year later, the pension ceases because a mans pensionable age is 65 ( again, as it is in the UK ) Basic issues like that.

Yes, some might misuse such an openness. Regarding pension, that should be equal for women and men anyway.

But the point remains (at least my point) that it should be any body's democratic right to choose their own gender. Quid pro quo.

We now have same-sex-marriages and civil partnerships accepted by most of the civilized countries in the West - not surprisingly USA is limping behind...

But why is it SO difficult to accept, that transsexuality is mental and not physical? It may be physical for those trans*women who feel that way, but that should not be an MO for all others.

There can easily be set up "check-points" to determine whether she's honest or not. Easy!

I live in Indonesia, and Indonesia is certainly not a front runner in the game of democracy - though they try! But it's nok like 20 % of the Indonesian population will apply for a new pass port should this become legal. And in the West it would be so much fewer. So who's being challenged here?

Why not just give in and accept the wonders of a true democracy where ppl make their own sexual and gender choices?

What's the big deal?

Why do we have to go through all this just because we have a slightly different take on things? Why can't I just get married with her here? Why do I have to go back to Denmark to do it? And why will such a civil partnership not be recognized as a true marriage in most parts of the world?

Oh yes, I do get the challenge, that the hetero ppl find in this... but they find the challenge without an explanation. It's so much more easy to keep us freaks away.

I just had a chat with my good old 75 year old trans*woman in Dk. She's still fighting, and the idiotic political establishment still doesn't get it.

I cannot and WILL not accept the lack of empathy. It's so unfair - and so idiotic.

H