quote:

---

BBC report
A British transsexual has won her battle in the European Court of Human Rights to be recognised as a woman and be allowed to marry.

---

quote:

---

If you were to take some DNA & clone it you would get another man

---

I don't know about the particular case in the OP but the above statement is not necessarily true as there are a few people who are sexually indeterminate (YYX instead of YY or YX). I don't know if this makes a differnece to the arguement or not.

There were a couple of really god articles in the Christian Press last year. I found some refs:

A Personal Testimony
So what is a Christian response to transsexuals?

There was also an article about a church that minsitered to and lovingly integrated a transsexual who wanted to revert. Unfortunatley, I couldn't find a link to that.


 

---

Posted by Lux Mundi (# 1981) on :
 
By saying that a persons DNA defines them as who they are, surely we are rejecting the right for them to define themselves as who they are, not just as what they are. Surely to define someone simply by what chromosomes or genetic make-up they have we are predicting who they are, and determining it for them. Surely it is society, familial upbrining, psychological upbringing which develops who we are, dosed with a liberal sprinkling of the Holy Spirit (who is the Lord the giver of Life), and some influence of other people, not mentioned above.

It may not be morally/ ethically right for a transexual to marry someone of the same sex (if they perceive themselves as being Male-Female or Female-Male), but it is not a biological point per se.

We surely have to allow this person to be the person they feel themselves to be (over and above what a biological determinism might assume). After this we must then review the ethical and moral issues, and base the decision on that. Ok it might not be right for that person to marry, but at least lets affirm in them there right to be them.
 

---

Posted by The Coot (# 220) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by fusilli:
There were a couple of really god articles in the Christian Press last year. I found some refs:

A Personal Testimony
So what is a Christian response to transsexuals?

---

quote:

---

From Mr Tiller's testimony:
Last year (1999) the Evangelical Alliance commissioned a report on transsexuality which has just been published by Paternoster. It is the most comprehensive publication on the subject to date – anywhere.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Olorin:
But how is 'she' a woman? If you were to take some DNA & clone it you would get another man. If she were not to take the hormones & other tablets on a daily basis 'her' body would revert back to its natural male state (sans surgically missing bits).

---

quote:

---

While a considerable amount of cosmetic, surgical & chemical altering can be done to the human form, it only alters the surface. The underlying DNA superstructure remains untouched.

---

quote:

---

To recognise & respect that a transexual is 'Other' and appreciate them as human beings is one thing, but to call them what they basically are not seems illogical.

---

quote:

---

I actually picked up most of this idea from Germaine Greer discussing a transexual student being accepted into an Oxford Women only college.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Atticus:
But saying we can redefine ourselves however and whenever we want is bunk. We are who we are, we are who we were born as, we are the sum total of our decisions, we cannot just up and decide to be something we are not. Accept the facts and deal with them as you will, surgically or otherwise, but don't try to negate the facts of life.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Olorin:
But don't call it a duck if does not have webbed feet & it cant swim .

---

Here is Mr Jamison Green.

He looks like a duck to me. He quacks like a duck.

He can't inseminate a woman, but there are a few XY men that can't do that.
 

---

Posted by GUNNER (# 2229) on :
 
Just a thought: can a marriage be a real marriage when there is at the outset no biological ability to reprouded in the case of a man pretending to be a woman and marring a man, or for that matter 2 heterosexuls who marry without the slightest inclincation to have children?
 

---

Posted by Lou Poulain (# 1587) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by GUNNER:
Just a thought: can a marriage be a real marriage when there is at the outset no biological ability to reprouded in the case of a man pretending to be a woman and marring a man, or for that matter 2 heterosexuls who marry without the slightest inclincation to have children?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by GUNNER:
Just a thought: can a marriage be a real marriage when there is at the outset no biological ability to reprouded

---

I presume that you mean reproduce.

Yes of course it is real. A friend of mine had to have a hysterectomy at the age of 25. She has no chance of producing any children. But if she decided to marry, I very much doubt whether anyone would question whether he marriage was real!

This is a complete and utter red herring.

bb
 

---

Posted by The Coot (# 220) on :
 
People may be interested to read about Kevin and Jennifer -v- The Attorney General for the Commonwealth.

In his judgement 12th Oct 2001, Justice Chisholm of the Family Court of Australia declared the marriage between a transsexual man and his wife valid. (The Attorney General has appealed the decision).

Notably: on the evidence of Australian and international experts on human sexual formation and transsexualism the Justice found "that a human being's sexual identity is biologically derived as a result of the sexual differentiation of the brain which, like the genitalia and gonads, irreversibly differentiates in the process of a person's formation as a human being"

Findings as listed by the Applicants' lawyer:
(for those that can't be bothered with the article)

7.1 The decision of Corbett is not persuasive and does not represent Australian law;
7.2 There may be circumstances in which a person who at birth had gonads, chromosomes and genitals of one sex, may nevertheless be of the other sex at the date of his or her marriage; such as in the case of a person who has, prior to the marriage, undergone the medical procedure called sex assignment or re-assignment;

7.3 That brain development is (at least) an important determinant of a person's sense of being a male or female, that the characteristics of transsexuals are as much "biological" as those of people thought of or referred to as intersex and that there is a biological feature of the brain that determines whether individuals think of themselves as male or female; whatever their other biological characteristics.

8. Thus, transsexualism is now properly recognised as a natural variation in human formation within the so-called intersex continuum; and not some form of psychological or mental illness. Like any predicament of human variation or difference, the prime ongoing disability of transsexualism for the persons who experience it, their families and their loved ones is not the predicament itself, but the response of others.
 

---

Posted by Astro (# 84) on :
 
There are some people who have XY chromosome but are unable to react to testosterone (the male hormone) so in some way they are male (XY) but in others more female than the average female who does get slightly effected by testosterone. They appear female.

Although now DNA can be tested there have always been cases where the doctors are not sure if teh baby has a small penis or a large clitoris, if they get it wrong it is usually very difficult to change the birth certificate (a recent case took about 9 years)

My 1000th post and I managed to get the word clitoris into it
 

---

Posted by Twilight (# 2832) on :
 
I first became interested in this subject when my cousin, a perfectly normal, healthy, sports loving boy, failed to go through puberty at the usual time. At sixteen his parents took him to a doctor. Tests proved "normal" as far as chromosomes, brain tumors, edochrine function and a dozen other possibilities.

His pituitary gland just didn't seem to know that it was time to send out the releasing hormones that trigger the surge of testosterone that cause a boy to turn into a man. At nineteen he began taking synthetic testosterone shots and within a few months he grew six inches, developed a deep voice, a beard, the ability to have sexual intercourse, a boney brow ridge, etc. etc. He's now a handsome young man with a steady girl friend. The one thing the hormone replacement injections can't do is make viable sperm so he won't ever be able to have a child of his own.

Now I ask you:
Should he be allowed to marry?
Would the "call a duck a duck" people maintain that he was not really a man but actually a boy, because without the hormones that's how he would have remained physically?
 

---

Posted by Irvin D Yalom (# 2833) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by fusilli:
[QUOTE]
There were a couple of really god articles in the Christian Press last year. I found some refs:

A Personal Testimony
So what is a Christian response to transsexuals?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by PaulTH:
The majority of us, who never seriously question our sexulity, are woefully inequipped to understand the pain, emotional, mental and spiritual, which transsexual people must go through. I often wonder what they did before all this treatment was available, and I suppose they just considered themselves gay.

---

quote:

---

Multipara:
I wonder how many of the contributors to this board have actually met and mixed it with a transsexual?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by ChastMastr:

About intersex people I don't know what gender they "really are" or are meant to be in the eyes of God. (I suppose we'll find out all of this at the General Resurrection.)

---

Not necessarily, David:

There is neither Jew nor Greek, slave nor free, male nor female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus. - Galatians 3:28
 

---

Posted by Olorin (# 2010) on :
 
As an area of life I've never run into before, or thought about in the slightest, it's been an education to see the reactions to my initial thoughts. I'm not convinced (yet?) but I'm a lot less certain and a lot more confused. (Quack?)
The apparent underlying premis that there is no such thing as a man or woman but that we are all on some vague continuum is an idea I find personally disturbing.

quote:

---

what's in a man's pants is not the defining characteristic of a man.

---

It isnt? It seems pretty damn important to me. I suspect most men in the world would agree with me.
This really is a very muddled area.
 

---

Posted by Merseymike (# 3022) on :
 
I'm delighted by the decision. I cannot see what can be gained by the retention of cruel and antiquated laws which do nothing to promote social acceptance and awareness of diversity. A pity that the Government had to wait for Europe to tell them so.
Gay issues, next, please.
 

---

Posted by multipara (# 2918) on :
 
Olorin, good on you!

Cheers,

m
 

---

Posted by babybear (# 34) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Olorin:
As an area of life I've never run into before, or thought about in the slightest, it's been an education to see the reactions to my initial thoughts.

---

And you have so many opinions.

I too used to have similar views. Then I started reading up in the scientific journals about the genetics and the role of hormones in determining gender. My views underwent a radical change.

bb
 

---

Posted by ChristinaMarie (# 1013) on :
 
This is a link to transsexual Christian support site.

http://www.emergenceministries.org/indexframe.html

If you click on the 'Profiles' link, it will take you to 9 testimonies by transsexual Christians. The top one, 'Jackie' is the transsexual woman I mentioned, who reverted back to male, then back again.

Christina
 

---

Posted by RuthW (# 13) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Olorin:
The apparent underlying premis that there is no such thing as a man or woman but that we are all on some vague continuum is an idea I find personally disturbing.

quote:

---

what's in a man's pants is not the defining characteristic of a man.

---

It isnt? It seems pretty damn important to me. I suspect most men in the world would agree with me.
This really is a very muddled area.

---

If through injury (say, a bad car accident or a criminal assault) you lost your penis, you wouldn't be a woman.
 

---

Posted by DonnaPatricia (# 3017) on :
 
Hello, everyone!

This is my first official post on Ship of Fools.

There's a different slant on this, you know. What about a person who went through the whole transsexual transition thing, and then quite a long time after that was all done and dusted, became a Christian. Literally, born-again. Don't you feel, that she must felt no conflict between her gender history and her newfound Love of Jesus?

I'll get to the meat in a moment, but first, I need to clear up a few basics.

Transsexualism is a recognized medical syndrome, a catch-all for a group of illnesses known as Gender Identity Disorders (there are other names, the one I prefer is dysphoria, because of its literal meaning). The kind of person you hear about in the press suffers/has suffered from a particularly nasty form of GID - the kind that leads some people to kill themselves - the profound variety. (BTW, to call such a person a 'transsexual' is about as demeaning as refering to an appendicitis sufferer as 'the appendix in bed 6').

It is curable, but the cost is very, very high. The cure is called triadic therapy, and it consists of taking hormones, living in the social gender role that is right for you, and surgery. No other 'attempt' at a cure has ever worked, including aversion therapy, electroshock, testosterone injections, and psychiatric intervention.

Sexual orientation has nothing to do with gender identity, which in my opinion, is core, fixed, and innate. You will see the same variation in a post-op person's sexuality as you will see in the general population.

So what has all this to do with the Lord? Realistically, absolutely nothing. A person got sick, was healed, lived her life, and later, through deep introspection on the nature of the Universe (cosmology, quantum theory, and comparative anthropology come to mind, for example) came to realise that Christianity was the only thing that made sense. She got 95% of the way there on logic alone, and then *bang*!!! God Spoke! Oh, I don't mean dramatically, with a James Earl Jones' voice. I mean suddenly, she was filled with a truly profound sense of peace and wonder, and the knowledge of the Truth of the Holy Trinity, and the Love of Jesus (if this was paper, it would be tear-stained with joy at this point - I'm crying my eyes out with happiness ).

So what has all this to do with people? Realistically, absolutely everything. A person who gets dumped on by society in general, and by religious organizations such as the Evangelical Alliance, in particular has a much harder time of finding her way to Jesus than someone who is not told she is either a sinner, or mad, or both.

God is Love, and all shall be saved. Sure, some have it more uphill than others, but that doesn't mean the mountain can't be climbed. I contend, however, that there is no reason for some people to build roadblocks for others.

Yours in Christ,
Donna Patricia (a woman, for that is the correct technical term for me, now that I am cured of profound gender dysphoria).

p.s. if anyone wants to discuss technical details, or needs help dealing with this topic because of a family member, say, please write to me privately. I will be happy to help as much as I can.
 

---

Posted by Mousethief (# 953) on :
 
Welcome to the Ship, DonnaPatricia, and thank you for your courageous post.

Reader Alexis
 

---

Posted by PaulTH (# 320) on :
 
DonnaPatricia
Welcome, I've been expecting you! can you answer a question I don't understand. You say that sexual orientation has nothing to do with gender awareness. I can't see that. Men and women who feel secure in their sexual indentity are a majority. But gay men and women are out of kilter with the orientation of their preferences. I imply no criticism or putting down in that comment.

Where gender awareness is concerned, it's only in very recent times that it could have been an issue. The world must have been a hard place before a plethora of psychologists identified so many variations from what the world expects.

In simple terms what is the difference between being gay and alternative gender awareness?
 

---

Posted by DonnaPatricia (# 3017) on :
 
I need to reply to a few things that have been raised on this thread.

Following the 'So what is a Christian response to transsexuals?'link, posted by The Coot, I note:
"That means those who change sex are looking in the wrong direction for the solution to their inner disturbance. The solution isn't physical but psychological: located more in finding their true identity than in getting a body to match how they feel. Ultimately that's only found in the God who made us and gave us the genders we have.

I don't really regret letting students raise knotty problems that totally stump me"

That's a bit like 'I didn't mind getting hit by the car, because it was God's Will'.

I need to pose this question: if you really have found your "true identity", (presumably gender identity) given by God, then is it not your Christian duty to fix your body to match your innate identity, based on Tony Watkins' logic?

And then, Fer Gossake, he goes on to reference Keith Tiller. FYI, transsexualism is the only 'psychiatric' condition that is self-diagnosed. No-one can diagnose another. No matter what the press might say. The purpose of psychiatrists in the equation is to certify a person wholly and utterly sane before irreversible surgery. Mr Tiller never diagnosed (identified) himself as transsexual. He let others do it for him. And now he presents himself as an authority to Christians on the subject. The word 'deluded' springs to mind.

Atticus said:

quote:

---

With all deference to transexuals, I'm not sure I buy into this whole "allowing people to define themselves" bit. Not having to do with sex necessarily, but I can't define myself as a geriatric woman of African descent just because I want to. I agree that society should not define people for them, but there are facts in this old world of ours, one of the facts is that I am a young white male. I can't change that just because I don't like it.

---

quote:

---

The apparent underlying premis that there is no such thing as a man or woman but that we are all on some vague continuum is an idea I find personally disturbing

---

Too true, Blue!

When I was young, that was all there was. Two possibilities. "God created man and woman". Thing is, scripture did not say God did not create anything else. There's nothing about intersexed genitalia, or mosaic karyotypes (e.g. XYY), or anything else that our more modern knowledge has informed us about.

You bet transsexualism is disturbing. It disturbs many people's world view. But why are not more people disturbed about the fact that their televisions work? The idea that electrons can be here! and there! at the same time to be much stranger than the idea that a foetus' brain structure can be feminised owing to lack of testosterone at 8 weeks, and their bodies masculinised at 11 weeks with a testo wash. (Not saying that is the cause of transsexualism, but it is a prevalent hypothesis).

You know, there are all kinds of people in the world. Heterosexual, homosexual, male, female, white, black, short, tall, thin, fat. Should we care? Surely our mission should be to bring all persons to the Love of Jesus?

Yours in Christ,
Donna Patricia
 

---

Posted by PaulTH (# 320) on :
 
Donna
As I've discussed with Christina I've led a far from blameless life in relation to sexual ethics, though I now feel I'm in control. But you talk of giving up a 25 year marriage. Most people who've been together that long are't about tearing off each other's clothes in mad passion. Their lives are about mutual respect, shared concerns, especially if children are part of it, and a shared family identity.

What is morally corrupt about our society is that we no longer heed the taking of an oath. That I'm an apostosate on this issue means that I don't cast any stones. But I genuinely believe in lifelong marriage commitment. Nothing other than abuse is a valid reason to end a 25 year marriage.
 

---

Posted by GUNNER (# 2229) on :
 
Do we still believe in the Fall? If we do can we assume that the fall had an impact of every aspect of our lives? Did the fall, for instance, damage our physical bodies, our emotions, our relationships with each other and God, and our sexual appetites? If the asnwer is "yes" then such perversions, while very real to the peoiple concerned, are contrary to the natural law. How do we then help these people. Do we condemn them to a loveless, sexless life because we think that same sex unions was not God's intention?
 

---

Posted by DonnaPatricia (# 3017) on :
 
Hi PaulTH,

you said:

quote:

---

Welcome, I've been expecting you!

---

quote:

---

In simple terms what is the difference between being gay and alternative gender awareness?

---

quote:

---

Men and women who feel secure in their sexual indentity are a majority. But gay men and women are out of kilter with the orientation of their preferences.

---

quote:

---

The world must have been a hard place before a plethora of psychologists identified so many variations from what the world expects.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by GUNNER:
Do we still believe in the Fall? If we do can we assume that the fall had an impact of every aspect of our lives? Did the fall, for instance, damage our physical bodies, our emotions, our relationships with each other and God, and our sexual appetites? If the asnwer is "yes" then such perversions, while very real to the peoiple concerned, are contrary to the natural law. How do we then help these people. Do we condemn them to a loveless, sexless life because we think that same sex unions was not God's intention?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by DonnaPatricia:
Following the 'So what is a Christian response to transsexuals?'link, posted by The Coot

And then, Fer Gossake, he goes on to reference Keith Tiller.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by PaulTH:
Donna
As I've discussed with Christina I've led a far from blameless life in relation to sexual ethics, though I now feel I'm in control. But you talk of giving up a 25 year marriage. Most people who've been together that long are't about tearing off each other's clothes in mad passion. Their lives are about mutual respect, shared concerns, especially if children are part of it, and a shared family identity.

What is morally corrupt about our society is that we no longer heed the taking of an oath. That I'm an apostosate on this issue means that I don't cast any stones. But I genuinely believe in lifelong marriage commitment. Nothing other than abuse is a valid reason to end a 25 year marriage.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by PaulTH:
Where their right to marry is concerned, my view is that the state should recognise all forms of marriage, same sex, transsexual or otherwise, but the church has a duty to the integrity of the Christian faith, and should only allow marriages which fall within what the faith permits. That doesn't prevent priests and congregations dealing pastorally with people who don't fit their mould.

---

Do I take it from this that I shouldn't have been officiating at the marriages of divorced persons for the past 20 years?
 

---

Posted by Santiago (# 2824) on :
 
Forgive the double post.

Thank you DonnaPatricia for your courageous debut!

 

---

Posted by DonnaPatricia (# 3017) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Santiago:
Forgive the double post.

Thank you DonnaPatricia for your courageous debut!

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by PaulTH:
You say that sexual orientation has nothing to do with gender awareness. I can't see that.

---

quote:

---

Men and women who feel secure in their sexual indentity are a majority. But gay men and women are out of kilter with the orientation of their preferences.

---

quote:

---

Where gender awareness is concerned, it's only in very recent times that it could have been an issue. The world must have been a hard place before a plethora of psychologists identified so many variations from what the world expects.

---

quote:

---

In simple terms what is the difference between being gay and alternative gender awareness?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by DonnaPatricia:
(BTW, to call such a person a 'transsexual' is about as demeaning as refering to an appendicitis sufferer as 'the appendix in bed 6').

---

quote:

---

You talk of "gender awareness". First of all, I'm not sure that a detailed reply to this is properly a topic for this forum. However, the issues of sexuality and gender are important to many Christians, so let's press on. (Help, please, Admins!)

---

host mode
Hi DonnaPatricia!
If you want to give a detailed reply to that please do. If you think it's going off topic then just start a new thread.

cheers,
Louise

host mode off
 

---

Posted by DonnaPatricia (# 3017) on :
 
Hi Shipmates,

I guess I didn't communicate very effectively, here.

The central theme of what I was trying to say was that it was truly important to me, to get my serious illness cured first!

It was only after that, when my mind was straight, and I was me, that I could spend a couple of years debating with ChristinaMarie and thinking seriously about the nature of the Universe. This was the path which led me to see Christianity as the Elegant Solution to the Mystery of why the Universe is the way it is.

Elegant Solutions are really important to scientist/engineer types like me.

Yours in Christ,
Donna Patricia
 

---

Posted by ChastMastr (# 716) on :
 
Has anyone ever studied the history of the berdache? I've occasionally wondered how such notions could be approached within a Christian context.

• Some
• more
• links
• on
• the
• Berdache
• phenomenon

quote:

---

Don Horrocks:
I am not here to make judgements against people. I am concerned with questions of fact. As far as the Evangelical Alliance and all religious organisations are concerned, is that this has to do with the question of what takes precedence -
does subjective feeling take precedence, or does physiological fact? I am afraid that there is so much mythology, just as Stephen has just confused
intersex with what we call gender confusion there, that surrounds this whole debate, that we are concerned that, in this judgement from the European Court of Human Rights, there was an actual admission that they hadn't looked at the
facts.

---

quote:

---

Stephen Whittle:
I have heard those arguments endlessly. The fact is that we are now in the 21st century, and one of the things I would say to Don is in fact, in plain legal terms, we have won this battle, they have lost this battle, and that's tough. The law has to change now. Thank God it does. I take my children to church where the family is fully accepted by many Christian people, who are very happy to see a family who are living their lives fully.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by The Coot:
It would actually be more useful if you gave a slight indication of what salient point you wish to make with each website.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Martin PC not:
...if I say, 'I feel like a woman trapped in a man's body', how can I possibly know what a woman feels like and how can I further know what a woman in a man's body feels like?....

---

I have no idea what it feels like to be a woman. I only know what it is like to be me.

Some of the stereotypical roles/thoughts/values that are attributed to women are totally alien to me. Mind you, the same applies to men too.

But then my internal body image is of a female. She is a bit taller than me, and slimmer, but she is still recogisable as being me. Now, imagine what it is like to have an internal body image that is "wrong". Guys how distressed would you be if you started having periods?

bb
 

---

Posted by The Coot (# 220) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by ChastMastr:
Is the OP as limited as that? I didn't think all we were talking about here was the rights issue, but about transsexualism in general...

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Martin PC not: (Out of order)
So what's her (Germaine Greer) problem, or have I misunderstood?

---

Her problem is that her definition of female is essentialist - that is, possession of the XX chromosomes - and nothing else will do. Yet she disregards any essentialist nature of transsexuality (as does the EA ), ie. that current medical thought is tending to the view that the brain differentiates irreversibly in utero according to the same process in male-to-female transsexuals as in biological women. (Similarly for female-to-male transsexuals)

quote:

---

Am I right in perceiving in her a rejection of solidarity with some who feel they are female in a male body? Because I see the philosophical problem she does, unless there are strong BIOLOGICAL, developmental, reasons for feeling that way - which one would assume in most cases - if I say, 'I feel like a woman trapped in a man's body', how can I possibly know what a woman feels like and how can I further know what a woman in a man's body feels like?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by babybear:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Martin PC not:
...if I say, 'I feel like a woman trapped in a man's body', how can I possibly know what a woman feels like and how can I further know what a woman in a man's body feels like?....

---

I have no idea what it feels like to be a woman. I only know what it is like to be me.

Some of the stereotypical roles/thoughts/values that are attributed to women are totally alien to me. Mind you, the same applies to men too.

But then my internal body image is of a female. She is a bit taller than me, and slimmer, but she is still recogisable as being me. Now, imagine what it is like to have an internal body image that is "wrong". Guys how distressed would you be if you started having periods?

bb

---

Hi BB,

It's not just a matter of how one feels, but how one relates and is related to. It's feels natural for me to relate as a woman, and be related to as a woman. The way one is related to, is different for men and women.

I had the most significant dream I've ever had, just after I decided to do something about my transsexual nature. I saw a marble bust (head and shoulders), covered with dry clay. As I examined it, I could see that it was me, but then it morphed, and it wasn't me, it was my Dad. This happened several times. Then, the clay cracked uo, like a dry river bed, and fell off the marble. As I looked at the marble bust, it was me, and I was a woman.

I learned to act male, and fit in, to an extent, but I always felt different. I joined the RAF at age 17, and stayed in for 12 years. However, as I got older, my inner nature kept coming out. In my last post, for 4 years, I was accused of being gay, even though I was married. It got to the point, when I was 32, that I just couldn't go on anymore, I had to do something about it.

My decision was one of integrity. Some of my evangelical friends, didn't see it that way. It's taken 6 years to heal the pain that my former evangelicalism, has caused me. They seem to see me as either needing psychotherapy, or exorcism.

I'm just me now, instead of someone I 'ought' to be.

Christina
 

---

Posted by ChristinaMarie (# 1013) on :
 
I see the Berdache as simply trans men and women, who lived before medical treatment was available for transsexual people.

A trans man, today, can get hormones. His voice will break and he will develop beard growth. He can have surgery to remove his breasts.

Imagine what it was like for a trans man, before these things were available. Of course they'd be seen by others as 'both sexes in one'. That was how non-berdache saw them though, not what the Berdache thought of themselves. A Berdache trans man would have to cope fitting in with the males, with an unbroken voice and breasts, and boyish looks, because of no beard growth.

Same with trans women, in those days. No electrolysis for beard growth. No Max Factor to cover it up. No hormones to shape-shift.

I do not think we can judge those in the past, according to standards today, because they lacked the MASSIVE advantages we have.

Christina
 

---

Posted by MR PINK (# 2979) on :
 
Can someone explain this: If a man becomes a woman or vice versa why is it some transexuals also become lesibians or homosexual men after they swap i.e Hetro male becomes Women but still likes Women sexually?
 

---

Posted by ChristinaMarie (# 1013) on :
 
Mr Pink,

A person's sexuality is not dependent on their gender identity. Transsexual women do not have surgery to have sex with men. They have surgery so their body is in line with their gender identity. After surgery, one could be celibate, straight, bisexual or lesbian.

I want to be related to as a woman in all aspects of life, not just the bedroom.

Christina
 

---

Posted by MR PINK (# 2979) on :
 
Thanks for that. Seems its the same as the top & bottom debate and are are you any less of a man if you take it up the.
 

---

Posted by Beowulf (# 899) on :
 
Hello all, it's been a while since I posted to the board but, as a transman, I guess I should contribute my twopennyworth.

I have just returned from holiday, spending two weeks in the C16th (living history nerd). Last Thursday evening my partner received a text message from a mate telling us about the European Court decision. I cannot begin to describe the sheer glee I felt as I ran around a field punching the air and grinning like I had swallowed bicycle handlebars. The prospect of being able to marry my darling girlfriend of seven years and also NEVER having to worry about my community finding out that I am a transman is joyous indeed. The only downer was that I couldn't share the wonderful news with more people.
I transitioned some years ago. I always knew I was a boy and that there had been some mistake. Wish I'd done it earlier. It surprised no-one who knew me, and more recent friends who have found out have accepted me with warmth and love.
It's been an interesting journey, but not an unpleasant one. Best thing I ever did.
As to the physiological causes of gender dysphoria, I rather like Jan Morris's approach. (Superb author, mainly travel books. One of the first high profile transwomen). She was on "Desert Island Discs" a few weeks ago. When asked what she thought of the recent research that indicates brain differences in trans people, she said that she had always known her female gender primarily as a spiritual and metaphysical truth.
I'll go with that, rather than being tempted by "reductio ad absurdum".

Thanking you all for your support and a considered debate. God bless.
 

---

Posted by Beowulf (# 899) on :
 
As an addendum to my last message, is it possible to set up a sort of subgroup on the board so that all of us transpeople on the ship can get together and chat/offer support? Just an idea, I speak with no technical knowhow.


 

---

Posted by ChristinaMarie (# 1013) on :
 
Hi Beowolf,

I'd rather do that sort of thing by private messaging or email, than a special slot on the ship.

Christina
 

---

Posted by babybear (# 34) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Beowulf:
is it possible to set up a sort of subgroup on the board so that all of us transpeople on the ship can get together and chat/offer support?

---

quote:

---

Last Thursday evening my partner received a text message from a mate telling us about the European Court decision.

---

I was think of you, and a few others when I heard the news.

bb
 

---

Posted by babybear (# 34) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by ChristinaMarie:
I'd rather do that sort of thing by private messaging or email, than a special slot on the ship.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by The Coot:

quote:

---

Originally posted by ChastMastr:
Is the OP as limited as that? I didn't think all we were talking about here was the rights issue, but about transsexualism in general...

---

Yes, we are. But berdache is not transsexualism! Transsexuals are not people in whom both genders co-exist. They most definitely, and by definition are (see HB SOC) either man or woman. I find it insulting to say otherwise.

---

I'm genuinely confused here; I mean, I believe in a sense (a mystical sense, I admit) that all people have both genders in them, the masculine and the feminine, the yin and the yang -- not a "continuum," however -- I do see gender (and I know this view is rare these days) as an absolute concept rather than one of degree. But I also know that this point of view is not the one everyone here shares -- nor are any of its alternatives, as the Ship is a pretty diverse group. Isn't the question of what transsexuals are, or even of what human beings in general are, part of the discussion at hand? Here on the Ship, we have different beliefs on issues which some would say are more absolute than gender -- the Nature of Christ, etc. -- and I would think that the Berdache notion would be something relevant here to the discussion, whether one sees them as another culture's approach to transsexualism or something different.

For me, the notion of the self (of whatever gender) as feminine in relationship to Jesus (for example) is one issue which might be a path to understand transsexual people better, even if I don't necessarily agree with their conclusions or beliefs.

And it does seem that at least one self-identified transsexual here (the other CM) does believe the Berdache concept to be relevant. The idea that such people may have special spiritual gifts, as well, intrigues me very much, though again I have not studied this nearly enough.

On a side note more directly relevant to the OP, isn't a great deal of the issue here whether people of whatever gender can form whatever legally-recognised relationships they choose with other consenting adults, rather than whether or not anyone agrees with various notions of gender identity, nature, etc.?

As another side note, if you find it "insulting" to suggest that transsexuals combine both genders, what does that mean regarding people who do believe, and proudly, that they do combine both genders? I'm not into androgyny either (I mean, from all my posts about my own life -- about the rough'n'tough, bearded, hairy, etc. sort of men being my own personal ideal -- one might suppose I'm going a tiny bit too far in Avoiding That Which Is Feminine -- which is part of why the Berdache issue fascinates me -- and I have to look at my own motives also), but I don't want to put down people, even if I disagree with them, who don't fit into my personal notions of masculinity and femininity.

Which is, I suppose, why I'm trying to make sense of all of this, even if (perhaps especially when) I don't agree with many of the notions involved.

David
Confuzzled orthodox guy
 

---

Posted by ChristinaMarie (# 1013) on :
 
I don't understand the antipathy expressed towards the Berdache. Many trans women make reference to the Berdache. Lyn Conway, who invented Very Large Scale Integration, and is a trans woman, has articles about Berdache on her website.

The Evangelical Alliance try to make out that transsexualism is a modern phenomena. The Berdache contradicts this view, along with other historical transsexual/transgendered people.

Without hormone treatment, electrolysis and surgery, one cannot just live as a man or a woman, and fit in perfectly.

Today, there are many trans women who cannot just fit in a women, because they get read, by their voice or certain aspects of their apperance. There are some trans women who are well over 6 feet tall, for example.

A trans man takes hormones, and his voice breaks and he grows a beard. Female hormones do not reverse the broken voice, or stop the beard growing. I think, it is easier for a trans man to blend in unnoticed, than a trans woman.

There are some people, who usually refer to themselves as 3rd gender, who are not happy being male or female. They're not transsexual. I don't understand them, but I have met a few online.

The issue of gay/lesbian marriage, is a different ballgame than transsexual people being allowed to marry. I for one though, believe that same-sex marriage should be legalised, with religious bodies having the freedom to refuse marriage to same-sex couples, if it contravenes their faith.

Christina
 

---

Posted by Beowulf (# 899) on :
 
Hey guys, what's the beef?
Ask any transperson how they feel now compared with how they felt last Wednesday and go from there.
Analyse, depersonalise, whatever...

Best summer of my life.

Huzzah!

 

---

Posted by The Coot (# 220) on :
 
Chast said:
"Isn't the question of what transsexuals are (...) part of the discussion at hand?"

Not if you're speaking scientifically about transsexualism it isn't. 'Transsexualism' is not some sort of inclusive, humpty dumpty term for cross-dressers, neuter gender, both gender, gender indeterminate people or people with other gender issues.

This is who we're talking about according to the ICD-10 definition in the Harry Benjamin Standards of Care:

Transsexualism (F64.0) has three criteria:

1. The desire to live and be accepted as a member of the opposite sex, usually accompanied by the wish to make his or her body as congruent as possible with the preferred sex through surgery and hormone treatment;

2. The transsexual identity has been present persistently for at least two years;

3. The disorder is not a symptom of another mental disorder or a chromosomal abnormality.

Chast:
"As another side note, if you find it "insulting" to suggest that transsexuals combine both genders, what does that mean regarding people who do believe, and proudly, that they do combine both genders?"

It means: 'Don't blithely include transgender (informal term: referring to any person with any type of gender issues) issues side by side with transsexualism like we're all one big happy family'.

It also means: 'People who do believe, and proudly, that they do combine both genders are not true transsexuals, by definition'.

It also means: 'Don't even think about telling a transsexual person they combine both genders, when they most certainly do not'.

Christina Marie said:
"I see the Berdache as simply trans men and women, who lived before medical treatment was available for transsexual people. (...) Of course they'd be seen by others as 'both sexes in one'. That was how non-berdache saw them though, not what the Berdache thought of themselves."

No argument from me. But the websites *you* (Chast) chose, celebrate 'berdache' as a 'third gender' or part of a gender continuum. Christina Marie commented: 'That was how the non-berdache saw them, not what the Berdache thought of themselves' (I'll assume Christina is correct here). So the berdache may well have been transsexual people who lived before medical treatment. BUT THAT IS NOT WHAT THE *WEBSITES* YOU CHOSE ARE SAYING. And so, your references to the berdache cloud the issue of what transsexuality is, which is something transsexual people can do without. (And I am using the terms 'transsexual' and 'transsexuality' strictly)

Chast said:
"And it does seem that at least one self-identified transsexual here (the other CM) does believe the Berdache concept to be relevant".

Christina said:
"So, if I can use my experiences as a transsexual woman, to help others resolve relationship problems, as the Berdache did, I see my experiences and condition, as a gift of God."

If I understand correctly, Christina understands the berdache to be transsexual. The websites you selected do not! What she sees as relevant (again, correct me if I am wrong) is the Berdache as an example of people using their condition to help others.

That first website you listed, I see even as hostile to transsexual people:
"In a metaphysical sense, the modern post-op TS could be seen as perpetuating gender role stereotypes and thus limiting the social wardrobe and habits restricting both males AND females". Well duh! Like is there something wrong with gender roles?

So. Just to remind you again. You opened the subject of berdache with a slew of websites which do not affirm the berdache as transsexual, and wondered how such notions could be approached within a christian context on a thread whose opening post is about the marriage of transsexual woman. I don't think that's a fair thing.
 

---

Posted by ChristinaMarie (# 1013) on :
 
Hi Coot and CM,

My info on the Berdache, was info gained elsewhere, not from CMs links. I already knew about the Berdache, from TS sources, and was making my points from them.

I think of the Berdache as transsexuals, who had to cope with life without medical treatment. Therefore, I admire them.

I'll try and find a link about the Berdache from a TS site, and post it.

Christina
 

---

Posted by The Coot (# 220) on :
 
Christina: by your definition of berdache, yes relevant, historically important.

But the categorisation of berdache, as posited by the websites Chast lists (and which I was working from initially) I see as counterproductive to understanding transsexual people.

Is there any concrete evidence to show how the berdache really saw themselves?

I keep wanting to write 'bardiche'. Too much D&D I'm afraid.
 

---

Posted by DonnaPatricia (# 3017) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by The Coot:
So. Just to remind you again. You opened the subject of berdache with a slew of websites which do not affirm the berdache as transsexual, and wondered how such notions could be approached within a christian context on a thread whose opening post is about the marriage of transsexual woman. I don't think that's a fair thing.[/QB]

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by sarkycow:
I can see the headlines:
British laws disappear up their own rectum.

---

quote:

---

Actually, I wasn't trying to make specific points with them -- I tried to get what information, in general, I could, from the viewpoints at hand. (My own point of view, such as it is, I posted earlier on the thread.)

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by sarkycow:
Due to the laws in Britain saying that my friend's girlfriend cannot change her gender legally, she is still registered as a bloke.

What happens if they ever wish to get married? A registry office has to legally allow them to - despite to all intents and purposes it being a lesbian wedding!

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by ChastMastr:
Er... Dear Coot -- are you angry at me or something?

---

quote:

---

I sincerely am a bit confused -- it sounds to me as if you are saying that no transsexual people regard gender as a continuum, or as if that continuum-based notion of gender was philosophically opposed to something intrinsically underlying transsexual philosophy, but I don't think I'm reading you right.

---

quote:

---

But no offence whatsoever was intended, and if anything came across as offensive, I apologise.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by babybear:
My understanding is that currently your friends would be allowed to marry. But if the mtf friend decided to 'officially' become a female (in the eyes of the Law), then they would not be allowed to marry. There is currently no provision of gay/lesbian marriages.

I wonder what would happen if they were to marry, then for the mtf friend to offically change gender. Would their marriage fall through a hole in the Law, or would their marriage become void?

bb

---

AFAIU mtf girlfriend cannot legally/officially change her gender. So in the eyes of the law they have a perfectly 'normal' relationship - one male, and one female. the fact that the male does the whole make-up, bras, dresses thing (and a lot more besides) is neither here nor there legally.

But it's looking like Britain may get moving, and eventually allow transsexuals to change gender legally (on driving licences and such). If they have got married before that, then British laws regarding same-sex marriages will have to change, as you pointed out

Here's hoping

Viki
 

---

Posted by ChristinaMarie (# 1013) on :
 
Viki,

We've been allowed to have 'female' on driving licences and passports for a long time now. It's just birth certificates that are the problem. For marriage purposes, it is the sex on one's birth certificate that counts.

I have a female passpost and dl.

Christina
 

---

Posted by babybear (# 34) on :
 
My understanding of the European Court case was that it meant that transsexuals were now allowed to legally change their gender.

I believe that the Government claims that a Birth Certificate is a historic document, and simply give the sex of the child at birth. There is some latitude to change the sex if a mistake has been made. It is only possible for a short period, ie before the child can say "Well, actually I am a xxxx."

bb
 

---

Posted by DonnaPatricia (# 3017) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by babybear:

quote:

---

Originally posted by sarkycow:
Due to the laws in Britain saying that my friend's girlfriend cannot change her gender legally, she is still registered as a bloke.

What happens if they ever wish to get married? A registry office has to legally allow them to - despite to all intents and purposes it being a lesbian wedding!

---

Such weddings have taken place. I remember seeing a photograph of the brides, both dresses in white.

My understanding is that currently your friends would be allowed to marry. But if the mtf friend decided to 'officially' become a female (in the eyes of the Law), then they would not be allowed to marry. There is currently no provision of gay/lesbian marriages.

I wonder what would happen if they were to marry, then for the mtf friend to offically change gender. Would their marriage fall through a hole in the Law, or would their marriage become void?

bb

---

Two quick points.

I know a heterosexual couple who were recently married. What was a bit unusual was that they are both trans. The only thing that was odd about the wedding ceremony was the groom taking this "man" and the bride taking this "woman"!

Also, if in a pre-existing conventional marriage, the husband goes through full transition, and they decide to stay together - and in a sexual relationship - then that marriage has truly become a lesbian marriage. I know several couples in this situation. And the marriage remains perfectly legal.

Yours in Christ
DonnaPatricia
 

---

Posted by sarkycow (# 1012) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by ChristinaMarie:
Viki,

We've been allowed to have 'female' on driving licences and passports for a long time now. It's just birth certificates that are the problem. For marriage purposes, it is the sex on one's birth certificate that counts.

I have a female passpost and dl.

Christina

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by The Coot:
That people have the ability to 'choose one's gender', is one of the conclusions people draw from phrases like: "Gender is a social construct".

---

quote:

---

True transsexual people do not see themselves somewhere on a gender continuum (by definition of the clinical condition!), they are 'man' or 'woman'.

---

quote:

---

You weren't offensive, you were your usual authentic (I hate that word) self.

---

Thank you. But then why are you angry if I have done no wrong?

quote:

---

But seeing as you're asking, you'll help me avoid having a nuclear accident by not posting in heaven that you flag right, grey, black in the same breath as saying you're chaste and celibate.

---

quote:

---

Could someone, erm, edit or delete my post above? This is Heaven, a place for light/silly fun, and while my post is accurate, it's a weensy bit, ah, explicit, I believe, for Heaven... / David /
embarrassed and penitent orthodox guy

---

and no one ever did, and this was two weeks ago now. But what does this have to do with the subject at hand?

I'm also a tad confused here -- I thought the other CM admirably cleared up a lot of the confusion about usage of terms. Not all of us here are going to be using the scientific or clinical terms, especially if they consider themselves transsexual but don't accept the ICD-10's definition.

Am I missing something here? Does everyone else here regard the ICD-10 as the arbiter of these definitions? Isn't some of what is at hand (the nature of gender and what an individual's intrinsic nature is) more a philosophical and metaphysical issue (which is not what the ICD-10 purports to be an authority on, is it?), not a medical or scientific one?

I mean, it seems to me that there are two (well, many more, really) sides to this issue (or cluster of issues), and while I don't agree with the "continuum" notion either, I think people who believe that way have just as much a right to speak on this thread as you or I do.

What happens if someone's metaphysics/philosophy holds that a "continuum" exists? Are they just not welcome on the thread? (For that matter, what if that's their philosophy, but believe they are much closer to one pole than the other, and seek surgery? Are they denied it because of their metaphysics?)

David
truly confused orth. guy
 

---

Posted by DonnaPatricia (# 3017) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by ChastMastr:
I think I'm genuinely baffled here now.

I mean, it seems to me that there are two (well, many more, really) sides to this issue (or cluster of issues), and while I don't agree with the "continuum" notion either, I think people who believe that way have just as much a right to speak on this thread as you or I do.

What happens if someone's metaphysics/philosophy holds that a "continuum" exists? Are they just not welcome on the thread? (For that matter, what if that's their philosophy, but believe they are much closer to one pole than the other, and seek surgery? Are they denied it because of their metaphysics?)

David
truly confused orth. guy

---

Well, let me see if I can clear away some confusion, at least.

Christina Marie defined two meanings for the word 'transgendered'. Both are perfectly correct, and in wide use around the world. But she speaks with an English voice. I'm Anglo-Canadian, and I see things not only from both sides of the gender divide, but also from both sides of the Pond.

In the USA, particularly, there is a strong move to use the word 'transgender' politically, which takes as foundation the 'continuum' notion. The rationale, of course, is that if trans people get any equal rights treatment legally, because of their medical history, then that should equally apply to jocks in frocks. Please note, this is not to put down cross-dressers.

But a man who is a transvestite has an innately male gender identity, and would no more dream of having phallectomy and vaginoplasty, that he would of flying without a 747.

A trans woman like myself (please note also, it is incorrect to call me a transsexual; I am cured and no longer suffer from gender identity dysphoria) is a woman with an interesting history. I see no continuum. Neither do the vast majority of trans women of my acquaintance. The few who do tend to be left-wing social scientists.

Transsexualism is easy to understand. It is an illness more properly called profound gender identity dysphoria (or disorder). The old homily about a woman's brain trapped in a man's body is actually pretty good shorthand for it. It is curable, and there is only one known method: triadic therapy. That means hormones, living in the correct gender role, and surgery. Incidentally, I'd no more wear a shirt and tie than you would wear a dress. I'd look (and feel) just plain silly, cross-dressed.

I wish to re-iterate: I'm not knocking transvestites. But a transvestite is not a person suffering from that dreadful illness, GID. There is no 'continuum' of gender identity (but of course it is an observable fact that there is a continuum of 'gender expression' - credit for this comment to Christina Marie).

And there is nothing to stop any 'transgendered' person coming to God. But it is harder for some. Does anyone have anything to say on my earlier post, where I said:

quote:

---

It was only after that [getting cured], when my mind was straight, and I was me, that I could spend a couple of years debating with ChristinaMarie and thinking seriously about the nature of the Universe. This was the path which led me to see Christianity as the Elegant Solution to the Mystery of why the Universe is the way it is.

Elegant Solutions are really important to scientist/engineer types like me.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by ChastMastr:
If someone believes that all gender is a social construct, though, which I hasten to say that I don't, and even if someone believes that people have the ability to choose it (which I also don't believe personally) -- well, that's a subject we can discuss in Purgatory on a thread like this, isn't it? It sounds as if you're saying "people who don't believe as I, and the people at ICD-10, cannot discuss this matter on this thread."

---

quote:

---

Not all of us here are going to be using the scientific or clinical terms, especially if they consider themselves transsexual but don't accept the ICD-10's definition.

---

quote:

---

Chast:

quote:

---

Coot:
True transsexual people do not see themselves somewhere on a gender continuum (by definition of the clinical condition!), they are 'man' or 'woman'.

---

What do you mean by "true"? Wouldn't this be possibly offensive to someone who does see gender as a continuum, but that their body is at one end and their mind/soul/self at the other?

---

quote:

---

But then why are you angry if I have done no wrong?

---

quote:

---

(Coot - irrelevant sentence about Chast, leather, chastity and celibacy) Chast:
But what does this have to do with the subject at hand?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by duchess:
I am truly addicted to this board...everything reminds me of it...I thougth of this thread when this morning Greg Kihn was interviewing Aunt Fran and I thought it was a joke thing since Greg is a little shyster... but I did a search and found the article in the SJ Merc Today and found it to be true.

Aunt Fran used to be "Uncle Frank", a hippy rocker freaky guy on a bang yer head rock and roll station, KOME (now defunct). This is the station that used to have Dennis Erectus , a guy who lived up to his name (I was a 13 year fan of Dennis and used to listen to him when the parents weren't around).

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by The Coot:
Ahhhhhhhhhhhh! David! [Coot becomes a Woodpecker for a short time, banging head on computer desk]. Transsexualism is a quantifiable, scientific, clinical condition!

---

Believe me, I understand; there's another thread I started which has gotten derailed as I look on, frantically waving my arms and shouting, and no one listens, so I've started adding this is karmic guilt for the Berdache thing, isn't it? to my sig... *HUG*

Re the use of the term -- I will try to be more careful in future. I think the terms are used much more loosely here in the US and are all mixed up by "identity politics" -- which is where I have gotten most of my information from. And generally mixed up in a trans*-friendly context -- not by opponents but by people who mean well, as well as people who consider themselves trans* but may not fit the technical definitions of the ICD-10. It may not be a "me too" thing -- they may simply not know that technical definitions fit into it -- or even that there is an international standard (I, erm, didn't -- I was assuming that each country had its own ) in the first place... also glad to hear that someone's personal ideology doesn't exclude them from being treated the same as anyone else!

(Massive (potentially derailing) text about existentialism, gender studies, graduate school, etc. deleted -- I'll just say that I've encountered so many people who assume that gender is a social construct that I assume that I am in a tiny minority, but perhaps my sampling is way off.)

We may not agree about the metaphysics of this, but I definitely want to be able to use the correct words for things. I've known too many people who refuse to use the word "gay" lest they somehow "validate" the notion of homosexuality/gayness, and they come across to me as very, very rude. I don't want to do that!!

reconciliation hugs

David
still, however, interested in the whole Berdache phenomenon, though he still also suffers karmically for it elsewhere, apparently
 

---

Posted by The Coot (# 220) on :
 
Don't you dare hug me! And if you do it better be an especially macho manly hug accompanied by backslapping and comments about football in a deep voice.

I will say that on the whole in everyday speech I am not a semantic nazi, but in this case 'cos we are having a fairly indepth and serious conversation I've been ruthless on the matter. In the past I've used 'transgender' in its US meaning and also for ftm/mtf people in transition and reserved 'transsexual' for post-operative, transitioned people. I have seen the error of my ways (nothing like a convert) and in the interests of education and dignity use 'man', 'woman'; or transsexual man/woman; trans- man/woman; XX-man, XY-woman if for some reason this is relevant. I have seen people commonly identify as: man, transman, tranny boy, transfag.

Further to the thread this may be of interest:
An expert witness statement (about halfway down page) in the case of Elizabeth Bellinger (a transwoman whose 20yr marriage was declared void). The affidavit is by Prof. Louis Gooren, the doctor whose papers the EA in their book 'Transsexuality' use at times favourably and dismiss at others.
 

---

Posted by duchess (# 2764) on :
 
ChristinaMarie, she does look good. She is fortunate to be in the best place for her to get a DJ job and should find work soon.

MR PINK, He was in jepody...baby..oooooooooooooooooohhhoooo
 

---

Posted by PaulTH (# 320) on :
 
I would like to thank both ChristinaMarie and DonnaPatricia for boldly giving us such an insight into where they're coming from. As I said, way back in this thread, those of us to whom this is never an issue, are ill equipped to understand the pain that is suffered over these issues. Many of us could never understand the differences between gayness, transdressing and transexualism, and you have done your best to explain it all.

I have a question for DonnaMarie, which you can feel free to refuse to answer. You told us that in your previous life as a man, you fathered a daughter. Does that have any bearing on your present way of life? Does she cope?
 

---

Posted by duchess (# 2764) on :
 
Newsflash...this ended up in my mailbox so I can not link to it...but copied and pasted it:

KFOX EMAIL UPDATE!!

BENNETT RETURNS TO THE AIR!
We're pleased to welcome back to the KFOX on-air team..."Aunt" Fran Bennett. She'll be filling in for Chris Jackson who will be on vacation... back in the shift previously held by "Uncle" Frank Bennett. Listen this Monday (July 22nd) and welcome her back!



 

---

Posted by DonnaPatricia (# 3017) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by PaulTH:
I would like to thank both ChristinaMarie and DonnaPatricia for boldly giving us such an insight into where they're coming from. As I said, way back in this thread, those of us to whom this is never an issue, are ill equipped to understand the pain that is suffered over these issues. Many of us could never understand the differences between gayness, transdressing and transexualism, and you have done your best to explain it all.

I have a question for DonnaMarie, which you can feel free to refuse to answer. You told us that in your previous life as a man, you fathered a daughter. Does that have any bearing on your present way of life? Does she cope?

---

Oh Gosh! We're not joined at the hip, you know. This is Donna Patricia speaking. And why should I refuse to answer? My life is an open book. I have nothing to hide. No shame about anything, here!

But you didn't read my post on another thread. I said:

quote:

---

Hi,

I want to speak to this issue on a very serious topic, as a woman who used to suffer from gender identity dysphoria (aka transsexualism).

Profesor Richard Green (an eminent man) wrote:

quote:
--------------------------------------------------
Available evidence does not support concerns that a parent’s transsexualism directly adversely impacts on the children. By contrast, there is extensive clinical experience showing the detriment to children in consequence of terminated contact with a parent after divorce
--------------------------------------------------
He has also given evidence in Court as to why a trans parent should be given right of access to the children.

I sweated buckets of blood before I told my daughter (then 14) that I was suffering from GID. She seemed completely nonplussed, and I asked her why. She said Oh, I've known for about two years. That was two years longer than I did!

Goodness, children are far smarter than we give them credit for!

Problems today? Zip. I go to her Royal Navy ceremonies, and there just isn't an issue.

So be honest with your chldren is the best policy

---

I'm seeing her tomorrow; she's on leave from the Ark Royal where she is a Weapons Engineer, and we (me, her, and my ex-wife) will probably go out for a drink or maybe dinner together. So wassafuss?

I also want to address your comment "in your previous life as a man". Ummm. This is a tough one. I could go into details (and will if you want) but essentially puberty was so brutal that I developed method acting to the point where I believed I was a man (as a small child, I acted and was - apart from having a willy - a girl). Post-puberty, I was hyper-masculine in behavior. I call it "eggshell theory" meaning that I constructed a male persona (the hard, thick, 'eggshell') so convincing, it even fooled me! Eventually she kicked her way out of the eggshell. Truly, I was never a man, I was a nascent transsexual. But the bits worked, and I became convinced I was a bloke, so married and became a father.

Is there an issue with me and my daughter today? No. What does she tell her friends? She's my pater. Bearing on my present way of life? (I presume you mean living with another woman in a committed and loving monogamous relationship). No.

And would I rather have a Universe where I found my true gender identity early, and thus never become a parent? Not in an aeon. For it is true to say that the hardest thing for older folk like me is the impact on the family, and missing out on their own childhood; and it is equally true to say that the hardest thing for youngsters is never to have had the opportunity to have had a family. Truly, 'tis a real Honest-to-God bitch of a thing.

But I love my daughter, and I would rather have had the pain, and a Universe with her in it, than one without. These feelings are echoed by my ex-wife.

Ah well, these things are sent to try us, and as Christina Marie has rightly pointed out, the burden can be turned into a gift from God.

Yours in Christ,
Donna Patricia
 

---

Posted by DonnaPatricia (# 3017) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by PaulTH:
. . . Many of us could never understand the differences between gayness, transdressing and transexualism, and you have done your best to explain it all. . .

---

You've made up a new word, which I feel is absolutely bang-on! The word is "transdressing".

And that is how oh so many trans people feel about cross-dressing men who like to wear female clothes for some (or even all) of the time. I should tell you, there is a strong element of disquiet amongst trans people - especially in the US - about transdressers who would hijack transsexuality for their own political purposes by calling it part of the 'transgender continuum'.

If a man wants to wear a skirt, fine, I don't care. But I do have an ethical problem with being lumped in with (excuse the crudity) chicks with dicks. It offends my sense of rightness to have my former serious medical condition associated with transdressing.

Having an illness (no matter what is is), and getting better is Good, in the Christian sense, because if one thinks about one's recovery, it helps us to Love more. Gosh, I know that to be a fact! But trying to link two distinct phenomena does not do so. And thus I consider the concept of 'transgender rights' not only invalid, but immoral.

Yours in Christ,
Donna Patricia
 

---

Posted by ChristinaMarie (# 1013) on :
 
Hi Folks,

I'd like to bring up a subject that we can all contribute to, that of sexism. One of the problems associated with my GID, was that I felt inferior. Why?

I was brought up in a very male chauvinist family, and society. Starting at a very young age, any behaviour that was remotely female, was 'stamped on'. It was done in such a way, that implied I was behaving like an inferior person.

Boys are quite often compared with girls, when they are being insulted, with the aim to make them perform better. If a boy isn't playing soccer very well, his Dad or Schoolteacher, will often shout, 'You're kicking that ball like a girl!' If boys are talking in class, 'You're like a couple of girls!' is sometimes said. If a boy is upset and starts crying, well, it's 'Boys don't cry!'.

I was never told directly that females are inferior to males, but at home, my Mom did everything in the house, my Dad did nothing. This gives a subconscious message, that women are here to serve men. Being compared to a girl, when being told off, subconsciously says, 'girls are inferior.'

Not all trans women have had this experience, I know Donna Patricia hasn't, but many have.

I wasn't just hiding my true self, for all those years, but feelings of inferiority associated with my feminine feelings, that others had brainwashed me into believing were inferior.

Any comments?

PaulTH: Donna's daughter knows me, and we get on very well.

Christina
 

---

Posted by MR PINK (# 2979) on :
 
I've always felt women were more powerful (& I Don't mean in a PC or Sexual way)

Think of all those sterotypical northern battleaxe types.

I went to an all boys school for the last three years of my education & it was drilled into us that men were superior to women. I know of one teacher who taught Us O level RE who lasted a term because she couldn't take the inherient sexism of the staff room or the fact that we had to adhere to COE based view of scripture (& an evangelical one at that) whereas we had before been encouraged to think for ourselfs.
 

---

Posted by Saint Sebastian (# 312) on :
 
I have a question: why does anyone who isn't transexual (or transgendered or gay or straight, for that matter)care enough about the issue to oppose those who are? What kind of threat do those of us outside the norm pose that makes people create God Hates Fags websites, oppose gay marriage, transexual or gay teachers, etc etc ad infinitum? It's not like the majority of people in the world are going to adopt those identities once they know they won't get killed for it. I just don't understand. . .
 

---

Posted by DonnaPatricia (# 3017) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Saint Sebastian:
I have a question: why does anyone who isn't transexual (or transgendered or gay or straight, for that matter)care enough about the issue to oppose those who are? What kind of threat do those of us outside the norm pose that makes people create

---

Why does anyone hate another person? Quite often, they were brought up that way. More to the point, they never learned to think.

No threat is offered, except to their worldview from the existence of women such as myself.

I have a simple response. Speak softly, and carry a Brno Arms CZ-75 with 15 Black Rhinos in the mag and one up the spout. Ensure you have Pachmyr grips, Trijicon sights, and have removed the mag spring for fast reload (I just described my personal weapon).

More to the point, you threaten tribalism . A primitive concept, true, but one we see in I'm brown, but she is black! It is the age-old problem of 'not one of us'.

What can we do? Why, spread the Good News, of course! Th more Christians there are, the more love and tolerance there will be in the world.

Yours in Christ
Donna Patricia
 

---

Posted by Saint Sebastian (# 312) on :
 
Donna Patricia, It occurs to me that you might make a great Laura Croft. I can see you standing in the flaming ruins one foot on the back of a new-fallen foe saying,"Let me explain Transexualism to you ONE more time. . . "
 

---

Posted by DonnaPatricia (# 3017) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Saint Sebastian:
Donna Patricia, It occurs to me that you might make a great Laura Croft. I can see you standing in the flaming ruins one foot on the back of a new-fallen foe saying,"Let me explain Transexualism to you ONE more time. . . "

---

Oh! She could, she could! Believe me, she could!

Christina
 

---

Posted by ChristinaMarie (# 1013) on :
 
OOOpppsss!

Didn't realise the computer was logged on to Donna's account. That last post was from me.

Christina
 

---

Posted by Icarus Coot (# 220) on :
 
Vatican says 'sex-change' operation does not change person's gender.

quote:

---

"The key point is that the (transsexual) surgical operation is so superficial and external that it does not change the personality. If the person was male, he remains male. If she was female, she remains female," said the source.

---

quote:

---

Icarus Coot:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Ley Druid:
The Vatican teaches that a fertilized egg is a person. Such a person has a sexual identity based on chromosomes that will stay with them for the rest of their lives. What's the big deal?

---

The big deal is that your view of sexual identity stems from the 1950s when genetic testing was available. Prior to that (C.19th) sexual identity was determined by the appearance of the genitalia. The current medical and legal view is not that people with transsexualism have any incongruity between their psychology and their biology (as asserted legally in the 1960s divorce case Corbett vs. Corbett), but that the sexual differentiation of the brain is as much a biological factor as chromosomes as determining identity.

What you have pronounced with authority as the determinant of sexual identity perpetuates the thinking that people with transsexualism have some sort of psychological flaw that makes them follow a 'lifestyle choice' and that this 'lifestyle choice' can be cured with prayer and/or therapy. This is the type of thinking that has led to the rejection and abuse of ppl with ts by the Church.

---

• Chromosomes are not decisive
• TS is considered a type of intersex
• one of the 2 eminent sexologists in the world Louis Gooren views the process of sexual differentiation:
  "First, the chromosomal configurations are established. Next, there is gonadal differentiation; that is, differentiation between the testes and ovaries. Next, there is the differentiation of the internal and external genitalia. Finally, there is the differentiation of the brain into male or female."
  and:
  "in human subjects with gender identity problems the sexual differentiation of their brains has not followed the pattern predicted by their earlier steps in the sexual differentiation process (such as chromosomes, gonad, genitalia) but has followed a pattern typical of the opposite sex in the final stage of that differentiation process... "
• While this biological factor cannot be proven at present in living people, there have been post-mortem studies on the brains of people with TS that support the presence of a biological factor. Namely, the BSTc area of the brain in XY-men has twice as many neurons as that of XX-females. It has been found in post mortem examinations of the brains of XY women ie. women with transsexualism that this neuronal pattern follows that of XX-women.

quote:

---

Why in respect of the Church, the view that chromosomes determine identity is flawed: It leads to an inconsistency in the way that intersex people have been viewed by the Church. Was the historical Church wrong all the time that it accepted XY-women as women? These women with Complete Androgen Insensitivity are phenotypically indistinguishable from XX-women and they experience their gender as female. You cannot say that it is their socialisation or their anatomy that has led to their experience of gender as female when you consider for example, the case of David Reimer, born XY, a twin, who was accidentally castrated during circumcision and was surgically reassigned and raised female. He experienced his gender as male and insisted he was male (leading to corrective surgery later in life), in spite of socialisation and appearance. So there must exist some marker, predisposition or biological imperative determining sex identity. What then, of the CAIS (XY) people who insist that they are male (often 'socialised' female, and again with entirely female appearing bodies)? The Church generally accepts these people as male because they have a 'legitimate' intersex condition. So here is an example of the Church accepting that some XY people (who appear female) have a male sex identity, whereas the others (who historically the Church has been oblivious to) have a female sex identity.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Duo Seraphim:
This is in some senses a spin-off from the thread "RCs and transgender", albeit from the other perspective - namely how the law treats marriage of post-operative transexuals.

The Full Court of the Family Court of Australia has recently ruled
ruled that a "man" for the purposes of marriage includes a post-operative female to male transexual. Thus the marriage of "Kevin" to "Jennifer" was valid for the purposes of the Marriage Act 1961 (Commonwealth of Australia) on the basis that "Kevin" was a man at the date of their marriage and thus the marriage of "Kevin" and "Jennifer" was valid.

The circumstances of "Kevin"'s birth were irrelevant - gender at the time of marriage is what counts. "Man" or "woman" thus bear the meaning given to them in contemporary Australian society, which includes post-operative transexuals in accordance with their re-assigned gender.

It is likely that there will be a further appeal to the High Court of Australia (local equivalent of the House of Lords or the US Supreme Court and ultimate court of appeal in this country). There is certainly support within the Catholic Church here for such a challenge.

The case raises fundamental questions, including:

1. What is the definition of marriage?
2. What makes a valid marriage? At law? In the eyes of the Church?
3. Is marriage a purely legal construct?
4. How can a legal definition of eligibility for marriage based on contemporary custom be reconciled with canon law?
5. What is marriage for?
6. What role does the Church have in pushing its views on marriage in a secular society?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Ley Druid:
Excellent thread.
Given this latest ruling in Florida I think your questions are fully relevant here in the USA.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Tom Day:
OK, as this thread got a good kicking, might as well try to answer some questions.

Personally, i feel the marriage was valid, as it was between two people of the opposite sex. Therefore is legal, as legally there was one man and one woman.

In the eyes of the church, imho, marriage is the joining together of a man and a wife, who love each other and want to make a commitment before God and their friends that they will remain with each other for the rest of their lives. It also gives the opportunity for reproduction.

However, I feel that marriage is definately changing. People are not married for life as much these days, and are not marrying in church, Marriage has become much more of a secular service than a religous one. This brings the question 'Do we still need marriage?'

I think as a church, we should push for the idea that marriage is a relationship, between two people who love each other and want to spend the rest of their lives together, and want to make a contract in front of God. However, whether it stays as 'marriage' or just as two people having a blessing I don't know.

Do we need marriage these days?

This post probably asks more qquestions than it answers, but....

Tom

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by jlg:

quote:

---

1. What is the definition of marriage?

---

Depends on who you're asking. My personal definition (as expressed in my own marriage) is that two individuals vow to stay together until death; the easiest way to achieve this goal is to constantly remember that your spouse is wonderful for putting up with your shortcomings. Remember, not remind!

quote:

---

2. What makes a valid marriage? At law? In the eyes of the Church?

---

Duh. A valid marriage at-law is a legal contract under the terms of the law. A valid marriage in the eyes of the Church is subject to the internal laws/canons/beliefs of the particular church. (So, No, I don't believe there is a single Christian definition of marriage.)

quote:

---

3. Is marriage a purely legal construct?

---

The concept of marriage is not a purely legal construct, but that does not mean that secular society cannot create a legal construct of marriage which may differ from the religious and philosophical concept of marriage.

quote:

---

4. How can a legal definition of eligibility for marriage based on contemporary custom be reconciled with canon law?

---

Why should it be?

quote:

---

5. What is marriage for?

---

Lots of things. Nothing. To beat your thick head against reality. What do you mean "What is it for?' Like most of life, it just is! And hopefully you learn something from it.

quote:

---

6. What role does the Church have in pushing its views on marriage in a secular society?

---

None. The Church (whatever church) should concentrate on convincing its own members to accept its views on marriage and let the secular government determine the rules for civil (secular) marriage.

OK, I spit all this off the top of my head. Let the debate begin!

---

quote:

---

Then along comes genetics which says that there are males XY and females XX, but there are also 'in-betweeners' XXY XYY etc

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Raspberry Rabbit:
[QB]Babybear wrote:

quote:

---

Then along comes genetics which says that there are males XY and females XX, but there are also 'in-betweeners' XXY XYY etc

---

I've certainly heard a lot of medical terms being used in this thread - giving me the impression that a majority of those living as trans-sexual, trans-gendered people have some demonstrable difference in their chromosomes from the rest of us who tend to be either XX or XY. Is this in fact the case?

People who have been 'told by the medical profession' that they are transgendered when 'in the midst of a depression' have been told this, I gather, by a psychiatrist based on something other than a study of their chromosomes?

---

quote:

---

... After decades of repression, Iran's Islamic government is recognising people with gender identity disorders and allowing them to have sex-change operations and obtain new birth certificates.

Before the Islamic revolution in 1979 there was no particular policy regarding transsexuals. Iranians with the inclination, means and connections could obtain the necessary medical treatment and new identity documents. However, the new religious government classed transsexuals and transvestites with gays and lesbians, who were condemned by Islam and faced a lashing.

But these days Iran's Muslim clerics, who dominate the judiciary, are considerably better informed about transsexuality. Some clerics now even recommend sex-change operations to those who are troubled about their gender. The issue was discussed at a conference in Tehran in June that drew officials from other Persian Gulf countries. ...

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by ACOL-ite:
OK, given that we have people on board that know about these kinds of things (by having studied them academically), I'd like to ask some questions that have always bothered me about the notion of "transgender". [Note: It possibly isn't my place to say this, but I thought I should just make a reminder that this is a public bulletin board and people should think long and hard before posting anything from personal experience. I think my questions are broad enough that we can have a useful discussion without that anyway]

To me the notion of being, eg. a "woman in a man's body" simply makes no sense. Not just in the sense of not being able to relate to it... there are elements to being gay or being a woman or being a Muslim or being a professinal athlete that I can't relate to (as I'm not any of the above). It raises a mind-body problem for me which I can't seem to resolve. What does it mean to "be a woman" if one has a man's body? Any notion which seeks to separate "being a woman" from "having a non-male body" to me seems entirely alien.

The root of my being male comes from my having, or even (temporarily) being a male body. My gender is not removable from that body (or atleast, I don't see how it could be).

Yet, I know that some people deeply and earnestly believe themselves to have (be?) some gender other than that of their body. In what sense is that gender theirs?

I am fully prepared to admit that "there are more things on Heaven and Earth...(etc)". Just because I can't resolve this mind-body problem doesn't mean a solution doesn't exist. We should try and learn from these people to better understand. But, fundamentally, I can't see how their claims have any meaning, yet alone validity, which makes me deeply worried by the whole movement.

So, what does it all mean?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Ophthalmos:
I hate to admit it, but I can see exactly where you're coming from. I have no real answers, so I'll shut up and let the people who do talk.

---

© Ship of Fools 2016


UBB.classic^TM 6.5.0