Crossdressing in public

[Gerpington]

Your analogies don't match, though.
You think a man dressing like a woman and exposing the public to his idiotic, borderline sick fetish is in any way analogous to a choice in colors [in your own bedroom, no less] or a productive career choice?
Just goes to show how effed up your moral compass is if these things are comparable in your mind.

The rest of your are employing pitifully emotional arguments. The fact is, we don't need to see it. If you have a bizarre fetish for doing it, keep it within your own bedroom.
Just like how I wouldn't want to see, in the street: a woman with her twins hanging out, a man in a tight speedo showing his bulge, a disgusting feathery, leathery... thing from the pride parade, a man wearing a fursuit or whatever, etc.


I'm not particularly surprised to see this disgusting degeneracy here, obviously, especially since I assume you're all 90s/millennials. But ask yourself: do I really want to live in a world where everyone enacts his inappropriate fetishes in public? Do I really want to go out to the park with my children and have them exposed to all kinds of bizarre fetishes because everyone wants to "express themselves"? Do I want to walk with them past the guy in tight leather around his bulge, or some "transfox"or whatever barking in public with his little fox ears?

No.

It's clearly just a cry for attention, like your generation knows to do too well.

And don't even get me started on ********.

Don't call them ********.

And it isn't a fetish at all.....I have no words for you.

 

[Sucumbio]

Your analogies don't match, though.
You think a man dressing like a woman and exposing the public to his idiotic, borderline sick fetish is in any way analogous to a choice in colors [in your own bedroom, no less] or a productive career choice?
Just goes to show how effed up your moral compass is if these things are comparable in your mind.

The rest of your are employing pitifully emotional arguments. The fact is, we don't need to see it. If you have a bizarre fetish for doing it, keep it within your own bedroom.
Just like how I wouldn't want to see, in the street: a woman with her twins hanging out, a man in a tight speedo showing his bulge, a disgusting feathery, leathery... thing from the pride parade, a man wearing a fursuit or whatever, etc.


I'm not particularly surprised to see this disgusting degeneracy here, obviously, especially since I assume you're all 90s/millennials. But ask yourself: do I really want to live in a world where everyone enacts his inappropriate fetishes in public? Do I really want to go out to the park with my children and have them exposed to all kinds of bizarre fetishes because everyone wants to "express themselves"? Do I want to walk with them past the guy in tight leather around his bulge, or some "transfox"or whatever barking in public with his little fox ears?

No.

It's clearly just a cry for attention, like your generation knows to do too well.

And don't even get me started on ********.

First off, I'd like to welcome you to the DH. As you're a new poster you should take some time to review the forum rules. Though I realize not everyone follows a "format" here anymore, at the very least we should strive to argue in proper form, which is why it'd also be a good idea to review RDK's "how to post" suggestions in the aforementioned rules thread. Though a bit lengthy, you're sure to find helpful information, specifically regarding both formal and informal logical fallacies. Also you may want to review the general Smashworld Forum Global Rules, as you're treading a very thin line in terms of "trolling" (inciting flame wars) and "flaming" (usage of improper language designed to hurt or instigate violence). I realize you're "just being honest" but on SWF, and especially the DH, we have a need for a certain verbal tenacity which precludes the usage of phrases and words that would otherwise be considered inflammatory, hate speech, etc.

Okay, NOW, onto your post!

There are several things about your post that I find troubling, but I'll start with your appeal to authority (fallacy). In your case, you've identified yourself as an "elder" referring to the other posters in such a way as to "forgive" their views as simple ignorance as if to say that they'll eventually grow up and "realize" the "truth." You also suggest that you yourself are from a previous generation to theirs (theirs being Gen Y or Millennials). Myself, I'd be considered Gen X (born in 76). The reason I have to point out your flaw in calling out their age as part of your stance is because it involves a false dichotomy (fallacy). That is to say, not everyone born to their generation is automatically "degenerate" (your word, and I'll address this in a bit). Nor are previous generations (Gen X or Baby Boomers) necessarily non-"degenerate." I would like to use myself as an example. I was co-founder and vice president of our high school's GSA (Gay-Straight Alliance) in 1994 and 1995. It was the first time anyone had done anything remotely similar to such a movement at the school, which was lily white (literally 1 black family in the whole town) and far from progressive (mostly Irish-Catholic). As the name implies, Alliance, there were several of us who began the quest to find equality for LGBT students and faculty. We were met with some hostility, of course, but in the end it worked out. The movement itself was initiated because one particular student came to school dressed as a woman (he was a male student). He got jumped by some of the "jocks" and hospitalized. We felt it necessary to challenge the notion that "normal" exists. The difficulty with "normal" is that it doesn't actually exist. There's status quo, sure, but if history tells us anything, it's that status quo changes. Normalcy does as well.

Thanks to progress, we've now accepted that humans really do have the capacity to be born one gender, and yet identify as the opposite. Being born into "the wrong body" is an issue that millions have faced over the centuries. And until very recently, it's been something that's been viewed as... well how did you put it? A Fetish? Okay... that's one word. Another is "perversion." In any case, the connotation is that it was "wrong." Bad. Forbidden. Should be kept secret. Can you imagine what it's like to live in secret? To hide who you really are because others are uncomfortable, and will lash out at you, violently if necessary. It's a terrible way to live. Suicide rates are extremely high among members of the LGBT community. It's tragic, really. But it's finally getting better.

Moving along, being of the age you are, you are probably familiar with the more "traditional" definition of cross-dresser. You see, up until recently, cross dressing really did refer pretty specifically to men in drag. And yes, I'll admit, it was usually odd looking. Though in Elizabethan times, there were no women on stage, for instance, it was typically men in women's clothes. Not the point. The difficulty with your choice of words is that you're implying there's an "evil" element. At the very least you expect people who are different from you to keep it behind closed doors. So this begs the question: what is "public" to you? I ask because your specific stance, the not-so-hidden inflammation behind your words, well they really don't fit in with today's version of "public." Certainly not in any major metropolitan areas. Heck, I live in Mississippi, the one place in the world you'd -expect- to find all kinds of intolerance, and yet there is fairly large LGBT community here. I guess what I'm asking for is for you to qualify your position if you will. You've said the words, but they don't ring true. It sounds too forced, too gimmicky. It's as if you are -trying- to get a rise out of people. Even if you're serious (hard to believe, but I'll buy it if you can prove your case rather than just defame blindly) you do realize where you are? This is a video game message board, lol. Do you really think anyone here would join in and start singing your praise? If this was a Harley Davidson website, okay, maybe (note: no offense to LGBT Harley owners/fans :D ... )

So yeah... lol you should take a breath and rethink what you're saying. You've invoked all kinds of frankly stale stereotypes of homophobic parents that I've not encountered personally in over a decade.

 

[DunnoBro]

And it isn't a fetish at all.....I have no words for you.

As someone once involved with the world of BDSM and all sorts of kinky play, I can assure you crossdressing is very much a fetish and quite popular. However, so is giving foot massages, eating, and even being cheated on. But these aspects and crossdressing and fetish/arousal are not joined at the hip as we should be well aware of.

 

[Claire Diviner]

Your analogies don't match, though.
You think a man dressing like a woman and exposing the public to his idiotic, borderline sick fetish is in any way analogous to a choice in colors [in your own bedroom, no less] or a productive career choice?
Just goes to show how effed up your moral compass is if these things are comparable in your mind.

The rest of your are employing pitifully emotional arguments. The fact is, we don't need to see it. If you have a bizarre fetish for doing it, keep it within your own bedroom.
Just like how I wouldn't want to see, in the street: a woman with her twins hanging out, a man in a tight speedo showing his bulge, a disgusting feathery, leathery... thing from the pride parade, a man wearing a fursuit or whatever, etc.


I'm not particularly surprised to see this disgusting degeneracy here, obviously, especially since I assume you're all 90s/millennials. But ask yourself: do I really want to live in a world where everyone enacts his inappropriate fetishes in public? Do I really want to go out to the park with my children and have them exposed to all kinds of bizarre fetishes because everyone wants to "express themselves"? Do I want to walk with them past the guy in tight leather around his bulge, or some "transfox"or whatever barking in public with his little fox ears?

No.

It's clearly just a cry for attention, like your generation knows to do too well.

And don't even get me started on ********.

You're a bigoted, hateful, and ignorant human being to believe one's choice of dress is synonymous to one's own kink. You ask if you really want to live in a world of "immoralities"; to you, I say you don't have any choice in that matter. Society is quickly transcending stigmas associated to what old religious leaders and tyrants dictated as things to be seen as "abominations", and it's clear you - like many, sadly - are not getting with the program out of sheer refusal from your apparent homophobic (hell, just downright LGBT-phobic) mindset burned into your mind by the very brainwashing conservative extremists views and teachings, religious or otherwise.

You must be extremely delusional if you truly believe that what a person chooses to wear comfortably, or a woman breastfeeding her baby in public, is some "cry for attention". And your apparent view of "********" is but an indication that we haven't even gotten to the bottom of the cesspool with your views; views devoid of reason, sources, or even a real argument.

People, like you, are the reason society has been held back in human progress to equality, because people, like you, give too much of a damn about matters that has no effect on your life or the life of others. The bad news in your case, is that everything you hate will be a part of normal society in the U.S., and will eventually spread across the world, and there is nothing you or any like-minded people who share your bigotry can do about it.

 

[Gerpington]

As someone once involved with the world of BDSM and all sorts of kinky play, I can assure you crossdressing is very much a fetish and quite popular. However, so is giving foot massages, eating, and even being cheated on. But these aspects and crossdressing and fetish/arousal are not joined at the hip as we should be well aware of.

...well yeah but everything can be made into a fetish I just meant it isn't just solely a fetish and plenty do it without sexual intent behind it.

You're a bigoted, hateful, and ignorant human being to believe one's choice of dress is synonymous to one's own kink. You ask if you really want to live in a world of "immoralities"; to you, I say you don't have any choice in that matter. Society is quickly transcending stigmas associated to what old religious leaders and tyrants dictated as things to be seen as "abominations", and it's clear you - like many, sadly - are not getting with the program out of sheer refusal from your apparent homophobic (hell, just downright LGBT-phobic) mindset burned into your mind by the very brainwashing conservative extremists views and teachings, religious or otherwise.

You must be extremely delusional if you truly believe that what a person chooses to wear comfortably, or a woman breastfeeding her baby in public, is some "cry for attention". And your apparent view of "********" is but an indication that we haven't even gotten to the bottom of the cesspool with your views; views devoid of reason, sources, or even a real argument.

People, like you, are the reason society has been held back in human progress to equality, because people, like you, give too much of a damn about matters that has no effect on your life or the life of others. The bad news in your case, is that everything you hate will be a part of normal society in the U.S., and will eventually spread across the world, and there is nothing you or any like-minded people who share your bigotry can do about it.

I like the cut of your jib. Society is slowly starting to accept these things as a whole....heck I've dated males that have identified as fully straight and never once treated me like a secret to keep from people.

Just the fact of that is enough to prove society is changing as a whole (I broke up with that person but not do to his ideals changing).

 

[GoldShadow]

Just a reminder to everyone on both sides here: please avoid ad hominem attacks and insults towards others, including other members.

@Near
You claim that others are using "emotional arguments"; whether they are or aren't is not the point of my post, but it's rather short-sighted of you to make that claim without realizing it's exactly what you're doing. You have provided no argument against anything described in this thread other than your own personal knee-jerk reaction; you find it "disgusting" or "abhorrent" or "deviant" for no other reason than that's what you personally have been taught and it's what you personally believe, and you are shocked that others don't. Sounds quite emotional to me.

 

[tyrannosaurusrik]

@ Sucumbio - Well put!

@Near - Using the term "fetish" to describe people dressing as the opposite is interesting (for a lack of better words) because the Merriam-Webster definition (among others) is "an object or bodily part whose real or fantasied presence is psychologically necessary for sexual gratification and that is an object of fixation to the extent that it may interfere with complete sexual expression." With this definition, wouldn't revealed ankles or long socks be a display of "fetish" to someone who has a foot/sock fetish, or revealed cleavage to someone who has a chest "fetish" (or need of breasts or chest to sexual gratification)? Then, there it is relative to the viewer or passerby and not to the person dressed as such necessarily. Just because there are people who have sock fetishes in the world (and I do not mean anything negative here), does not mean I should be force to cover up socks with pants. What I believe your argument is rooted is in culture. A revealed ankle is some cultures is (still) a sign of promiscuity. While in other cultures and locations, men strutting around in speedos (and even less) is acceptable. There are cultures in the world that accept crossing dressing and gender ambiguity. And for them, that expression is not a form of "fetish" while there are people who most likely do fantasize them.

Needless of your argument, there are people out there who will dress as they please. There is truly nothing you can do about it. If you do physically attack them, chances are, you will be suffering the consequences more than they did. I am not saying you must like it or must appreciate it, but I am saying you should be able to accept it as it happens, and move on with live. Say what you please, it still is going to happen somewhere in the world.

 

[AZ_Spellbound]

wow, im kinda surprised this many people commented on my thread.

 

[zozo]

It's extremely weird. And gay. Inb4 homophobe.

 

[Gerpington]

It's extremely weird. And gay. Inb4 homophobe.

I assume you also have a negative view point of transgender people?

Homophobia is a completely different topic entirely why are you even bringing it up here? Some people just prefer the opposite sex's "assigned" clothing, I see nothing particularly indecent or wrong with that, granted I'm transgender so I'm a bit bias...seeing how I do not care for the gender I was assigned at birth :/

 

[_Keno_]

I'm all for equality in genders and whatnot, but a man who wears a dress because he is "a woman" at heart is more trapped by gender roles than anyone else. Contrary to what you believe Gerp, there are some people who crossdress for sexual reasons and most others for gender roles / attention. The smallest group, I would have to say, is because they feel more comfortable.

Tbh, if I could remake society myself, everyone would be nude (barring weather).

 

[Gerpington]

I'm all for equality in genders and whatnot, but a man who wears a dress because he is "a woman" at heart is more trapped by gender roles than anyone else. Contrary to what you believe Gerp, there are some people who crossdress for sexual reasons and most others for gender roles / attention. The smallest group, I would have to say, is because they feel more comfortable.

Tbh, if I could remake society myself, everyone would be nude (barring weather).

I am fully aware that someone get some sexual stimulation from it, but that doesn't mean everyone does.

I don't wear skirts because I feel I must to be a woman I do it because they are breezy and god damn comfortable. Though I've never liked jeans or anything of the sort...I often wear sweaters and skirts or tunics these days....I did go through a phase in high school where I only wore dress pants and dress shirts (back when I identified as male) Idk for some reason I've always liked more form fitting and "uncomfortable" clothing. It's not just because I'm transgender, though I do often find myself enjoying female fashions more often....I wear a lot of unisex shirts (mostly omocat print ones) and sweaters/ hoodies that aren't particularly gendered so it's not like I'm dressing up for attention or what not, but I am a girl, and if I want to wear a skirt or dress. I'm going to.

 

[zozo]

I assume you also have a negative view point of transgender people?

Homophobia is a completely different topic entirely why are you even bringing it up here? Some people just prefer the opposite sex's "assigned" clothing, I see nothing particularly indecent or wrong with that, granted I'm transgender so I'm a bit bias...seeing how I do not care for the gender I was assigned at birth :/

I have a negative viewpoint towards the idea of being transgender, and the whole LBGT thing in general, not transgender people. I cannot express strongly enough that I DO NOT HAVE ANYTHING AGAINST A TRANSGENDER PERSON. I said inb4 homophobe because I get called a homophobe by everyone on the internet for posting my beliefs, so I assumed everyone on here would do the same. I wasn't expecting a levelheaded response like yours, and I appreciate that. I think believe that thinking you were born with the wrong gender is a mental issue, it's not anything normal, or healthy. God doesn't make mistakes. The gender you're born as is what you were meant to be. Whether or not you agree with that however, is up to you. I just don't personally believe in that stuff, but I have nothing against those who do.

 

[_Keno_]

@ zozo I'm afraid most people are going to disagree with you, since they are opinions that contradict fact. It's often the case that uninformed people make opinions about issues that have a known truth value. If you are going to actively apply this attitude in life at any point, I suggest you do some more research on lgbt.

@gerp If that's true, then I expect you would wear clothes of either gender purely based upon physical comfort. Otherwise, gender roles does have an influence over it. I was actually expecting most of your talk about "comfort" to have to do with how you are perceived rather than how it feels on your skin.

 

[Gerpington]

I have a negative viewpoint towards the idea of being transgender, and the whole LBGT thing in general, not transgender people. I cannot express strongly enough that I DO NOT HAVE ANYTHING AGAINST A TRANSGENDER PERSON. I said inb4 homophobe because I get called a homophobe by everyone on the internet for posting my beliefs, so I assumed everyone on here would do the same. I wasn't expecting a levelheaded response like yours, and I appreciate that. I think believe that thinking you were born with the wrong gender is a mental issue, it's not anything normal, or healthy. God doesn't make mistakes. The gender you're born as is what you were meant to be. Whether or not you agree with that however, is up to you. I just don't personally believe in that stuff, but I have nothing against those who do.

Gender Dysphoria is the proper term and it is defined as:

"the condition of feeling one's emotional and psychological identity as male or female to be opposite to one's biological sex."
It is a psychological thing for sure, but it isn't exactly a mental illness or disorder. It is just a strong discontent or uncomfort in the sex one was assigned at birth and there are plenty of methods to change the body to satisfy the person's thoughts of themselves and make them more comfortable in their body, but trying to change their mind or "cure" the dysphoria will only result in depression and in many cases, suicidal intent (the suicide rate of transgender/gender non-conforming people is at 41% last I checked). And that rate isn't so high because of a mental issue it's high because of how people treat them.

Heck if one can determine they are experiencing gender dysphoria early enough one can transition to the point where no one will have a doubt in the world as to what gender they are. That would require accepting parents, however, and I believe we are still a few generations away from that being common enough.

And of course I'll give you a level headed response. Anger only breeds more anger. Hate only breeds more hate.

@ zozo I'm afraid most people are going to disagree with you, since they are opinions that contradict fact. It's often the case that uninformed people make opinions about issues that have a known truth value. If you are going to actively apply this attitude in life at any point, I suggest you do some more research on lgbt.

@gerp If that's true, then I expect you would wear clothes of either gender purely based upon physical comfort. Otherwise, gender roles does have an influence over it. I was actually expecting most of your talk about "comfort" to have to do with how you are perceived rather than how it feels on your skin.

Well, I can only really speak for myself. I meant comfort as far as what clothes I view myself wearing. I don't really care about the opinions of others as far as what I should and should not wear means. I do prefer feminine clothing, but I don't see that as a bad thing? Men's clothing are pretty baggy and I prefer tighter fit things, but I weigh like 115 pounds, so even men's smalls feel pretty loose on me. (I'm nearly 6 foot)

And yes I wear skirts and dresses, but It's more so because I enjoy how they look on me and how they feel it's not because I'm trying to fit into gender roles or what have you, but I suppose I would be read as pretty feminine and more female conforming gender role wise, but then again I was always called a girly boy or ****** in middle/high school simply because of my frame (I wore pretty generic nerdy boy clothes back then.)

I do still wear men's clothes some times, especially to work but that's just because tighter fit stuff while I'm working isn't exactly fun..and I don't exactly like being stared at during work. (granted I've still been hit on...by carnies, but still)

 

[zozo]

@ zozo I'm afraid most people are going to disagree with you, since they are opinions that contradict fact. It's often the case that uninformed people make opinions about issues that have a known truth value.

I never post my beliefs and opinions with the intentions of making others agree with me. 90% of time no one ever agrees with me, especially not on the internet. I usually get ridiculed and insulted for my beliefs and for being a Christian, among other things when I express my beliefs on the internet. It's refreshing being able to talk to someone that isn't gonna immediately cry HOMOPHOBE, BIGOT, CHRISTIAN ***, etc as soon as I say something. That being said, I don't believe that theories crafted by flawed human beings without being proven using science are truth. It's just more theory crafting.

 

[Carrill]

I have a negative viewpoint towards the idea of being transgender, and the whole LBGT thing in general, not transgender people. I cannot express strongly enough that I DO NOT HAVE ANYTHING AGAINST A TRANSGENDER PERSON. I said inb4 homophobe because I get called a homophobe by everyone on the internet for posting my beliefs, so I assumed everyone on here would do the same. I wasn't expecting a levelheaded response like yours, and I appreciate that. I think believe that thinking you were born with the wrong gender is a mental issue, it's not anything normal, or healthy. God doesn't make mistakes. The gender you're born as is what you were meant to be. Whether or not you agree with that however, is up to you. I just don't personally believe in that stuff, but I have nothing against those who do.

God gave us the need to drink water and eat food. And yet, it's possible for us to choke and die on said water and food while we consume it.

Disregarding the fact that not everyone in this thread believes in God, I'm sure he's made more than a few mistakes. Trans people have every right to live as the gender we're supposed to be.

 

[_Keno_]

I never post my beliefs and opinions with the intentions of making others agree with me. 90% of time no one ever agrees with me, especially not on the internet. I usually get ridiculed and insulted for my beliefs and for being a Christian, among other things when I express my beliefs on the internet. It's refreshing being able to talk to someone that isn't gonna immediately cry HOMOPHOBE, BIGOT, CHRISTIAN ***, etc as soon as I say something. That being said, I don't believe that theories crafted by flawed human beings without being proven using science are truth. It's just more theory crafting.

Invalidating massive amounts of research that tons of people have spent much of their life working on with the phrase "God doesn't make mistakes" simply doesn't cut it as an argument. Nor does it undercut the legitimate experiences of millions of people.

You have a right to have an opinion, even if it is based on a total lack of experience + blind beliefs, everyone else just has a right to call you out on it. Most people will respond with hostility.

 

[zozo]

God gave us the need to drink water and eat food. And yet, it's possible for us to choke and die on said water and food while we consume it.

Seriously? That's your argument on why God isn't perfect? Everyone knows that too much of anything is bad for you, that's not God's mistake. He gives us choice to do what we wish with our lives, regardless of the consequences.

[/quote]Disregarding the fact that not everyone in this thread believes in God, I'm sure he's made more than a few mistakes. Trans people have every right to live as the gender we're supposed to be.[/quote]

I'm pretty sure that everyone that identifies themselves as transgender in this thread or supports it doesn't believe in God. More and more people are becoming atheists these days, because humans think that we have all the answers, when we don't, and never will. You indeed to have the right to live as the gender you think you're supposed to be, just as I have every right to not agree with that lifestyle.

@ _Keno_ And you have a right to opinion, even though it's based from blind belief in theories. And if you're validating calling someone out with hostility because their beliefs don't match yours then you're completely wrong and a hypocrite. It's like everyone feels like as long as you agree with what they believe it's totally fine, but as soon as you respond with hostility to them, they say you're a bigot, stupid, homophobe, etc, but if they respond with hostility to you then it's warranted because you "lack experience" and have a "blind belief" in God. I have nothing more to say to you.

 

[Carrill]

@ zozo

The point is that arguments based on God have no meaning when other people don't believe in him. You have to come up with some stronger reason to defend your beliefs about transgender people. I was entertaining the God argument just for the hell of it.

And no one's being hostile, I'm afraid.

Also, you don't have to choke on food because you're eating too much of it. You can choke on it simply due to an honest mistake. It has nothing to do with gluttony.

 

[Gerpington]

Seriously? That's your argument on why God isn't perfect? Everyone knows that too much of anything is bad for you, that's not God's mistake. He gives us choice to do what we wish with our lives, regardless of the consequences.

Disregarding the fact that not everyone in this thread believes in God, I'm sure he's made more than a few mistakes. Trans people have every right to live as the gender we're supposed to be.

I'm pretty sure that everyone that identifies themselves as transgender in this thread or supports it doesn't believe in God. More and more people are becoming atheists these days, because humans think that we have all the answers, when we don't, and never will. You indeed to have the right to live as the gender you think you're supposed to be, just as I have every right to not agree with that lifestyle.

@ _Keno_ And you have a right to opinion, even though it's based from blind belief in theories. And if you're validating calling someone out with hostility because their beliefs don't match yours then you're completely wrong and a hypocrite. It's like everyone feels like as long as you agree with what they believe it's totally fine, but as soon as you respond with hostility to them, they say you're a bigot, stupid, homophobe, etc, but if they respond with hostility to you then it's warranted because you "lack experience" and have a "blind belief" in God. I have nothing more to say to you.

I am not an atheist. I am agnostic. I am not entirely sure what to believe, but I do believe something is out there, but I do not believe the something out there would wish hatred upon anyone due to anything as trivial as this. God did not will his children to murder others in his name, and yet so many lgbt people are victim to hate crimes quite often.

And if Christianity is correct and I am going to hell for my choices, Well so be it, if that's true, I'd rather suffer the tortures of hell than be surrounded by close minded individuals for all eternity.

 

[_Keno_]

I think you misunderstand me. I'm not being near as hostile as you think.

By 'blind belief,' I wasn't referring to your belief in God, I was referring to your negative beliefs about lgbt that aren't backed up by anything. God never even attempts to say why people are gay/trans or why they aren't, so why do you hold such ideas?

And are you telling me you have a lot of experience dealing with lgbt? I have doubts.

Also, "blind belief in theories"? Do you know what the word 'theory' means? It's not a hypothesis, it's something that has massive amounts of evidence backing it.

 

[SleuthMechanism]

I am absolutely amazed by the ammount of acceptance towards these kind of issues there is here. well done, smashboards, well done indeed. sure there are the bigots but if this kind of thing were posted on somewhere like shoryuken it would've exploded into a hateful ****storm.(which is also why i'll probably never compete in a street fighter tournament despite my love of super turbo and third strike because the community both disgusts and terrifies me with how much misogyny and transphobia goes on there.)

 

[DunnoBro]

I am absolutely amazed by the ammount of acceptance towards these kind of issues there is here. well done, smashboards, well done indeed. sure there are the bigots but if this kind of thing were posted on somewhere like shoryuken it would've exploded into a hateful ****storm.(which is also why i'll probably never compete in a street fighter tournament despite my love of super turbo and third strike because the community both disgusts and terrifies me with how much misogyny and transphobia goes on there.)

You'd probably be surprised how little they care either way, honestly lol.

 

[Gerpington]

I am absolutely amazed by the ammount of acceptance towards these kind of issues there is here. well done, smashboards, well done indeed. sure there are the bigots but if this kind of thing were posted on somewhere like shoryuken it would've exploded into a hateful ****storm.(which is also why i'll probably never compete in a street fighter tournament despite my love of super turbo and third strike because the community both disgusts and terrifies me with how much misogyny and transphobia goes on there.)

When it comes down to it the better halves of communities (and usually the ones that actually get to tournaments) tend not to care about these things I've noticed. Just matters how well you play.

Play well and you have most people's respect.....usually.

 

[Thor]

I have a negative viewpoint towards the idea of being transgender, and the whole LBGT thing in general, not transgender people. I cannot express strongly enough that I DO NOT HAVE ANYTHING AGAINST A TRANSGENDER PERSON. I said inb4 homophobe because I get called a homophobe by everyone on the internet for posting my beliefs, so I assumed everyone on here would do the same. I wasn't expecting a levelheaded response like yours, and I appreciate that. I think believe that thinking you were born with the wrong gender is a mental issue, it's not anything normal, or healthy. God doesn't make mistakes. The gender you're born as is what you were meant to be. Whether or not you agree with that however, is up to you. I just don't personally believe in that stuff, but I have nothing against those who do.

You're presupposing God exists. That's for another thread, but as is,how then do you explain people who have XXY or XYY or XXXYY chromosomes? They clearly are not man (XY) or woman (XX), so what standards do you hold them to? And [assuming you are correct, that God does not make mistakes] why did God make them this way?

 

[Sehnsucht]

I have no issue with crossdressing in public spaces. Part of this is likely due to a general lack of interest in fashion on my part, such that I'm not all too invested or concerned with what other people wear, but I see no issue with the concept in principle.

The only thing that I'd be inclined to deem impermissible for public wear are blatantly discriminatory or offensive attires (e.g. dressing up in Blackface). For that example, I suppose that, in principle, nothing would stop a person from putting on Blackface and strutting around town. But it's clearly offensive, and said person would most probably not be well-received by other citizens. Such a category of outfits would rightly deserve to be, if not outright banned by legislature, then at least not tolerable or welcomed as part of social mores.

Crossdressing doesn't seem to hold such discriminatory or offensive connotations. A male person puts on a wig, a dress, make-up, and goes out on the town. To whom might such an attire be offensive? Women? Is long hair the sole province of females? Dresses? Make-up? If it is, why is it, or should it be? And the inverse applies, if a female person dresses in clothes tailored for male bodies. If dress shoes and tuxedoes, for instance, are the sole province of men, then why is that so, or should be so?

I guess I fail to see the relationship between what a person can wear, and what they should wear. Why a male person should not wear dresses and wigs (if they so desire), or why a female person should not wear business suits (if they so desire). And this, in the context of wearing such things in public spaces.

I also don't think motive is very relevant. Perhaps the given person is transgender, and identifies as a certain gender; perhaps the given person just wants to have a laugh and try something different; perhaps the given person wants to be audacious, or prove some point. The question of why someone would want to crossdress doesn't seem relevant to the question of whether crossdressing in public spaces is permissible.

Further, discrimination against people who do crossdress in public spaces seems both pointless and senseless (which, I suppose, is at the heart of discrimination based on sex, gender, race, religion, and so forth). The fault would not lie with the crossdresser, but those who discriminate against them. So far, there doesn't seem to be any reason to do so. Though even if crossdressing had a good reason to be socially maligned, that doesn't suddenly give people the right to mistreat crossdressers (physical or verbal violence, discriminatory treatment in public services, etc.).

As for the question of gender roles, I similarly see no issue. The emphasis should less be that "a man" should be this and "a woman" should be that, and more that a person as a rule should exhibit a given set of desirable qualities (e.g. why strive to be a good father or a good mother when everyone can strive to be a good parent?). Crossdressing may blur and conflate traits ordinarily assigned to one gender or another; the question is whether such a blurring is socially deleterious (and at first glance, I don't see quite how it might be). What negatives would there be in a scenario where there existed zero social stigma relative to crossdressing in public?

This all concerns public spaces, of course. If you work for a given company, you should be subject to whatever dress or uniform codes and standards imposed by the employer. And on private property, the property owner could deny giving service to a crossdresser, or deny them the permission to be on the property, as per their prerogative. Might be a douchey thing to do, but on private property, the owner sets the standards.

But for things like walking the streets, using public transit, attending restaurants or clubs or events, and use of all other public spaces and services, there's no practical reason to disallow crossdressing, or refuse service to crossdressers.

Such are my views as a cisgendered male who doesn't crossdress, and has no real inclination to ever do so.

 

[Claire Diviner]

I would like to make some points:

I'm pretty sure that everyone that identifies themselves as transgender in this thread or supports it doesn't believe in God. More and more people are becoming atheists these days, because humans think that we have all the answers, when we don't, and never will. You indeed to have the right to live as the gender you think you're supposed to be, just as I have every right to not agree with that lifestyle.

As surprising to some as it may sound, there are people in the LGBT community who are devout Christians (as well as those who follow other religions). The following link below is a website that is all about transgender Christians in particular:

http://www.transchristians.org/

It's one thing to believe in a god(s), but saying "because God did this" or "God said that" and using the bible as a point of a source is not a valid argument in a debate. I could very well use George R. R. Martin's "A Song of Ice and Fire" series as a point as to why dragons and white walkers once existed, and saying Westeros was what we now know as Ireland, etc. Use actual points and reasons unrelated to religion as a case, using renowned sources online if you must.

I have a negative viewpoint towards the idea of being transgender, and the whole LBGT thing in general, not transgender people. I cannot express strongly enough that I DO NOT HAVE ANYTHING AGAINST A TRANSGENDER PERSON. I said inb4 homophobe because I get called a homophobe by everyone on the internet for posting my beliefs, so I assumed everyone on here would do the same.

The problem with your "I DO NOT HAVE ANYTHING AGAINST A TRANSGENDER PERSON" argument, is that it completely contradicts your initial statement of "I have a negative viewpoint towards the idea of being transgender" (as well the entire LGBT community), which would imply that you are what you claim not to be, a homophobic/transphobic person.

Homophobia definition: http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/homophobia
Transphobia definition: http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/us/definition/american_english/transphobia

If "everyone on the internet" label you a homphobe/transphobe, you now know why.

Seriously? That's your argument on why God isn't perfect? Everyone knows that too much of anything is bad for you, that's not God's mistake. He gives us choice to do what we wish with our lives, regardless of the consequences.

I wasn't expecting a levelheaded response like yours, and I appreciate that. I think believe that thinking you were born with the wrong gender is a mental issue, it's not anything normal, or healthy. God doesn't make mistakes. The gender you're born as is what you were meant to be. Whether or not you agree with that however, is up to you. I just don't personally believe in that stuff, but I have nothing against those who do.

The interesting thing about "God not making mistakes", is that he does indeed make mistakes, especially if the bible is anything to go by:

One of my favorite examples stems from the fact that God apparently messed up somewhere with humanity, that he wiped all of the world clean of humans and had Noah and his family repopulate it, which is actually two mistakes in one. The first was creating a flawed human race to begin with, while the second involves inbreeding to accomplish repopulating the world.

The Great Flood: https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Genesis 7&version=NKJV
Inbreeding: https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Genesis 9&version=NKJV (verses 18-19)

Also people born with birth defects and, as mentioned by Thor, those with extra chromosomes, as well as intersex individuals is considered an error of the human body. This can be seen as a "mistake" by God, does it not? Or are intersex people a special exception? In either case, there are no biblical laws saying anything about those individuals, and some are downright androgynous in appearance, so how would biblical laws govern them?

Another thing you mentioned is that thinking one born in the wrong body is a "mental issue", and that however we were born is "how we were meant to be". The link below is an article that shows that transsexualism isn't a mental disorder; it is actually more a brain being in a body that simply doesn't add up with the specific individual's perception of their self, and cannot be "cured" with therapy or prayer. On the contrary, studies show that trying to "fix" someone will be more damaging as shown in the additional links provided:

Link to the brain scan article involving trans people: http://www.newscientist.com/article...rences-caught-on-brain-scan.html#.VCtgYvldUXw

Links to articles detailing conversion therapy:
http://psychology.ucdavis.edu/faculty_sites/rainbow/html/facts_changing.html
http://www.livescience.com/25082-gay-conversion-therapy-facts.html
http://www.faithinamerica.org/reparative-therapy/

Also, "blind belief in theories"? Do you know what the word 'theory' means? It's not a hypothesis, it's something that has massive amounts of evidence backing it.

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/theory

 

[_Keno_]

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/theory

You do know there's a difference between the definition of "theory" when used to describe psychology, science, and history and the definition of "theory" used in everyday talk, right?

Like a very, very big difference. I know you know what I mean and I feel like you're trolling me a little bit =(

 

[Claire Diviner]

You do know there's a difference between the definition of "theory" when used to describe psychology, science, and history and the definition of "theory" used in everyday talk, right?

No there isn't, unless you can provide proof of this.

In your case, I wouldn't have used "theories", but would have stuck to your "years of research". If zozo calls you out on your "blind belief in theories", counter it by providing sources to said research via links like I have in my previous post.

 

[aethermaster]

Uh...my only question to all the people who are against it: What are you going to do about it? You can't control what another man or woman wears unless you want charges slapped on you for harassment or violence or the sort. You can't even control what your own children wear after a certain age (and even then they'll go behind your back and do it anyway). So why does the decision of what someone else wears such a big deal? If you oppose it on religious grounds alright cool but what I've learned from Pride parades and the sort is the more you protest against something like that, the less people are going to listen

That being said, I think my stance is clear. Wear what you want out and be proud of it (as long as you're not naked like someone else here mentioned).

 

[Sehnsucht]

That being said, I think my stance is clear. Wear what you want out and be proud of it (as long as you're not naked like someone else here mentioned).

I wonder about public nudity. My stance on it is still formative at this point, but at the moment, I'm not entirely sure it should be impermissible. I'll collapse some thoughts with tags, since it's slightly tangential to the thread topic.

[collapse=On Public Nudity]
All (or most, I suppose) people have heads and arms and legs and chests and buttocks and genitals. There should be no shock as to this fact -- and thus, no scandal, at least not on that point alone. The act of witnessing a breast or a penis or a vagina in itself has no potential to harm or endanger anyone (unless whatever psychological hang-ups you happen to have cause you to go into mouth-foaming shock at the merest glimpses of such things).

I'd surmise that much of the opposition to public nudity comes from sexualization. Or perhaps, to reveal parts of the body usually held to be "sexual" -- the breast, the genitals, the buttocks and pelvis. You don't want to show these off in public to strangers, lest...

...Well, lest what? That passersby might sexualize you or those parts, or view those parts under a sexual lens? There isn't much one can do about finding people attractive or unattractive, as this is a reactionary response. However, those aforementioned parts need not be viewed as strictly sexual things. A penis can be viewed as a dongful of manmeat, but it can also simply be a urinary appendage. A pair of buttocks can be seen as tight piece of ass, but they can also just be a pair of gluteal muscles.

By walking out in the nude, you necessarily invite the risk of such sexual appraisal. Some may simply look your way, but others might leer or ogle. If, for whatever reason, such a potentiality bothers you or makes you uncomfortable, then you should reconsider going out nude in public. You can't blame people for unconscious, biological responses such as deeming a given public nudist or other as being attractive. You could take issue with a person who sexualizes everyone they see, or sees a certain sex or group purely as sexual objects, but that's a different issue and a different discussion.

If the concern for public nudity is the potential risk in predators, harassment, molestations, or any other violations of personal space or autonomy, then the fault clearly lies with the transgressor, and not the public nudist. Any conceivable sex-gender combination should be able to walk around naked without any transgressors groping or fondling them or whatever else without their consent. You can Look, if only because a nudist is necessarily naked, but you can't Touch (unless they give express invitation).

As for the relationship between children, sex, and nudity, this seems to be more about social mores than anything else. Should we be exposing prepubescent children to nude adults (or other children) walking around streets or in parks or at the mall? If not, why not? Is it to prevent the exposure to sexuality, or sights of sexual organs, at such a young age? Well, if we're consistently teaching that ta-tas and bum-bums and weewees and froofroos are strictly sexual things, and are private, and shouldn't be shown off, and that they're "too young" to be seeing such things, then naturally, there might be a problem for the child (since you're teaching them that nudity is "wrong").

What if children were taught that everyone has a body? That everyone has parts? That these "private parts" are just parts, pure and simple? Just because a person, child or otherwise, witnesses a wang, doesn't mean that their minds will suddenly be corrupted by pornographic images and thoughts. And if a child asks questions -- a daughter, for instance, asking their mother why all the boys have little tails -- then as a parent, you could tersely mutter to look away and lament for their innocence when they don't, or you could answer or address the question in a mature, honest way in terms they as children could understand. You could also teach them such values as the importance of personal space and autonomy, and discourage going up to people and groping them (just as we presently tend to discourage the groping of clothed people). To instill the idea that people can choose to wear as little or as much as they wish, and that the nudist deserves no less respect than the person wearing Abercrombie & Fitch than person wearing a turban than the person stuffed in a winter coat and snow pants at the beach in July.

None of this is advocacy for pedophilia, ****, or any other manner of sexual predation or pathology, on children or otherwise. The fact that there are people who exhibit such pathologies can't be helped. A pedophile, for instance, can't help being a pedophile. In a scenario where you have some people going nude in public spaces, including prepubescent children, there's not much you can do if a pedophile is discreetly observing from a distance. The issue would come if the transgressor tries to touch/abduct/molest/grope/etc. young people who are in public spaces, at which point we're seeing clear legal and personal violations, and so legal and social reprimand should ensue.

Perhaps one might propose that people being nude in the open might increase the risk and prevalence of sexual crimes in public areas (harassment, abductions, molestations, etc.), but it's not like clothes or the lack thereof has stopped such predators and transgressors in the past -- certainly not in our present society where public nudity is disavowed -- so this doesn't appear to be a strong point in opposition to permissible public nudity.

Thus far, we can infer that a world where public nudity exists would, ideally, not be dissimilar from where it's socially maligned. If you work for a company, or enter a privately-owned space, then you must meet the standards of dress for that place, as set by the owner. If you, as a nudist, step foot in a No Shirts, No Shoes, No Service environment, it's the prerogative of the establishment to extend or deny you service. If you work for a company in which nudity is disallowed during work hours, then you can't do much about it. And so on.

If a nudist gets harassed or groped or whatever in the streets or on the bus or in the subway or in public washrooms, it's still reprehensible behaviour -- since these acts are violations whether you are clothed or not. People having sex in public spaces, or engaging in lewd conduct (public masturbation, egregious flashing or flaunting of your bits, etc.) would still be discouraged acts (and in many jurisdictions, such acts carry legal repercussions). The presence or lack of clothing won't deter criminals from committing crimes, sexual or otherwise. Children wouldn't be forevermore tainted or corrupted by realizing and witnessing that people have bodies that have certain parts, and that some sexes have different sets of bits than others. They wouldn't even be scarred or traumatized for life if they were aware that sexual organs are used for sex, which is the mechanism for reproduction (though a five year-old, for instance, may not be mentally sophisticated enough to understand the full extent of how it all works)***.

The only thing that would be different in a world where public nudity is permissible is that, in public spaces, some people, whatever the age or race or sex or gender, would choose to enter those spaces with little to no clothing, for whatever reason(s) they might have. The only real opposition to public nudity that exists seems to be social mores (which change and can be changed over time), concerns of sexualization (which appear to be baseless), concerns of sexual predation (which happens either way, and is a separate issue from public nudity), and a Save the Children! mentality (which may be an invalid concern, depending on the actual relationship between children, nudity, and sex).

So, after this assessment, it would seem that there's no real reason for public nudity to be impermissible in public areas and spaces. In the Western World, public nudity is mostly disavowed. Will this ever change? Potentially. But opposition to the concept doesn't appear to be rational, as it presents no evident harms or dangers to society. So ideally, societies will eventually progress to a point where public nudity is permissible, if people do want to engage in public nudity.

***This is all cause-and-effect musing on my part. At a glance there doesn't seem to be a connection between having a prepubescent mind, and becoming psychologically compromised the moment said minds become aware of how babies are actually made. If there exists data on how children exposed to sexual ideas and topics at a younger age negatively impacts how well they function as adults (or even as post-pubescent individuals), then I'd invite you to direct me to this data through links and sources.
[/collapse]

That ended up being pretty long. Geez.

I guess that these are my view on public nudity, said as one who has never been nude in public, and doesn't have the inclination to ever engage in public nudity as a consistent fashion choice.

It also seems that my view of public nudity is basically similar to crossdressing:

-There is no innate danger -- physical, psychological, or social -- in witnessing people who crossdress or are nude;
-The fault always lies in those who transgress against other people, and simply crossdressing or being nude is in no way an invitation for trangressions against one's personal autonomy;
-Sexual predators and people with criminal pathologies will target those they target regardless of how the target is clothed (or not clothed at all), and the permissibility or non-permissibility of public crossdressing and/or nudity won't change that;
-If children who witness crossdressers or nudist are psychologically scarred for life, or are later unable to properly function as adults and citizens, then the fault lies in how they were raised to view gender roles and nudity, and/or the result of social mores and values instilled into them from a young age onward (through media, culture, role models, and so on);
-The erosion or dissolution of a given set of gender norms and/or roles doesn't matter in the scheme of things. We should place value in trying to be good people (as per the agreed definition of "good"), more so than trying to adhere to a set of otherwise-arbitrary rules, norms, and expected behaviours.

So yeah. Party on, crossdressers and nudists (and clothed people and everyone who isn't a jerk and/or actually dangerous).

 

[theeboredone]

It will personally bother me for quite a while, due to the lack of experience being around cross dressers. Unless you count cosplays...seeing a man dressed up as Misty from Pokemon. That did not sit well with me, and that image still haunts me to this day.

Anyways, quick question. Do cross dressers identify themselves as the opposite gender? Or is it simply clothes they find appealing to wear? I would personally not enjoy being tricked into liking a person who I thought was a woman, only to be revealed that said person is a man.

 

[Gerpington]

It will personally bother me for quite a while, due to the lack of experience being around cross dressers. Unless you count cosplays...seeing a man dressed up as Misty from Pokemon. That did not sit well with me, and that image still haunts me to this day.

Anyways, quick question. Do cross dressers identify themselves as the opposite gender? Or is it simply clothes they find appealing to wear? I would personally not enjoy being tricked into liking a person who I thought was a woman, only to be revealed that said person is a man.

People who identitfy as transgender do dress and identify as the opposite gender to that of which they were assigned at birth, myself being one such person.

Cross dressers, at least those who actually refer to themselves as such, tend not to and will dress as men as well as women (I know some cross dressers who only dress as women during the night time to go to clubs and such).

I would like to point out: Transgender women will not try to "trick" you. Most will tell potential partners of their status as a transgender individual, though I suppose some won't, especially those who already have had the surgery (which is quite costly) out of fear that the person they admire will leave them once they reveal their past.

I cannot speak for Crossdressers. Especially since Cross dresser is kind of an umbrella term.

TL;DR: Transgender: identify and live as the opposite gender to that of which they were assigned at birth.
Crossdresser: A person who wears and presents themselves as the opposite gender for various reasons (that vary between person to person).

Transgender women are not tricksters and do not indentify and live as women in order to trick men, we do it because we never felt right/ felt great discomfort identifying as the gender we were assigned at birth.

I will not be offended if you say it about me, but do not ever refer to a transgender woman as "born a boy" or a transgender man as "born a girl" or anything similar (biologically a male/female, genetically a male/female, etc). Transgender people have always been the gender they identify as, some just take longer to realize it, some, like myself, out of fear of upsetting the world and being brought down by hatred.

have some reading material on my last point: http://www.autostraddle.com/let-it-go-for-the-last-time-trans-women-were-not-born-boys-255055/

If you'd like reading material on anything else I've mentioned let me know and I'll gather some up for you.

 

[Sehnsucht]

Yeah, if a transgender person who has an actual romantic/sexual/relational interest in you, but fails to disclose their status as transgender to the cisgendered partner, then the fault lies in the transgender person.

If I was actually a giraffe in a mansuit, I wouldn't wait until we get intimate to reveal my actual form. I might get lucky if my partner coincidentally happens to be a giraffe fetishist or something, but I can't count or rely on that possibility.

 

[Gerpington]

Yeah, if a transgender person who has an actual romantic/sexual/relational interest in you, but fails to disclose their status as transgender to the cisgendered partner, then the fault lies in the transgender person.

If I was actually a giraffe in a mansuit, I wouldn't wait until we get intimate to reveal my actual form. I might get lucky if my partner coincidentally happens to be a giraffe fetishist or something, but I can't count or rely on that possibility.

I don't really like that analogy....but kinda?

 

[Sehnsucht]

I don't really like that analogy....but kinda?

I suppose, upon further thought, that the analogy doesn't work. The accurate scenario (to my knowledge) would be that the giraffe identifies as a human male, and so presents themselves accordingly; the giraffe may have been "born" as a giraffe, but they consider themselves a male human. The mansuit isn't therefore a means of subterfuge or camouflage, and the "giraffe" doesn't consider their giraffeness to be representative of who they really are (or desire to be). The giraffe isn't trying to hide their giraffeness, so much as they are coming into their own as a human male (gender-wise).

I was responding to the idea presented a few posts above, concerning a "woman" revealed to be "male" at the last minute. But I guess I was responding to an incorrect assumption -- the transgender woman wouldn't consider themselves male to begin with, nor would present or announce themselves as such.

I'd prefer not to mess up or misrepresent the actual substance of what is it to be transgender, and how it relates to sex/gender/identity/etc. So I'd appreciate knowing if the above is anywhere in the ballpark.

 

[theeboredone]

I guess I have a better understanding of the terms now. I was also basing my own knowledge off of what OP said, when mentioned how the employee thought he was a girl, until seeing his ID. I guess it should just be appropriate to dispel the truth rather than dragging assumptions, let alone someone's feelings on for the ride. Especially if it's going to come out at one point or another. So basically, crossdressing with the intent to fool someone is perhaps my only reason as to why I'd be against it.

I may take this to PM for hijacking the thread, but back to transgenders. So if someone identifies themselves as a "transgender girl", that means they were initially born with...for a lack of better term, "boy parts" and decided to undergo a sex change? And vice versa? Or do they not have to go through an operation, and keep their respective "parts"? It's just whatever you want to identify as?

Finally, is there some brain chemistry, genetic, or biological code that can imply if one will identify as a transgender? Or is a product of the environment? I'm guessing it's both, but I'd like to see the science behind this as well.

 

[Claire Diviner]

I suppose, upon further thought, that the analogy doesn't work. The accurate scenario (to my knowledge) would be that the giraffe identifies as a human male, and so presents themselves accordingly; the giraffe may have been "born" as a giraffe, but they consider themselves a male human. The mansuit isn't therefore a means of subterfuge or camouflage, and the "giraffe" doesn't consider their giraffeness to be representative of who they really are (or desire to be). The giraffe isn't trying to hide their giraffeness, so much as they are coming into their own as a human male (gender-wise).

This analogy, while a bit... odd, is pretty much right. One thing that some trans people try to do, and they shouldn't do, is try to hide their past, especially if they fall under the category of those who transitioned later on in life (18 years +). It's fine to live, represent themselves, and identify as their preferred gender, but they also need to acknowledge when the time calls for it that they were physically a different gender, since their experiences then molds their personality, and memories cannot and should not be erased.

I was responding to the idea presented a few posts above, concerning a "woman" revealed to be "male" at the last minute. But I guess I was responding to an incorrect assumption -- the transgender woman wouldn't consider themselves male to begin with, nor would present or announce themselves as such.

If a trans person, especially those who have undergone all necessary surgeries, feel they need to reveal their birth-given physical gender, that's up to them. Regardless, trans people do not transition to "trick" the public for anything. Why anyone would believe this is based on conservative extremist views from politicians and media whose ignorance views the community in such a negative light.

I'd prefer not to mess up or misrepresent the actual substance of what is it to be transgender, and how it relates to sex/gender/identity/etc. So I'd appreciate knowing if the above is anywhere in the ballpark.

The best thing you can do is get to know a transgender person, be it pre-transition, mid-transition, or post-transition. Many who aren't too aware of the community will come to find that trans people are just as much people as any other "normal" individual. Not that I'm implying you view the trans community as abnormal, more than I speak for the general public as a whole (especially those who have a misplaced sense of what "normal" really is).

So if someone identifies themselves as a "transgender girl", that means they were initially born with...for a lack of better term, "boy parts" and decided to undergo a sex change? And vice versa? Or do they not have to go through an operation, and keep their respective "parts"? It's just whatever you want to identify as?

All of your questions are correct. Some trans women choose to keep their birth-given genitals for personal reasons while others undergo what we know as "bottom surgery". To many trans people, their only wish is for their outer appearance to represent how they feel on the inside, and many of them will say that genitals do not dictate gender. There are those few who identify as a particular gender, but do not undergo any kind of surgery or hormone therapy. There are even those who are considered "gender fluid", but that's a completely different topic.

Finally, is there some brain chemistry, genetic, or biological code that can imply if one will identify as a transgender? Or is a product of the environment? I'm guessing it's both, but I'd like to see the science behind this as well.

Refer to my earlier post:

Another thing you mentioned is that thinking one born in the wrong body is a "mental issue", and that however we were born is "how we were meant to be". The link below is an article that shows that transsexualism isn't a mental disorder; it is actually more a brain being in a body that simply doesn't add up with the specific individual's perception of their self, and cannot be "cured" with therapy or prayer. On the contrary, studies show that trying to "fix" someone will be more damaging as shown in the additional links provided:

Link to the brain scan article involving trans people: http://www.newscientist.com/article...rences-caught-on-brain-scan.html#.VCtgYvldUXw

Links to articles detailing conversion therapy:
http://psychology.ucdavis.edu/faculty_sites/rainbow/html/facts_changing.html
http://www.livescience.com/25082-gay-conversion-therapy-facts.html
http://www.faithinamerica.org/reparative-therapy/

 

[Carrill]

Another reason a trans person might try to hide their birth-given gender is to avoid discrimination and hate crime. When identified as trans, a lot of us fall victim to murder, racial minorities in particular. So there's heavy risk involved when a post-transition trans person actually reveals themself as transgender.