the DSM - defining TS as a mental illness?

A heated discussion recently highlighted how distressing some women born TS find the inclusion of true transsexualism in the Diagnostic Service Manual. The DSM-iv, and the upcoming DSM-v include GID as a psychiatric condition.

Some people find that this is offensive to TS women. Their arguments run along the lines of "it says we are mad, or requiring psychological intervention. We are not. We have a medical condition, not a psychiatric one"

I couldn't agree more. surgery / hormones, and in the future, gene therapy are admirably successful treatments for being born TS. Physical form correction works, with a 97% success rate. It is clear, that once correctly diagnosed, being born TS is a medical, not a psychiatric issue. We simply need to amend our bodies to match us, due to some misconfiguration of the chromosomes during our conception.

However, it is a big thing to come to an unambiguous and correct self-diagnosis. 

How do we really know? getting philosophical, there is no outside measure, no matter how well we may be able to read each other's thoughts. 

Simply following the journey is not that easy, at least it was not for me. It is good to have support available, support trained in understanding mind, psychology. Support that can help us work through our stuff, and its initially very specific stuff that no other group on earth has to deal with.

and then there are those people who should NOT be getting surgery. The ones who are willing to go off prematurely, and risk, or convince themselves that they need surgery. How many other psychological states could lead to an erroneous self-diagnosis?

Even if this was treated as a medical issue, the medics would still need to send the prospective patients to psych evaluation, if only to cover their legal liability.  Looking at it from a purely business perspective, i, as a surgeon, would be demanding as much signed and stamped documentation as i needed to ensure that the person i was operating on wouldn't sue me. Looking at if as a person, i'd want to make sure that what i was about to do would help, as opposed to make things worse. Its not an easy thing. I'd need to have people i trusted to do the work with the patients before hand, and be sure that this was ok.

Which, effectively boils down to needed a diagnosis, from a psychiatrist,

its not about US, it is about THEM. the medical staff and the non-TS folk who need to be kept safe.

in my day to day life, i've not met anyone who tries to imply i'm in any way psychotic or mad. I might get labeled as a man, but never as mad. I do not see the inferred 'slur' against women born TS. I also don't really see why it matters - having a psychiatric diagnosis should carry no negative consequence. It is simply information. Information that says "yes, i was checked out by specialists and we all agree, i need surgery" or "i was checked out by specialists and they are sorting me out with some CBT so i can deal with my cross-living fetish without having to ". Any extra meaning in those statements is, in my opinion, projection.

I think, far more than campaigning for the removal of an useful safety net for many people, we should instead spend our energies getting an exit-clause added to the GID diagnosis, so that we can be 'officially' <word that means discharged or 'cured'>. 

having said that, i no longer have much interest in wanting to change anything. its too much work trying to deal with life. that's a fair bit of the requirement for a GID diagnosis gone.

oh. anonymous commenters who want to simply bitch? i'm not interested. get a name and a life and i won't delete your comments, but totally fail to comprehend what i'm saying? bye.

Surgery - keeping it real

My last blog had unexpected results, namely a spew of parting TG rhetoric. To quote:

"I guess some of you cut off your dicks to spite yourselves - self loathing is a separate illness from gender dysphoria. A faux or neo vag is the same cock you had to start with, only mutilated, if you enjoy sensations post-op it is because your cock nerves are getting you there."

We were also asked to consider the transsexual priestesses of antiquity, specifically the status of their surgery.

So. a blog on surgery.

How good is it, really? how wrong can it go? what does it change?

I suppose i could do some research. In keeping with the spirit of this blog, though, i'll keep it personal. There's enough personal accounts available out there for anybody with a serious interest to hear many sides of the story without me needing to paraphrase the vocies of others and twist them to my own purposes.

How good is surgery? Its rubbish. it really is. I suppose it is the best it has ever been, yet, for me, no matter how realistic or sexually functional a neo-vagina may turn out, surgery still fails in its most important aspect. I'm sterile. I cannot carry children and i have to take hrt for the rest of my life.

It gets worse!

In my case, i opted for Colon-Transfer surgery. Over the years i had developed an increasing hatred for my boy bits. I really did not want them, nor did i want to retain the memory of them in flesh... In retrospect this was a little foolish, as the surgeons can do amazing things with the various bits and pieces. Biologically, the male and female systems develop from the same base of cells, so there's not a huge difference between them either. But. that is where i was at, so penile-inversion was out.

I couldn't get a place with my preferred NZ surgeon, so i headed out to thailand, to a well known and respected Thai surgeon, Sanguan Kunaporn. Unfortunately, he wasn't very experienced at CT at the time, a small detail he neglected to mention. So he made a bunch of mistakes. When you join flesh, you get scar tissue. Scar tissue does not stretch. So, when joining two tubes (say, the colon and the entrance of the vagina) it is important to join them with a zig-zag. that way, when the tube needs to stretch, the zig zag can straighten out. Needless to say, that's not what i got. He also chopped out rather too much of my ascending colon (12", instead of 4"), severely compromising my digestive system. He then went and put it in upside down, so instead of the smooth muscles and blood supply being arranged to push stuff out, they pulled stuff in. And he failed to remove all the erectile tissue, meaning that when i was aroused, a small nub of tissue effectively blocked my vagina. Nice work, and about the biggest nightmare any woman born TS could hope for.

By the time i became aware of this i was newly single, without a job and and more than a little stressed. I was in the bath and out popped a thumb sized ball of grey stinky horror. It was to become a regular thing. I called them my clay babies. They were a consequence of all the fuck-ups my dear surgeon made. So. My newly minted body disgusted and revolted me. It required constant maintenance to keep it clean and would regularly remind me just how bad things were. Plus, i was broke with no means to get it fixed.

Still want surgery, anyone? It can go wrong....

Seriously, its probably worth having a few extra grand in the bank just in case. And not going into a relationship meltdown during the recovery phase would help too. It is impossible to quantify how important a stable relationship is to your mental health during recovery. Watching mine crash and burn was uniquely terrifying.

It took me 5 years to get things fixed. that's a lot of my youth missing, unable to really share with anyone else because i felt untouchable. A lot of time to learn how to become unapproachable. I used to get told i was proud and aloof. I wasn't. i was terrified and self-hating. I'm still realistic. No matter how many boyfriends care to tell me how things are fine down there, i'm not stupid, nor am i deluded.

Nowadays, after more surgery, things work as they should. I imagine for most operations, the kind of nightmare i had to live through is not that common, but who knows? It has taken me a fair bit of nerves to talk about what happened to me. It is a mental health issue. When dealing with traumatic stuff, we like to tell positive stories, and not dwell on the unchangeable horrors. How many of my TS sisters have secret horror stories, and how many are completely happy? Also, to be out like this is to risk giving ammunition to the haters. It has taken some time to feel strong enough to not care.

We like to think that our 'neo' vaginas are similar to the real thing, but they are not really (in my opinion). I've come across a few natal vaginas in my time, and i don't think i'd be mistaking what i have with one of them. Perhaps i was really unlucky? I doubt it, though. That's why, IMO, that parting gift from the last blog has the power to irritate us. There is, unfortunately, an element of truth.

We do have to accept a poor-quality result; superficially functional but really a hack job. It is true that the nerves we feel with are the same nerves as before, the flesh, the same flesh.

Does it actually matter, though?

My boy bits were always an alien thing, strapped to my body. They didn't fit some undefined pattern of self that demanded a womb and a vagina instead. The sensations i gained from them were somehow disconnected from me, in the wrong place. Looking at things spiritually, are my astral and etheric bodies female? I'm fairly sure my etheric one is. I've had too many experiences which fit. Perhaps that is where my drive to re-configure my physical form came from. Where the knowledge that it was wrong; arose?

I'm meant to be keeping it real. I can't deny the reality of my spiritual experiences - indeed they seem more real than many of my manifest ones - however. Speculation is speculation.

Changed my mind. Let's speculate! The whole energy business seems incredibly important to me. Why else would so many of us, throughout history, feel the need to take such drastic action, knowing that the results we get are so far from perfect its almost tragic? Why are we willing to accept imperfect results that we know may cost us our careers, family, friends, health or life? Why else do we allow an otherwise perfect body to lay down on the surgeon's table, (not knowing if we will wake), and then be mutilated (albeit carefully and with great skill)?

We know that we will not be able to carry children. We know that the unique smell and taste and feel of a natural vagina is beyond the surgeon's skill. We know that we run a risk of dying, of having a bad result. We know that we may become unable to orgasm.

yet - despite all the risks and fails, we do it, because it is still better than the alternatives.

That's real. I think. I doubt any of us are deluded about what we are putting ourselves in for (unless, perhaps, we've drunk too deep of the TG Koolaid). I doubt many of us fail to recognize that yes, our bodies have been re-shuffled. Some of us have cervixes made from the tip of their penis, some have clitori made from the glans, with the nerves concertina'd to make it all fit. Some of us have labia constructed from other bits a pieces. It doesn't matter. We have to live with the inadequacies, live with the not-quite-rightness. We also get to live with the re-positioned flesh being in the RIGHT place, with the patterns of energy coinciding with the pattern of body. It allows us to claim full ownership of our manifest, physical form when we couldn't before. Our bodies become ours, in a way that was impossible before.

i guess.

ed. note.
Looking at the comments, it seems people have been reading me wrong. I'm not unhappy with my results, i was not surprised or let down, and i have no regrets. I needed surgery, and i tried to get the best i could, at the time. This blog is more about being honest about what can be achieved, recognising the limitations and looking a little at the strength of the motivation that leads (some) of us to chose a sub-optimal but still state-of-the-art SRS. I felt that i needed to acknowledge the truth of what is thrown at us, in order to transcend it (the mutilation bit), as i believe denial is unhealthy. Yes. i did mutilate a perfectly healthy body. Unfortunately it was my body, not someone else's, and fine as it was, it was not right for me. Had there been other options (body-swap, gene therapy, brain wipe, whatever) perhaps i'd have tried that instead. As it was, the main option i could see was suicide. Or perhaps mass-murder, to let god know how unhappy i was.
It boils down to this: Yep, those of you who hate me. I had pretty extreme things done to my body. Call it what you like, you are probably right. I don't CARE. I did what i needed to do and that's all any woman can do.

compassion for our sisters

It is easy to get polarised by the nonsense that spews from TG bog supporters.

It is easy to allow the idea that since so many TG are nutcases (by which i am referring to the actual males who think that calling themselves sally, speaking in a girly voice and wearing shiny sateen panties over their eager cocks makes them in any way, shape or form, female), that all are.

It is easy to forget to be compassionate and to forget to acknowledge the range of individuals who do not desire or gain SRS.

It is easy to forget, because males who wear dresses outnumber everyone else so incredibly.

So, we hear their voices disproportionally. We have to be regaled by monsters like Sandeen, telling us that transsexualism has nothing to do with sex, and we should reject 'sexualising' surgery, simply because he/she doesn't want it (and so therefore feels the need to try tell all of us who've had it, and the general public that we didn't need it and shouldn't have access to it). We have to listen to people say that crossdressing, convicted peadophiles have rights, and that those rights are feminist rights. We have to repeatedly hear our TS sisters be misgendered in the media and called 'transwomen' instead of 'women', or  'TG', instead of 'women' (TS really should only be an issue when raised by the woman in question). All because the lunatics run the asylum. (LGBT organisations and GLAAD)

How many people, born with the wrong body, but for some unknown reason don't want surgery get lost in the noise? How many of our sisters do we reject, simply because we've become polarised, we've hardened our attitudes to defend our condition, TS, against colonization and misappropriation by men?

I'm sure there are a few. 

What spurred this line of thought? I was having a shower today, thinking about women. I've been pretty heterosexual since my surgery, with only one non-sexual love affair with another woman. I'm clueless as to what women do when in bed together. I had a look at sex toys, checking out what is marketed at lesbians. There's some fun stuff - harnesses with inward 'plugs' and outwards dildos, a weird contraption which is supposed to slot into your bum and vagina and extends out like a penis. (i know! the one i saw was black, too, it kind of looked like one of the scary aliens from signourney weaver's movies clinging to the model's body). Tools of penetration.

And all just a little ickky. scary, even! Maybe its because i am heterosexual (well, i thought i was), but sex seems like its supposed to have a good component of penetration in it. it certainly feels amazing to be on the receiving end. Would sex with a female partner be lacking in some pivotal way without it? Perhaps i'll find out one day.

So, i thought. What if... what if i'd been in love with a woman, prior to surgery, and my revulsion for my boy bits was less strong than my love for my partner. Wouldn't keeping a neat biological strap-on, far more advanced than anything you can buy in a sex-shop be far preferable to spending heaps of money on surgery? For me, it wasn't. the whole thing was too much. (although now i'm thinking having a cast done prior to hormones would have made for the most hilarious strap on). Perhaps for some of us, though, that equation is different. Not through attachement to parts, but through love of another (and love of screaming sex). Perhaps some of those people who say "i am a woman", even though they've got a penis, really are women?

Can't imagine it, from a personal perspective. Playing with sex toys could well be a bit of fun, and the tool of penetration would be both exchangeable and expendable. You'd have to have a really twisted idea of servitude to your sexual partner to want to keep a deformity, and to miss out on the joys of a good, hard, ... well. hopefully you know what i mean. Perhaps you'd even be lost in some mental game of wanting to be a stereotype of female, so therefore sterotypically submissive, so therefore willing to pretend that keeping a penis is an act of love as opposed to and act of attachment?

But that's my opinion. Maybe some of you reading know better?

"surgery does not make you a woman"

or so said the almighty Harry Benjamin. (paraphrased)

what does that mean for post-op TS women? Is the guy who named our condition saying we'll never be female?

I've read a few nasty TG bog blogs that say exactly that. they delight in finding that statement and use it to attack post op women. Declaring that either the concept of transsexualism is wrong, or men can never become women. They seem to take perverse delight in undermining the womanhood of women born TS, as if denying it grants them some kind of transgendered superiority. I feel that they are trying to 'take down' people that they themselves have put on a pedestal. more on that in a later blog.

How valid is that claim? If it is valid, then there are a lot of very deluded men out here, myself included, because we see ourselves as female. Fully female. Are we mad? Is the Law that acknowledges us mad? (as indeed, the recent Argentinian law that allows men to legally declare themselves female without examination or surgery indicates it may be) Are our lovers and family mad?

If the claim is not true, then what about the rest of Harry's work. do we ned to throw it all out, because we don't like that last bit (as the TG bog explicitly claims we do).

I think that there is no direct connection between the infamous statement of surgery not making us female' and the rest of HB's work. There are no assumptions being breached. There are no causative links being challenged. The rest of the work and that statement exist in isolation, so we could, if we chose, reject it without invalidating the rest of his work. It is a moot point, since the days of TS are long gone, and we are now diagnosed with GID (although with much the same requirements), or, if we are not actually TS, with GID(not otherwise specified), or, if we are not diagnosed, 'TG'. (This is in the medical world, not in the crazy world of GLAAD media manipulation.)

However. I think it is true. Surgery cannot make you female. It is impossible. We are born male, or born female. In our selves, not in our bodies. Our bodies mostly fit, but occasionally. To use the medically derived TS figure:1 in 20 or 1 in 30 thousand, not the more common TG figures of one in a few hundred.
We know pretty early on in the piece: "i've got the wrong body". Not, "i've got the wrong social role", although that may also follow. Neither, "i've got the wrong clothes", although, again that may follow. The fundamental marker is "i've got the wrong body". For a woman born in a male body, that means she knows she is female, from really early on. From there grows the struggle between self-understanding and societal stereotyping. Between Nature and Nurture. Eventually that woman may access surgery to correct the issue. That surgery does not make her female, because she already was. It simply adjusts her body to match who she knows she is.

If a man, for some reason fetishizing being female (and really, who would? it is not the easiest path in life, for anyone) to the extent that they can pass the gatekeepers, accesses surgery; what then? Well, they are still a man. Surgery cannot make you female.

This is one of those things that we, as women born TS need to accept. Instead of rising to the insult intended when the TG bog proponents throw this challenge, we need instead to face it head on and re-affirm it. Surgery cannot make a man into a woman. It is true.

At the same time: Surgery cannot make a man into a woman. So anyone not born transsexual needs to be aware of this. The knife is not going to perform magic, all it can do is change your body. If you are transgendered, not transsexual, and you are considering surgery. ARE YOU SURE? you may be able to provide the correct answers to fool the gatekeepers, and you may be able to play a good enough role to pass the real life test. However, if you think that surgery is going to overcome your actual male identity, then you are in for hell.


I'm happy with this concept. I've looked at it from many angles, talked about it, taken time to let it settle and mature. Its annoying. Why? because it means that there can be women out there who truly are women, but who simply don't want surgery to correct their male anatomy.

I've met natal women who, when asked about it, said that if they'd been born with a penis, there's no way they'd have them removed. The idea of power, or penetration of others, of privilege is too tempting, too alluring.

So, it becomes harder to say to the very strange TG people who have active male sex lives yet claim to be female: "you are not female". perhaps they are. Or perhaps, my argument to allow acceptance of HB's irritating statement was too clever, and deconstructed the idea of 'female' to such an extent that i broke my understanding of it.

What do you think?

shh... stealth.

Ah, new day. new thoughts.
Why is it "mentally ill" to be stealth? Another militant TG proponent claims it is. I'm not linking to their blog, its full of too much horror for me to want to associate with it.

I'd have thought the opposite but i'm trying to understand. Perhaps, if being stealth is a stress, a constant fear of being caught, then yes, it is bad. That wasn't my experience when i was doing it.

Being stealth meant going out into the world and doing stuff like everyone else. If someone said "you've got a deep voice" the response was "sexy, eh?" instead of an explanation. It meant sidestepping unpleasantness and enquirys into history (i'm 6'2" with an adam's apple, i got a few!) and having a bit of fun instead. It wasn't mentally ill, it was liberating.

NOT being stealth is a constant pain in the arse. I'm out in my small town, due to being a non-self-respecting moron. So most people know. The odd passing ship in the night doesn't, so i don't tell them. Why should i? Do i need to perform confessional each time?

The argument: "that since some of us can't pass, all of us shouldn't" is solidarity turned into little yellow stars and pinned on our dresses. If you can't pass, go home, look in the mirror and do something about it. Its a call all of us had to make pre-surgery. "Can i do this? Do i need to do this? Can i live with being obviously mtf? Can i live pretending to be a man?"

Being TS is not the biggest thing in our lives, although perhaps it is for some. Living a good life, that's more important.

media misgendering and rebuttal

Jillian posted : in the montreal gazette a most infuriating article, that suggested we should accept misgendering by media organisations.

http://blogs.montrealgazette.com/2012/04/28/transsexual-vs-transgender/

this is my rebuttal:

for us here in NZ, "transgender" is defined as:

   "A person whose gender identity is different from their physical sex at birth"

this conflated two issues. Gender identity, and physical sex identity.

a different dictionary says this:
   trans·gen·der  (trns-jndr, trnz-)
   adj.
   Appearing as, wishing to be considered as, or having undergone surgery to become a member of the opposite sex.

this definition is clearly WRONG, as it excludes 95-99.5% of people who currently label themselves as TG.

the DSM-IV say this:

Between the publication of DSM-III and DSM-IV, the term "transgendered" began to be used in various ways. Some employ it to refer to those with unusual gender identities in a value free manner-that is, without a connotation of psychopathology. Some professionals informally use the term to refer to any person with any type of gender problem. Transgendered is not a diagnosis, but professionals find it easier to informally use than GIDNOS, which is.

which boils down to "transgendered refers to unusual gener identities"

and common use says transgender refers to anyone who does not fit into the gender binary.

the HRC defines transsexual as:

Transsexual

The term 'transsexual' refers to a person who does not identify with the biological sex designated at birth and who adopts the social role of the gender they identify with. Because this is a phenomenon of identity, rather than biology, it is now more common to use the term 'transgender'

again, conflating a physical issue with a gender role issue,

the diversity of definitions show that there is no accepted standard. Transgendered is a word with no meaning, and so has come to mean too many things. Cross dressers, sexual fetishists, 'weekend women'. whoever wants to label themselves TG can do so, without issue. It even applies to drag queens.

all of these definitions miss the fundamental and unavoidable basis of transsexualism. HAVING THE WRONG BODY. there is only one cure - surgery.

social gender role disorders - TS aside, the basis of the TG 'umbrella' are NOT treatable with surgery. Surgery would be a life destroying error.

that is the root of the distinction between TS and TG. Surgery.

it may be some TS are happy without surgery, merely playing a different gender role. Given free access to surgery, 24% of dutch TS women chose not to have surgery, so the field of TS is not uniform.

97% of post-operative TS women ( Kuiper & Cohen-Kettenis, 1998 ) are happy with their results and no longer suffer from Gender Dysphoria. The study does not talk about gender roles, as gender roles are irrelevant. As is often said by post-op TS women, "we can play any gender role we like. all that mattered was our bodies."

There are no similar statistics for the non-TS TG populations. It must be remembered, TS is a diagnostic label (now no longer used, as it has been replaced by GID, but once very clear) TG has no diagnostic value. its diagnostic equivalent is GIDNOS, which is distinct from GID.

the TG umbrella is an invention with no foundations. it is innacurate, lazy and could potentially be applied to every person on the planet who has ever wished they could wear make up, or pee standing up. That is why so many of us reject it utterly. That, and the fact that so many TG 'activists' who demand  to be recognized as 'female' are wielding operative male sexual organs and have NO issues about it (hence cannot be diagnosed with GID and hence have a different medical diagnosis to TS women)

TS do not have "gender problems" or "unusual gender identities". We, for the most part, fit neatly into the gender binary. We are women.

and Jenna, yes, she chose to be in the spotlight, but she spoke in the spotlight to define herself as "transsexual" and "a woman". GLAAD's campaign to mis-gender her as 'transgender' is not acceptable, no matter what a patently incorrect dictionary may say. The dictionaries take their cues from organisations such as GLAAD so this is not a game of factual information. This is a propaganda game being played by GLAAD to mis-appropriate the TS voice, and TS social gains (Jenna, for example) to further their agenda, which appears to be to make a mockery of the gender binary.

the real life test

it used to be that a prospective candidate for SRS, or 'sex change' surgery had to pass a 2 year "real life test". the idea was that she legally changed her name and lived full-time as a woman.  She had to either have a job, study or be in some way socially integrated and function as a female. I suppose this was to weed out those who would not be able to cope with a permanent change in sex and gender role. We were allowed hormones and testosterone blockers, and we supposedly given a lot of support (i saw the psychiatrists at charing cross GID three times. once at the outset, and twice towards the end for the paper signing and clearing for surgery).

Those of us who didn't pass well would have had a hard time, and i wonder how many gave up and decided to live as men, after all. It was a reality check. Out in the real world, could we survive? could we cope? it was a taste of what would be a permanent way of life, post surgery.

in NZ, the gatekeepers seem to expect people to start this test WITHOUT hormones, which seems unduly difficult. 

Dr Richard Green (who was horrid, and one of my 'gatekeepers') said: "it is advisable to postpone your testing of the new identity until the hormones administered by your physician produce adequate physical changes."

Testosterone is a significant hormone. It has physiological and psychological effects. the pattern of muscle deposition, metabolic rates, responses to stress, mating behaviors etc. The effect on one's mind is immense, and the effect of removing it even more so. the flavor of the world changes. the shape of it, the texture of it, the feel of the world, all change immensely when testosterone is removed. For me, turning the stuff off was like being let out of jail - a constant, ill-fitting, twisting of my perception was taken away, and the world finally started to fall into the right place.

Testosterone also plays a significant role in non-conscious social interactions. Our Pheromone system is far more significant than most people realize. We are constantly sampling our DNA and expressing it via our scent glands, and constantly sampling other's pheromone releases and analyzing it for reproductive fitness. These systems are facilitated by sex hormones. So, if you have a testosterone driven hormonal physiology, then you will read as male on a deep, subconscious level. Essentially, you are outed before you are even seen.

Why on earth a woman should be forced to pass a real life test prior to accessing hormone blockers is beyond me. It seems criminal - especially as the delay in access can be up to 10 months. For a pubescent TS woman, that is the difference between gaining irreversibly positively male forehead, cheekbones, facial hair, jaw, hands, shoulders, height, voice, chest hair, musculature, pelvis and feet  and avoiding the physical ravages of male puberty. It is the difference between a lifetime of standing out, being obviously different and passing easily. It is criminal to deny access to T blockers.

Oestrogen is also a significant hormone. think about what effects testosterone and estrogen have during puberty. children become men and women. The effects are undeniable and life changing.

Oestrogen also changes physiology and psychology. It plays in balance with progesterone to change one's responses to others. as the balance between the two alters, we change from nesting behavior to mating behavior to social behavior to family seeking. Very few people realize how much and how strongly this occurs. A common cause of relationship breakdown is when a woman stops taking birth control, and suddenly she finds she doesn't like her partner any more. This is exceptionally well studied in mice, who have a large vomeronasal organ, which mediates the pheromonal processes. Quite simply, their partners stop smelling right, and out they must go.

When taking estrogen, you start to 'smell' female. it helps you fit into a group of females and changes the way males view you.

Physiologically estrogen changes the texture and 'glow' of your skin. it changes the way fat is deposited. it softens sharp curves and alters muscle structure. eventually it promotes breast growth, changes in body hair and causes the typical female body shape to grow (although it does not alter the skeletal form once age related growth has stopped). It really helps in 'passing'.

So, again, why a woman should be expected to have any success in 'passing' without the aid of estrogen is beyond me. It is a cruel and unusual form of torture, and i think it should be illegal.

Indeed, there is little evidence that a real life test is even necessary, although i'd say that for the person in question, its probably worth testing, just in case!

If anyone feels the same, perhaps we should get together and put together a challenge to the current twisted rules, which do NOT follow WPATH, DSM-iii, DSM-iV or the putative DSM-V recommendations.

Taking hormones is also supposed to be a reality check. It has such a significant effect that it is pretty obvious very quickly whether it is right for you or nor. For me, it was a powerfully affirming action. I felt a way i had always known i should feel, without ever getting there. I'd been using recreational drugs for many years, as a way with dealing with a world that i didn't fit, and i suddenly had little desire to keep taking them. I felt good, in a way i had never done before. I felt right in a way that had only been hinted at by my ecstasy use. Thank god. The suicidal depression that had plagued me for my entire adult life lifted. i had hope.

For others, i hear, it can quickly show the opposite.

i've got completely sidetracked from where i was when i sat down to write this.

The reason i started was because i've been heavily bullied by trans LGBT members over having experience and viewpoints. The latest round of abuse was because i suggested that having surgery and taking hormones changed your body and psychology and made passing easier. I consider that to be a no-brainer statement. Of course, removing testosterone from your system changes your psychology. It is a hugely powerful drug that is designed to create male stereotyped behavior. Of course it changes your physiology. Its purpose is to create a male phenotype body and to cause male phenotype social interactions through mediation of the pheromone system. Everything about testosterone promotes male-ness.

Yet, i was accused of transphobia (again) elitism (again) and privilege (again). Simply because i've had surgery, live as a woman, paid attention to what was happening along the way and dared to talk about what i see as sensible things.

I took a close look at the people making these statement. I know it is not PC to do so, to check out people's presentation and have opinions about it but really… Their clothes were not appropriate for their body shapes. They often have facial hair. They present as both male and as wearing dresses. They say very provocatively male things...

we took a "real life test". We HAD to fit in, to become a normal part of society, to cope, in order to access surgery. thousands of us succeeded (in the UK alone). We completed the test. We didn't whinge and complain and try and bully people into accepting us. We modified our behavious and tried to fit in, smoothly.

It was not necessarily easy. We are trained in gender correct social interaction and behaviors from birth. Very little of the training is overt. It lies in the micro-gestures of interaction, the subtle pushing and pulling of acceptance and rejection. It is a subtle and pervasive conditioning. 

Many studies agree that male/female behavioral and cognitive differences arise from social conditioning - not from any innate qualities. 

That lays an awful lot of responsibility at the door of society, and a massive job at the feet of the transsexual. If we want to FIT into society, then we need to pay attention to ourselves and root out patterns, habits and ways of being that are due to male-conditioning and replace them with female appropriate ones. It is a huge job. since we grew up as boys, every single female interaction with us was skewed along the lines of a male female pattern and every male interaction along the lines of a male-male pattern. Unless we've been very lucky or observant, we've never been on the receiving end of female-female specific training, or male-female training with us as the female.

It is a huge deficit to overcome. It takes years and years of attention and giving a damn to fix it. I still catch stray male-trained responses. I then need to track down their inception to let them go.

With many of the TG bullies who attack me, they don't give a damn. They demand acceptance as women from the outset. Without hormones, without surgery, without even recognizing that their every smell, every look, every behavior is male phenotype. Then they get angry when i say something as true as "hormones help you pass", as if it is their RIGHT to pass. (and by pass, i don't mean pass the RLT, i mean pass as a woman).

When i say "pass as a woman" i don't mean: be a beautiful head turning stunner. I mean: be like most other women on the planet; Come across as female. Its a simple thing, and there are lots and lots of very masculine looking and behaving natal females around. They are NOT mistaken for men and neither should we be. If someone really cannot pass, it is not only down to looks. It will be down to the movements of the body, the tone of the voice. The patterns of speech and action. The tiny little things that our minds are constantly assessing. Things we actually have control over.

Whilst searching for references and quotes i came across this blog. Very much in the same vein as mine: http://tgnonsense.wordpress.com/2009/01/06/tg-failure-of-the-real-life-test/

This TG attitude is wrong on so many levels. The real life test is not something that you pass or fail. Its a personal test, that asks us "do we want to do this?", "can we cope with this?", "can we deal with the consequences of this?". It asks us "can we live in society, as women?", "can we fit in, be normal?". It asks us "are we sure?". If you come across as a guy in a dress, then it is going to be hard. If you act like a guy in a dress, then it is going to be really hard. I don't know any TS women who are like this, though. There may be odd moments when we seem like a guy. The same is true for all women. There may be moments when we get spotted, and outed, and our past rises up to haunt us. Those are the trials, which we learnt to accept during our RLT.

That is real-life, though. We have to be able to live it. For the people who can't be bothered to try? Why should society accept you?

It will be a very limited world in which you live, TG honeys.

Here's some links onwards:

Someone who hates the RLT. not surprisingly, they don't want surgery:

http://www.firelily.com/gender/diane/rlt.meaning.html

A very personal account of the whole journey:

http://www.drbecky.com/rlt.html

Someone else who has taken it, and doesn't see what else can replace it:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/lifeandstyle/2012/jan/23/transgender-real-life-experience

And someone who doesn't get it at all!:
http://www.crossdressers.com/forums/showthread.php?151403-Real-life-test

An awesome analysis of the psychology of those taking the test:

http://whittlings.blogspot.co.nz/2008/09/i-am-not-medical-or-other-form-of-psych.html

I like that last one a lot. here's a quote: 

"However, I believe the RLT, or as I (and the WPATH SoC) would prefer it was called, the RLE (experience), is still fundamentally flawed in many clinical practices. It's practice is often set out in such a way it focus's the patient's mind on PASSING the test, whether by; 'passing' , or, more likely, by persuading themselves that they are passing, or by pretending they are passing —- or as the French psychoanalyst Collete Chiland might say for the majority ; by deluding themselves or by an illusion of themselves."
I love that concept, the understanding that we are capable of deluding ourselves.