Are we really a community?

[Anonymous]

Hi,

From what iv seen over here i mean in N Z its about as frgmented as you could get the infighting for years has shown for a group of people to stay connected they must have common bonds get on with each other & beable to not lord it over others who happen to be different, yet nothing has changed over 19 some what years, so will it change in the furture i dought it very much .

Im not going to even try again & be a part of the so called community here, its just not worth the time & the put downs , You see some are intiminated they may not have the looks so feel very left out, so wont wont any thing to do with a group. in the local place they live, some have been told not to come to any trans or dresser meetings. so what hope is there . none i see,

myself well iv allways been female, & what advantage is there for myself , as a woman i may meet one or two yet friendships are not something i see happening too far away to start with, so im out anyway,

Plus my friends are normal woman & my time is spent with them in our groups, & a few men as well. my life is with in our community here where i live,

I know this is not what you & others wonnt to haer yet this is the facts of whats going on, i did try & help & was told after by the one running the group , was a dresser group , well that was a waste of time, at a outing i had aorganised , for the benifit for all. wether they were dresser’s or trans or others,

so I talked with Jos about this & we said the same thing dont bother & waste the time if the attitude is that way,

For my self it needs to be a social group with out the politics .

…noeleena…

[Adrian]

Quote:

I’m starting to think that in fact describing ‘us’ as a ‘community’ is pointless, unhelpful & misguided.

In his excellent keynote address ( http://www.genderrights.org.au/Downloads/2012_QLD_Keynote_Address.pdf ) Peter highlights the importance of focusing on common ground and building on it.

The talk about community has potentially the makings of just another reason for us to all disagree with each other.
But on this point I want to make a stand in defence of the word “community” which I think is being unfairly used in a divisive way.

So let’s start with the common ground for what we understand by the word “community”. Wikipedia tells us that one meaning of community is

Quote:

a group of interacting living organisms sharing a populated environment. A community is a group or society, helping each other.
In human communities, intent, belief, resources, preferences, needs, risks, and a number of other conditions may be present and common, affecting the identity of the participants and their degree of cohesiveness.

The word “community” is derived from the Old French communité which is derived from the Latin communitas (cum, “with/together” + munus, “gift”), a broad term for fellowship or organized society

The most important message here for those who want to shun being in a community in favour of just being individuals in the big pool of “mainstream” society is that communities already exist within society and are formed by normal people in need of fellowship. The catholic church is a community in Australia, as is the Italian community, the Sydney Swans fan club, Same Same and even TgR. Yes everyone reading this post is already part of a Transgender Community – TgR.

To form communities in society is human, and being in one community does not generally affect your ability to be in any other community. Wanting to be seen as ‘just’ another member of greater society is a good reason for being part of communities, not a reason against it.

There may be those who want to do life alone, not associate with others having similar needs preferences and risks. But to describe such a life choice as normal doesn’t seem reasonable to me. We all need fellowship – the more so if our life journey contains shared hurdles and challenges.

Quote:

Does anyone else have any thoughts on the idea of describing ourselves as normal people with variant gender understanding already within one society, as opposed to describing ourselves as individual variants within a somehow disconnected society i.e; the ‘Tg community’.

I am a normal person, therefore like all other normal people I associate with communities. One community I associate with is the Transgender Community because only by involving myself with other gender diverse people can I learn more about myself. It also provides an avenue for me to provide fellowship and support to others. Telling someone I am part of the Tg Community should have no different impact from telling them I am in the Italian Community, or the catholic Church.

Finally Peter also stresses the advantages to be obtained by identifying common ground both within the community and between the community and other organisations and bodies in society. The point is an excellent one, but it will become impossible if we all insist on not being a community and just going stealth as an unconnected group of individuals lost in the big pool of society.

[Anonymous]

Amanda, in my original post I stated;

Quote:

Please understand, I am opening a discussion, not making a point.

This (particular) discussion about the need for coherance would not be taking place without my questions & (indirect) assertions.

Amanda wrote;

Quote:

The talk about community has potentially the makings of just another reason for us to all disagree with each other.

I do hope that comment wasn’t in response to my intention to have a discussion, which I believe can lead to an understanding for the need to work together regardless of terminology. Not being an Ostrich, I prefer not to have my head in the sand.

Whilst some or even all of us will have opinions on the various topics that affect us, I think it fair to assume that without having conversations, that some may not be aware of some of ‘our’ limitations as a ‘group of individuals’.

In the interest of openness & honesty, I am personally offended if you are suggesting that I am being (or intending to be) divisive as you have stated; you wrote;

Quote:

But on this point I want to make a stand in defence of the word “community” which I think is being unfairly used in a divisive way.

What on earth would be my motivation to be divisive? Divisive to what end? In fact my intention is to be inclusive by way of a conversation. A conversation which seems to be gaining some momentum across a few TgR forums.

Quote:

Finally Peter also stresses the advantages to be obtained by identifying common ground both within the community and between the community and other organisations and bodies in society. The point is an excellent one, but it will become impossible if we all insist on not being a community and just going stealth as an unconnected group of individuals lost in the big pool of society.

I’m not clear on whether your comment above relates to my post or if you believe that we ‘all insist’ on stealth.
You certainly know that I am about as far removed from stealth as a fulltime Tg person can be.
If your response is to provide balance to the conversation, fantastic, if on the other hand it is based on misunderstanding my intentions then some clarification would be appreciated.

As an adjunct, since reading Peter’s post & consequently spending the best part of today reading the ‘National LGBTI Health Alliance’ web site, I intend to apply for membership to the Alliance. I am totally supportive of an alliance (of any sort) that will improve the situation for ALL Tg people. Furthermore, most of my needs have been met.

[Anonymous]

I hope I am not jumping the gun with this reply. I respect & expect that Amanda-Adrian may wish to reply to my response above.

In the meantime I wish to say that I have just read Peter’s (AGA) keynote address that Amanda has included in her post. It is very constructive & definitely positive.

In it he suggests an example of how to approach the common good with the following thoughts;

I am entitled to be legally recognised, and to be able to access appropriate

healthcare – not because I’m ‘just like you’, not because ‘I deserve your pity’,

not because I’ve had more or less surgery than someone else, not because I

was born this way and therefore ‘had no choice’… I am entitled to be legally

recognised and to be able to access appropriate health care because I am a

person.

Though it may not be clear, that is the general concept I was basing my original post on.

Peter also stated the following;

Using diversity as a strength

Many people consider the representation of diversity within a lobbying context

as a deficit. I don’t. I think are ways we can reframe the diversity of our

community and turn it into a great lobbying asset.

Diversity in lobbying is problematic when lobbying is done on single issues.

When members of parliament are approached by twenty different people each

arguing for a single issue that addresses their personal concerns, and each

saying different things.

But if we group together and combine those single issues and take the ones

that we can all agree are important – even if they don’t impact personally on

us – then there is great strength. Strength that springs from the very fact that

we are so diverse: we come from such different places, and yet we can all

agree on what we want.

I’m so glad that this discussion (thread) is taking place. As difficult as it may be, without it, I for one may not have had the opportunity to read Peter’s keynote address.

Regardless of any understanding or (misunderstanding) relating to the word ‘community’, I’m certain that working together for the common good by, as Peter has suggested, ‘finding the common ground’ is the best way to achieve positive outcomes for all.

[Adrian]

Quote:

I respect & expect that Amanda-Adrian may wish to reply to my response above.

I’ve exchanged emails with Chloe and there appears to have been quite a bit of misunderstanding plus a bit of difference of opinion. The former is frustrating and the latter to be expected and valued.

For the record
[ul]If you are opening a discussion and don’t want to make a personal point – then it may be better to withhold from presenting your own views. [/ul][ul]If you ask a question about something members are know to disagree about (like community) then you are encouraging us to explore our differences. It doesn’t build consensus. [/ul]
Where there is known disagreement maybe one positive approach is to try and show how unimportant the topic being disagreed about actually is.

That was what I was trying to do (perhaps with poor effect) in my post.

[Anonymous]

Is this a good time to add my uninformed comments? I have always been an observer of people and it is increasingly obvious to me that everyone belongs to a community of one type or another, and indeed we all belong to more than one community.

I am Transgendered, hence my involvement with the TGR community.
I am a resident of Australia, so I belong to the Australian Community.
I am also a member of the NSW, Wagga Wagga and my suburbs communities.
I am a railway Modeller so I am part of the Model Railway community.

We are all members of a community whether we like it or not, so as a community we should be combining our forces and attacking our problems as a group, not as individuals. We could never hope to get anywhere near approaching our goals as individuals, we must stick together and formulate a plan that benefits all us as a group. Then if we need more strength perhaps we should consider an alliance with a group that can not only help, but enhance our plans.

I don’t believe that healthy discussion should be mistaken for conflict either. Sometimes the true meaning of a conversation is lost in the words.
I would also add that as members of the TGR community we still have our individual identities, being part of a community does not negate the individual in us.

[Anonymous]

I would like to address the issue as I see it originally raised as it is something which has been bothering me for some time.

Is it helpful to discuss the entire group of people who identify, or are identified as transgendered as the ‘Tg community’?

The “Gay Community” has long been strong in fighting for the rights of it’s “members”. That is because the “Gay Community” has one very simple definition – it is a collective of people who are attracted to members of the same sex/gender.

The “Tg Community” is trying to gather a whole range of gender diverse people together under one solitary umbrella but we are all so different. A lot of the time we cannot even agree on something as simple as what “transgender” actually means.

Many of us find “what” we define ourselves are changes over time as well. And our individual needs change by what we define ourselves as at that point in time. Hide in the closet and you are seen as just another accepted member of the community at large. Then you have the full spectrum of gender variant behaviours in between which culminates with trying to live a normal life after switching genders.

Of course, each of us have differing needs depending on where we sit in this “gender spectrum”. Many of which are also dependant on how well we fit into society at large in the role we choose. My needs as a transwoman (as distinct from just “woman”) are different to what someone who CD’s partime are.

While I have no wish to devisive, I find it hard to fathom the “how” we can find something to accurately define “our” needs or what we actually have in common. I believe all of the arguements which are raised to the many topics and subjects under discussion just indicates the variety of opinions and agendas that so called “Tg” people have.

[Anonymous]

When I started cross-dressing, in 1960s Britain, it was illegal. I remember reading, horrified, of a man arrested boarding a bus as a woman and subsequently being convicted of perversion. In the intervening 50 years much has changed: I frequently go out in public en femme and am treated on the whole very respectfully. There are now laws that define and protect my rights.

So why the change in society’s attitude? I think it’s a combination of greater tolerance in general for diversity and the efforts, over the years, of gender variant people striving for acceptance. In other words, there’s been a community of gender variant people whose actions have prompted change.

While I’m not really a group person, being quite content to find my own way as Chantelle, I recognise and appreciate the valuable contributions of CD/TG/TV (whatever) community groups (TgR, Seahorse, The Gender Centre) in making life easier and safer for all of us who show gender variance.

[Adrian]

If I could nudge this discussion to possibly more fertile areas, without derailing it….

Communities are everywhere
The reality, as Pamela and Chantelle have acknowledged is that human society spawns communities readily.

As others have observed, there are many communities created specifically by those who are gender diverse – from the clusters of support groups through to the internet meeting places.

Maybe we might be moved to question not “are we a community?” – but rather why there are so many.

Why so many?
I think what differentiates all these communities is also what makes it difficult to have just one community.

Each community defines itself by a formal or informal statement of who can participate. This can be in terms of gender, geographical area, status, and so on. So we see communities ranging from a support group for Transexuals in Western Sydney to world wide web sites embracing crossdressers.

As the Wikkipedia definition of community I quoted earlier states:

In human communities…a number of … conditions may be present and common, affecting the identity of the participants and their degree of cohesiveness.

The way I interpret this is:
[ul]A tightly defined community is more likely to be strongly bonded with a enhanced feeling of belonging amongst its members.
A tightly defined community will project a clearer and more defined identity to society.
A tightly defined community is more likely to adopt specific labels to describe its identity
[/ul]

Choosing our communities
As individuals we choose to either associate with a particular community and be part of it, or ignore it.

One reason for choosing not to associate with a particular community may be because you don’t fit with the demographic of ‘acceptable’ participants.
But my experience of most transgender communities is that they are, at least on the surface, very welcoming and inclusive.
Maybe more frequently the issue is that a particular community has a public identity that you don’t want to be associated with.
Or the community adopts a label to describe its identity which is not a label you wish to apply to yourself.

Do we need a single Transgender Community?

A community with an identity so neutral that everyone can associate with it, and limits on participation that exclude no one, is unlikely to project a feeling of belonging. And that is probably the reason why no single transgender group seems to dominate, to the point of being “the transgender community”.

I think this is what Portia was hinting at when she wrote:
The “Tg Community” is trying to gather a whole range of gender diverse people together under one solitary umbrella but we are all so different.

As an aside, TgR is perhaps very close to being such a neutral, open community. But I detect that membership is more determined by a need for help and support than by a feeling of belonging. Perhaps I need to print some TgR T-Shirts!!!

In another thread Peter wrote
“One of the things that strikes me is the lack of communication that has historically occurred between different parts of our community.”

Perhaps we can rephrase this to say that there is a lack of communication between various communities that embrace the gender diverse.

I observe one final aspect of a tightly defined community with a clear sense of identity and belonging.
[ul]
A tightly defined community has narrow interests and is reluctant to communicate. Such communities will often resist the efforts of other similar communities, ignoring in the process what might be in their common good.[/ul]

I’m starting to feel there is a role for a neutral open “Transgender Community” as a conduit for such communication between the various more “specialised” communities. Not a community that everyone feels they specifically belong to, but a community that represents the common identity that would allow us to communicate more effectively.

So, yes – perhaps we do need a “Transgender Community” – and no, there isn’t one that quite fits this bill at the moment.

[Anonymous]

I have just spent hours thinking about & writing the following. Little did I know Amanda was doing the same. Hopefully nothing I have written will undermine what is I believe a very good post from Amanda.
I wonder if it would be constructive to now discuss how to present ‘us’ as a cohesive group & identify what are our common needs?

This is what I had already written;

In my original post I asked was it helpful to discuss/describe us as a community?
I did not say we are or are not a community. Nor do I deny the need & benefit of community.
The definition of community already offered in this thread is as follows. I accept it. If read carefully it includes my motivation for asking my original question.
The definition was; a group of interacting living organisms sharing a populated environment. A community is a group or society, helping each other.
In human communities, intent, belief, resources, preferences, needs, risks, and a number of other conditions may be present and common, affecting the identity of the participants and their degree of cohesiveness.

A community is a group or society, helping each other.
So we need to help each other. Does that include those that do not help but identify as part of the group. Yes, if looked at altruistically.

Intent: From my observations our intent for being a part of, for example the Tg forums ‘community’ is varied. Is our motivation to identify & associate with (not as) other gender variant people the same. I would say not. Is our intent to ‘dress’ the same – this is a can of worms, it depends on where you start to look for reasons for common behaviours.

Belief: It also seems that we believe varying things about how to describe ourselves & why we are variant in the first place, etc.

Intent & belief are difficult to separate when discussing issues of ‘self’.

Resources: Resources needed is an area where we can identify & work toward ‘community’. Individual resources vary greatly, this impacts on needs.

Preferences: It seems our preferences are quite varied (at times this causes me discomfort).

Needs & risks: Some of our needs are similar, identifying them is important. Some will be common to all/many, others to a lesser degree. Individual & collective resources can attend to need & risk.

Having read the ‘National LGBTI Health Alliance’ web site, I particularly like their description of the people they represent. They use the terminology & acronym ‘Diverse Sex & Gender’ (DSG).
I find this to be a most inclusive description which allows for the needs of all who come under that banner. It does not deny the commonality amongst us, whilst still allowing for individuality in identification.

Some readers are likely to be thinking that my comments here are more unnecessary labelling & semantics but from my personal perspective it matters. I am a communicator & I am increasingly finding myself drawn to want to be of some type of assistance to gender variant people. The personal difficulty I am encountering though, is that I do not identify with a reasonable proportion whose motivations to ‘dress’ are different to mine. I do not want to be exclusive of individuals in need but at the same time I do not necessarily want to be seen as being ‘with’ or ‘as’ all.

I don’t know if the TgR t-shirt idea was a joke or not but I have many times thought about printing a shirt that reads ‘Just ask’.

[Anonymous]

I would love a TGR T-Shirt, but I don’t know if I would wear it in public. I have an aversion to logo’s on shirts. Maybe a small TGR on the pocket.

I have always thought that the difference between most of us is the result of the genetics that cause our problem in the first place. By this I mean aren’t we all much the same in our need to express our feminine side, just varied in the depth we are all involved.

Just cross-dressing in fine for some people on a part time basis, where, at the other extreme some of us want to go the whole distance with GRS. This would not indicate to me that we are different but merely at different levels of Transgenderism. (is that a word?) I identify totally with cross dressers and transsexuals alike but I consider myself somewhere in the middle, wanting more than a casual CD might want but not as much as a full time TS.

So to me we are all in the same community of Transgendered people but to different degrees. I don’t see this as a problem but a good reason for everyone to want to be a member of our community. There are of course people who dress for sexual reasons and are not interested in emulating a woman for any other reason, and to these people our community would be totally redundant.

So why we all can’t be dedicated to a common cause for the good of everyone Transgendered is a mystery to me. We all want something to change for the betterment of our lifestyles, so why not all pull together and combine as one voice. After all it’s for the good of the future Trans Community that we need to start the wheels in motion now.

Please excuse my use of labels, they don’t actually reflect my opinion of them they were merely used to illustrate my point.