-
transvestic fetishism
-
As a general rule I find attempts to give names to parts of the Transgender spectrum are rarely helpful. Whilst we are are entitled to our own views to help understand the sometimes confusing world we live in, it is a fact that there are many competing and possibly equally valid models that you could apply to the community. So promoting any one model does generate conflict and discomfort.
That said, the classification proposed by Shells is somewhat unusual because it classifies drag queens as transgender. And it provides no hope for anyone who is not in it for sexual pleasure, but who doesn’t want to have surgery.
From past experience such classifications are pretty divisive in TR and provoke people into flame wars. If you want to discuss this then please start a new thread, because that is not what V was talking about.
But if you do start a new thread then be VERY CAREFUL how and what you say. (Moderator is watching!)Moderator
Quote:MODERATOR WARNING – THIS THREAD MAY BE DANGEROUS TO YOUR TR MEMBERSHIP
-
Quote:As a general rule I find attempts to give names to parts of the Transgender spectrum are rarely helpful. Whilst we are are entitled to our own views to help understand the sometimes confusing world we live in, it is a fact that there are many competing and possibly equally valid models that you could apply to the community. So promoting any one model does generate conflict and discomfort.
I didn’t realise it generated discomfort, however it does invariably lead to conflict (2 opposing ideas always result in some sort of conflict.) My personal view is the multitude of definitions is more confusing – especially when you class yourself as something under one definition and someone else has a different idea of the definition for the same term.
Quote:That said, the classification proposed by Shells is somewhat unusual because it classifies drag queens as transgender. And it provides no hope for anyone who is not in it for sexual pleasure, but who doesn’t want to have surgery.Since when? CDs don’t do it for sexual pleasure, TVs do is the basic message. CDs are people who are comfortable with their assigned gender from birth, TSs like CDs except that are not comfortable with their assigned gender and wishes to change it (regardless of surgery or not). That’s what I said wasn’t it? I’m a TS, I’m on HRT, I don’t do it for sexual pleasure, I do it to be happy. Whether I have surgery or not I’m still a TS.
Quote:From past experience such classifications are pretty divisive in TR and provoke people into flame wars. If you want to discuss this then please start a new thread, because that is not what V was talking about.
But if you do start a new thread then be VERY CAREFUL how and what you say. (Moderator is watching!)I brought it up mainly to show that the Wikipedia page on Transvestistic Fetish actually would fall into the TV category above, but under the Wikipedia definition it does not, and I wonder if the Wikipedia page on T_F was created to attempt to class what I know as a TV as just someone with a fetish…? I could be wrong, but I would suggest both TG and T_F pages are probably written by an American (or Americans) as the desciptions on the page do not match what my doctors have said on the issue in Europe, the UK and Australia. I do know the views of the Wikipedia pages are the US centric definitions as per the doctors over there.
I don’t want a new thread on definitions of TG/TS/TV and CD because as you put it, it often ends badly. My personal definitions are what I actively tell the community around me, TR being one of those communities but as always – they are my definitions based on my research. If people agree good, if they want to follow our American counterparts or follow their own research, that is indeed their prerogative.
Regards,
Shells
-
wow – such a wide range of responses – i guess that’s sort of not unexpected.
amanda – breakfast? well, i try to take a double dose of optimism, mix it with a liberal helping of sense of humour, add a good portion of inquiring mind, a sprinkle of thirst for the truth, followed by a single shot of desire to understand the human condition.
anyway, a few things prompted me to put up this post. i certainly had no intention of being controversial.
my first thought was that wikipedia is essentially a great idea. a free service to post information about any particular subject with a view to building up a source of information that allows everyone access. but reality is that it leaves a lot to be desired. i think the article i posted is a good example. not one “fact” is backed up by any reference or supporting research. so where do you turn to if you want to find out some information that you can trust?
from the posts, there seems to be some sort of implication that i was advocating a distinction for tranny radio to not have or restrict members based on some criteria. well, i’m an inclusive type of girl, so I don’t think i would have ever advocated anything like that, and i think close examination of my post will reveal that there is no such suggestion.
another thought i had when i found this wikipedia article was that this article was written as if it was the definitive statement on tranvestic fetishism and gender identiy diyphoria. ironically, if you look up the wikipedia article on gender indentity dysphoria, it states that gender identity dysphoria is a condition of transsexuality, transgender identity and transvestism. contradictory? sure is. confused? i certainly am!
unfortunately, my thoughts didn’t stop there. the article essentially summarises what is in effect the description given to this certain type of behaviour by the american psychiatric association. this amazed me, because what many would think is seemingly normal (to them) and innocuous activity is the basis for a diagnosis of a psychiatric illness.
of course, there is the critical element of this classification, that of the requirement that such behaviour causes
Quote:clinically significant distress or impairment, whether socially, at work, or elsewherei’m not sure what “elsewhere” means. anyway, i thought that this requirement sort of saves anyone who is a transvestic fetishist any embarrassment that they may be suffering from some psychiatric disability. what is scary for me is that there is a short hop from this to saying gender identity dysphoria is a psychiatric illness. i guess it is only if the significant distress or impairment thing kicks in.
as for me? well i reckon that the article and the psychiatric association of america may have gotten it all wrong. i am not convinced that the findings and statements are backed up by any reliable research. and therein lies another conundrum for the transgender community (and I use that in the widest possible meaning). the competition for funding by most research institutes is such that transgender issues are probably going to rank much lower than say, heart disease, drug abuse and other topics which are deemed mainstream. but … i start the day with a double dose of optimism, so maybe there is hope yet!
the transgender condition, in the widest meaning, is so great and diverse, that it is difficult to pigeon hole or make statements like this type of behaviour is not related to another. sexual arousal is as different as people’s looks. i’m sure you cannot say one group of people are never aroused by certain things. you will find an exception somewhere, surely.
i guess that the main thing that really struck me in all this is, are the trappings of femininity (nail polish, hair, jewellery, make up, pantihose, hair free armpits) absolutely necessary to anyone who considers themselves female? isn’t the female condition existent irrespective of what you wear?
so there we have it. lots of food for thought. i remain (i hope) undistressed and unimpaired.
love and peace
-
Quote:my first thought was that wikipedia is essentially a great idea. a free service to post information about any particular subject with a view to building up a source of information that allows everyone access. but reality is that it leaves a lot to be desired. i think the article i posted is a good example. not one “fact” is backed up by any reference or supporting research. so where do you turn to if you want to find out some information that you can trust?
There is a very good reason it’s called the website of 1000 lies
Quote:i guess that the main thing that really struck me in all this is, are the trappings of femininity (nail polish, hair, jewellery, make up, pantihose, hair free armpits) absolutely necessary to anyone who considers themselves female? isn’t the female condition existent irrespective of what you wear?Reminds me of a not so recent post I made on my blog about being passable or not and who cares anyway..
Shells
-
Hi Girls, I find the labels less than helpful too. I know CD’s that are certainly turned on by their dressing…and TV’s that aren’t. I’m a trans woman and can look in the mirror and think “Hey babe, you’re hot tonight!” and get a sort of sexually based pleasure from that (you feel sexy). The thing is I have identified as CD, TV, TG and TS at various times in my life. I believe I was actually TS the whole time but didn’t manage to work that out until later life unfortunately. So did my fundamantal identity change? I actually don’t think so although to all external appearances it would have.
The labels have the danger of presenting a hierarchical model of gender presentation that is simply not useful or desireable. And if someone wants to self label it’s fine but without a shared idea of what the label means it’s still not useful. -
This is very difficult for me to say on here, I’ll probably get banned after this, but I agree with Shells and somewhat with Amanda.
Quote:My understanding is that there are 4 types of TransGender people:Cross Dressers (CDs)
Transvestites (TVs)
TransSexuals (TSs)
Drag Queens (DQs)Unfortunately the world and society puts us in one of those 4 categories whether we like it not! I know personally from trying to educate my work colleges on exactly who I am, and it always comes down to DQ, CD, TV or TS. What are you? Step out of your CD/TV fantasy land and get into reality! It’s very frustrating trying to explain and educate where girls are at in their journey! It’s just plain ignorance, don’t worry about it. Do your best to educate as much as you can, we can only lead from example.
Jade Starr once said that’s it’s the fault of the media, porn industry, and society’s perceptions, things like Priscilla etc
Even the medical community uses those 4 categories. You go to a shrink; they will label you in one of those boxes. Sorry if that offends you! Get over it!
I suggest don’t worry about, so what if you’re CD or TV? I wish I was a CD and only dressed once a month for cafe night, life would be far easier. Count yourselves lucky girls!
I agree with Amanda not to label girls here, it does cause issues. However, I also disagree; I think there is a lot of prejudice and discrimination here on TR. CD/TV vs. TS. Why? I know this from seeing things and hearing how other TR members have spoken about TS girls in the past. What’s the issue? Is in envy, jealousy or just plain “you’re unhappy with your life, so let’s make some fun of someone else”?? Do you know what shit we go through psychologically to try and live a happy life?
If TR is to become a “Transgender” entity in Australia, I think those barriers need to be torn down and the members need to be more accepting of girls who have GID. For heaven’s sake, it’s not a competition or race; it’s all about you and being yourself!
Amy
-
Quote:This is very difficult for me to say on here, I’ll probably get banned after this, but I agree with Shells and somewhat with Amanda.Quote:My understanding is that there are 4 types of TransGender people:
Cross Dressers (CDs)
Transvestites (TVs)
TransSexuals (TSs)
Drag Queens (DQs)Unfortunately the world and society puts us in one of those 4 categories whether we like it not! I know personally from trying to educate my work colleges on exactly who I am, and it always comes down to DQ, CD, TV or TS. What are you? Step out of your CD/TV fantasy land and get into reality! It’s very frustrating trying to explain and educate where girls are at in their journey! It’s just plain ignorance, don’t worry about it. Do your best to educate as much as you can, we can only lead from example.
Which comes to the issue of people having one idea on what things mean and our community having the other. The resulting confusion can then be quite horrible and often ends badly.
Quote:I agree with Amanda not to label girls here, it does cause issues. However, I also disagree; I think there is a lot of prejudice and discrimination here on TR. CD/TV vs. TS. Why?I don’t think anyone has the right to label another (and we should avoid doing so particularly here) but for those that refer to labels we should have a pre-defined set for them to use…
Now this is way off the original topic so I have created a new topic to discuss the 2 issues here: viewtopic.php?p=13733#13733
Take care,
Shells
Moderator
Quote:Yes – we are no longer discussing V’s original post. So to preserve the integrity of what was said earlier on topic I’m locking this thread.
