Adrian
Forum Replies Created
-
Andi wrote:Sexuality maybe should be part of the survey.…wandering somewhat from the topic of the 2017 survey – but if people want to actually think what question (or questions) they would ask about sexuality then we could always run a followup.
Forget open ended questions (“what turns you on sexually”) because the answers will almost certainly not be analysable.
Personally, I struggle with the number of T-women with male genitalia that like to describe their relationships with other women (female genetalia) as lesbian. Lesbian has a definition (as does homosexuality) that rests on biological sex (and so genetalia). Avoiding the redefinition of commonly used and accepted terms to describe sexuality is the start of the challenge in framing multiple choice survey questions. Before you know it you are on the slippery slope of defining sexual attraction by the details of preferred sexual activity – and that is far too much personal information for me to digest!
However if there are viable suggestions out there…do post them and see what feedback you get.
(I can always split this discussion off into another thread if it gets ‘legs’) -
Thanks to all those who rushed in to try out the survey.
As the survey is completely anonymous I can’t email back to you directly with answers to your queries…so here is some very early feedback….Quote:The questions go a,c,d,e,f,g,h. B is missing.
I only received Sections 1,2 and 5…not sure what happened to Sections 3 and 4?There is some confusion because the survey doesn’t ask everyone all the questions. If your answer to a previous question indicates that following questions wouldn’t make sense or wouldn’t be relevant then it skips the question. You would have to be VERY special to get asked all the questions!!!
Quote:I think, perhaps, the survey should bite the bullet and discuss sexuality.The 2011 survey didn’t ask about sexual preferences, and during the analysis of the data this did not appear as an issue. So in this followup we are assuming that sexuality and gender orientation are not intertwined and we can explore one in depth without asking questions about the other. It was difficult enough providing a non-label/non-box definition of gender for the survey without also having to think of ways of describing sexual attractions involving transgender people.
-
August 2017 Meetup
-
Why we do it is a BIG question…which I guess no one has a complete answer.
In the 20 or so years since I decided I did HAVE to do it and went to a Seahorse meeting, my answer has definitely changed.
As we discover more about our suppressed gender identity the reasons why we have to express our gender seem to morph and change. That isn’t to say you can’t be happy just doing what you do, and then perhaps you may have longer to think through why you are doing it. But for me I didn’t have that sort of long term stability. It was a long journey not an occasional vacation.Suzzzyy2 wrote:because female clothes are far more sensous ,They look better and feel better …A partial answer yes – because it doesn’t explain why some of us feel just fine in old jeans and a T but presenting and feeling feminine. There is heaps more to this I think than clothes, though our taste in clothes is a convenient and perhaps easier to understand introduction to ourselves.
-
This thread is in dire danger of morphing into yet another thread on successes/failures of telling/not telling people.
But that wasn’t what the original thread was about.
Anyone want to resurrect the original discussion about “what if”? Or has it run its full course. -
July 2017 Picture
-
TinaMartini wrote:I have for many years been a reasonably accomplished live music creator and performer.
If you get a gig let us know and we will try to come along and cheer you on!
-
Well….we didn’t run the survey in 2015.
:unsure:
I collected a lot of helpful comments about the questions we should ask…but we failed to reach a consensus on why we were running the survey.
One idea was to see how things have changed since the original 2011, which would mean keeping a lot of the questions the same. Others thought we should improve the survey and fix some of its shortcomings. These two goals were largely incompatible.
I ran out of time.
And the survey didn’t happen.
😳
But thank you to everyone who gave me feedback.2 years later there is perhaps another ‘window of opportunity’.
This time round I propose to just get on and do it – keeping the changes to a minimum – and seeing how much of the analysis from 2011 can be reused (we did put a lot of work into the 2011 survey)
I’ll start a new forum thread (or two) to seek feedback on any difficult changes in case I’ve got things wrong… but by keeping the work to a minimum I could perhaps get the survey launched in a month or so.
Let’s see what happens this time!
:unsure: -
Flyer from the Colombian Hotel website
-
June 17 Picture
-
ClaireStafford wrote:Has this fame, or infamy, created some problems as well as solved some?
As someone who has been tramping the streets of Sydney for a couple of decades let me assure you that before we were “nearly there there” there was never a time when the person on the street mistook me for a large woman.
Back in the “not remotely there” years you were far more likely to be called out as “Hey did you see the guy in a skirt” than you are now. With Caitlin et al came an awareness that “Tranny Spotting” wasn’t such a PC thing to do – more people now recognise you are transgender, but less people feel it is OK to make fun of it.
Of course there still are the dregs of humanity who boost their own self-ego by making fun of anything that doesn’t match their narrow view of acceptable. But I’m building up a list of names and they will be first to the wall when the revolution comes.
-
It is perhaps time for a not so subtle reminder of what this thread was about!
Replies that address the topic are, as always, particularly welcome!!
Caroline wrote:….It made me ponder firstly , how far has Australian society advanced and secondly how far the “ T component of the LGBTQI community have advanced in their respective attitudes and acceptances since the release of the Movie all those years ago ?.How far have we advanced as a society ie ” Are we there yet!!” and as a minority group in understanding and acceptance ? Then, more importantly, what do we need to do to continue breaking down acceptance barriers and in doing so make it easier for people who are closeted to “come out” and enjoy themselves. The answer to this I think lies in ourselves !!! ie continuing to present ourselves frequently and confidently in public and not worrying about the “TG friendly” tag that many seem to seek as a condition.
………….. -
Mira,
Thanks for sharing your thoughts on Caroline’s post.Myracd wrote:Adrian, as I understand, is simply encouraging more of us to be more actively, and publicly, expressing our feminine identity.I don’t want to hog this discussion…but no, I have never believed in blindly encouraging people to be active or publicly visible. What was good for me is almost certainly not good for someone else. So that isn’t what I said in my post (read again what I wrote).
I did however comment on negativity and a distorted perception of risk. I don’t believe that we have to wait till we are “there” before it is safe to embrace our gender.
-
OK – after all that complexity just to record an “other” gender we finally see the results
http://www.abs.gov.au/ausstats/abs@.nsf/Lookup/by%20Subject/2071.0~2016~Main%20Features~Sex%20and%20Gender%20Diversity%20in%20the%202016%20Census~312016 CENSUS OPERATIONAL CHALLENGES
Quote:The special procedures relied on contact with the Census call centre. A significantly larger than expected volume of calls was received before and after Census night, which meant that some people were unable to get their calls answered in a timely fashion. This may have deterred some or many from following through on the special procedures to receive an access code for the special online form or to seek advice on procedures for the paper form.There were also some reported incidents of call centre staff being unaware of the special procedures, possibly due to additional staff being brought on quickly to assist with the larger than expected peaks. Call centre management addressed reported issues as quickly as possible.
The withdrawal of the online form for 43 hours also may have led to some people reporting on paper rather than online, and they may have been unaware of how to report as other than male or female on the paper form.
2016 CENSUS RESULTS
The ABS does not consider the count of people reporting as other than male or female in the 2016 Census to be an accurate measure of the number of people with other than male or female sex or gender. The ABS has made this assessment in consideration of the inherent limitations of the Australian Census for this topic, the limitations of the approach used for the 2016 Census and the operational challenges experienced.Quote:There were 1,300 people who provided a sex or gender response other than male or female that could be validated, a rate of 5 per 100,000 people. Approximately one-third of these simply answered with no text or no meaningful text. The remaining two-thirds gave descriptions that will be helpful for understanding the complexity of sex and gender.A further 2,400 people provided a response which may have been meant to indicate another sex or gender, by marking both the Male and the Female responses on the paper form (multimark) without writing any text. These marks could have been intentional, for those people not aware of the special procedures. The marks may also have been mistakes. Where both sex boxes were marked, but one was clearly crossed out, the records were excluded from this analysis.
There was a dramatic increase in the proportion of this type of reporting from the 60 years and over age groups. This could indicate that the older age groups found it difficult to or chose not to follow the special procedures, or alternatively they could have simply made an error and not crossed it out. In addition, multimarks were only possible on paper forms, and the proportion who used paper forms also increased with age.
The highest possible count, therefore, for sex/gender diverse responses as measured in the 2016 Census is 3,700, representing a rate of 16 per 100,000 people. Around one- third (35%) of this group (1,300) were able to be validated as intentional. It is not clear how many of the remaining 65% (2,400) intended to indicate that their sex or gender was other than male or female.There is a LOT more to read in the report.
http://www.abs.gov.au/ausstats/abs@.nsf/Lookup/by%20Subject/2071.0~2016~Main%20Features~Sex%20and%20Gender%20Diversity%20in%20the%202016%20Census~31Next Steps
This overview is the first release of results from the 2016 Census’s collection of non-male and non-female responses to the Sex question. Over the upcoming months, the ABS will publish several articles on this topic:[ul]
[li]Final results of sex and gender reporting in the 2016 Census, including analysis of descriptive terms[/li]
[li]Characteristics of people whose sex/gender is other than male or female[/li]
[li]Lessons for future collections.[/li][/ul]
The ABS will seek advice on articles from peak groups and undertake targeted peer review, and welcomes feedback from the community. -
A most insensitive remark Adrian, one which I feel you need to apologise for to people like me asap.
Sadly Cathy I think your post proves my point. Or at the least, does nothing to challenge the observations I made.
A very few people on TgR post a lot about what they can’t do – in predominately negative posts; whilst the rest of us get on with life and chip away at the road blocks at our own pace.
I see no reason to apologise for stating what is so obviously the case.
How about we address the original post which was positive, in a positive way?
Quote:what do we need to do to continue breaking down acceptance barriers and in doing so make it easier for people who are closeted to “come out” and enjoy themselves.?