[Adrian]

I think this thread has run its course…with a diversion midstream onto a more general recognition thread.
Karly has correctly drawn it back to the original topic.
As organiser – I don’t wish to see a political or media spotlight thrown on TransFormal.
Karly has voiced the main reason – the support and validation inherent in such an event would be lost if the participants felt they were being observed or were being expected to make a political statement!!
But I have a second reason…far more pragmatic.. I think a lot of the value of TF comes from its scale… not too small as to be ineffective, not to large as to be impersonal.
Without any plans to change venue (which I think is an essential part of the mix) the current reality is that demand will probably exceed supply of tickets…it would be just generating disappointment at this stage to ramp up the demand.

I suggest this is where we leave the thread for now?

[Adrian]

Quote:

i guess one issue about tr “transforming” into something more organised and political may well be

Funnily enough – as someone who avoids these things – I have absolutely no interest in making TR political or even organised (in the sense of formally structured).

So if that is the only way to make others acknowledge your existence…
then perhaps we should just muddle along as we do now – hopefully helping a few people and doing no one any great harm.

[Adrian]

March Glebe cafe Night

April Glebe Cafe Night

May Glebe cafe Night

[Adrian]

I’ve moved this post into the forum where, in the past, there have been discussions about improving the profile of TR – as this post talking about TransFormal I think is in a similar vein. certainly the posts by Amy are an extension of post made in another earlier discussion about TR.

Jade’s comments about the lack of cohesion reflect a real problem we have in presenting gender diversity as a community and not individual sub-groups.

The specific issue about stealth and women has been discussed in some depth in the serious forums. I don’t think it is a relevant issue with achieving greater recognition for TR or TransFormal. After all it is clear that many in this situation would no longer wish to consider themselves gender diverse or value a continuing association with TR.

So let’s try and focus instead on the wider gender diverse community – from those who are in the closet and not wishing to attract any attention, to those who are transgendered and expressing their gender choice full time. It is this group that is currently represented in some way by TR and meetings like TransFormal. To the outsider this group must appear reasonably cohesive, and although it lacks advocates and spokespeople, it should perhaps attract greater recognition.

This I think is the issue that frustrated Amy.
However I don’t think that complaining that the world is unfair in this way gets one anywhere (other than perhaps increasing the frustration).
What is perhaps needed is some concrete strategies to increase the profile of this Gender Diverse group (maybe in only a small way) and volunteers to implement them!

[Adrian]

Quote:

Just to clarify……
Sorry, it really gets up my nose!!

Like Amy I get increasingly frustrated by being ignored.
Ten years ago – I was resigned to TR being labelled as a virtual club for those who ‘weren’t serious’ – well actually what was said by ‘The Establishment” was more offensive than that!

But now – yes it does get up my nose too.
In the new age of facebook, email, twitter and smart phones it is no longer acceptable to dismiss in such a way those who network and don’t join the “official groups”.
But still the cold shoulder continues…surely by now “The Establishment” has seen the value in what we do?

Surely they can’t have missed TransFormal? The ability of this event for the last two years to help girls on their journey through gender land and build relationships brings tears of happiness to me.

But still… we aren’t incorporated, we don’t have government grants, we aren’t “official” and so we are ignored.

[Adrian]

Well I won’t claim to have read the entire report and memorised the statistics.
But one reported result struck me as being far from what I expected.

This states that 25% of the respondents openly reject the concept of binary gender, and another 45% feel that in some way they are neither fully man nor woman.

These figures are much much higher than I had been led to believe talking to people through TR.
Often I feel I am one of a small minority who find the argument “I’m not a man so I need to become a woman” a gross oversimplification of gender.

Statistically valid surveys like this will hopefully open the eyes of those who believe there are only two choices in life, to be “a man” or “a woman”.

And certainly they are going to make me speak with much more courage about the rich gender spectrum we experience as a group.

[Adrian]

Quote:

I think it is because I am getting older and more sure about who I am.

Totally agree.

Whilst the male-ness in us focuses on the physical (chopping bits off and making things grow) – the real changes of who we are and how we feel don’t exclusively need HRT.
They need an inner confidence and acceptance of who you are.
Whilst HRT can help achieve these mental changes – it can also bring its own set of mental issues.

So this is one of the few times when I can honestly say there are advantages in getting old – naturally falling testosterone levels and increased self confidence can I believe get one a long way.

[Adrian]

Moderator

Quote:

Page 2 of a very interesting thread…
but it is now moving away from the original question.

Which asked not what we might consider living as a woman…
but rather what do those who determine eligibility for surgery consider it to be.

In Jamilla’s words

Quote:

Reading through a lot of the posts on transitioning there is a lot of talk about living as a woman before facial and/or SRS. Can anyone please let me know what would be defined as “living as a woman”?

[Adrian]

Quote:

so how weird does that make me!!!!

Lisa

Not as weird as a blue spade!

[Adrian]

It is time to stop some of the silly stories that are circulating about Peta_A and TR.
Here, on the record, are some important facts.

1) There was no anti-Peta smear campaign.
Prior to this outburst I have had no contact for years with Peta.
I have not heard anyone talking about her recently, either in emails nor in public.
And her recent pattern of work meant she was essentially a social recluse.

2) Peta chose to leave TR.
Peta was at no stage asked to leave TR, nor was she expelled.
Furthermore, as I wrote in my last post to her, I am not aware of any reason why she should leave.
Certainly there was no smear campaign or collective hostility towards her that I know of.

3) Peta was not personally attacked in the forums
Peta’s claim that she had been personally attacked is not substantiated by reading what was posted.
She chose to post in the forums misleading information and refused to share with everyone the relevant facts.
As a result I did call into question her judgement.
And I also publicly refused her attempts to make me take sides, and support her divisive behavior.
This was necessary moderation, not a personal attack on her beliefs, gender choices, or lifestyle.

4) Peta was not an innocent victim of circumstance
I stand by my decision to moderate Peta’s behavior, which it appears was neither altruistic nor in the best interests of our community.
She alone chose to delete her profile, and so I believe has to accept the consequences of her own actions.

If anyone finds these facts surprising or wishes to dispute them, then I’m happy to discuss privately by email.

[Adrian]

Sighs…. more proof I’m abnormal…..

[Adrian]

I think this joke has run its course.
Trying to be funny in this community is always a bit of a knife edge balancing exercise.
Possibly that’s why many of the posts in this forum aren’t funny at all…
Lighten up everyone please!
Thread closed

[Adrian]

As Peta has done what I guess she was looking for an excuse to do all along…I’ve locked the thread cos it is not in a public forum.

[Adrian]

Right – my turn!
To say I am disappointed to read this thread is an understatement.
There are two issues wrapped up here both of which I think have been handled badly.

One is the alleged offensive email from a member.
Note I use the word alleged (just like everyone else should have) as no formal complaint has been made by Peta despite my requesting one.

The only two people who really know what was going on were Peta and the other member.
I am suspicious that there was far more to this relationship than just a few words in an email.
But this hasn’t stopped others jumping in and making their public judgment.

Quote:

peculiar but disturbing, not the place to be receiving that sort of mail, dark thoughts and feelings,
smear campaign, poisioned words, disgruntled member, a personal attack

On what basis did everyone determine the email sender is a guilty party? To me it just looks more like an orchestrated attack by some people on the other member (whoever that might be).

Secondly there is the call by Peta for the community to reassure her she shouldn’t leave.
Peta has also written to me privately expressing surprise I didn’t request her to stay.

The only members I ever engage with to persuade them not to leave are the victims of attacks and abuse by other members, generally after I have expelled someone from TR.
In this case Peta has chosen not to give me any evidence that she is a victim of anything, and so I cannot and should not get involved.
The expressions of support for Peta are I’m sure genuine and show a widespread appreciation for Peta’s contribution – but a far stronger reason for staying was surely that there was no reason to leave?

After reading the thread I’m still left with the feeling that I’ve only been told a selected part of a story.
I know that the relationships between some transitioning girls here is Sydney is rocky (an understatement).
So I’m naturally suspicious that this thread has its origins in some wider dysfunctional behavior.
I challenged Peta earlier in the thread to tell us this was not the case, but again there has been no reply.

Peta is a valuable member of our community but I feel that this time her judgement has lapsed.
At best this thread might be a misplaced attempt to survey community opinion;
at worst it is attention seeking, asserts a false grievance and potentially smears others.

Where next?

Well I sincerely hope this thread doesn’t stand in the way of Peta reconciling her differences with another member.
I can’t see how it could possibly help, but I hope both sides can see beyond it and move on.

Then I intend to move this thread. Perhaps to Peta’s blog (if the thread is misplaced), or to the sin bin (if it was in any way malicious).
Like Peta I’m going to take my time – because I suspect that in time the truth about what is going on will become clear.

[Adrian]

Well I’ve given my advice… and I have to say that it is very unusual to need to conduct a public validation exercise like this. It is dangerously close to launching a witch hunt for the member and if that happens I would have no hesitation in banning everyone involved. (BIG WARNING!)

Peta, if you want to continue in this way then perhaps you need to tell us ifyou have ever had any prior issues/disagreements with this member that could make the email just an ongoing issue between you,?
Or is this an email from a member you had no prior contact/issues with?

My view is that it is risky to take sides in a personal dispute unless all the facts are on the table.