and what if your 'vibes' are dead wrong--you choose someone else's GENDER based on some *feeling*?

what if i feel like you're a man--should i start he'ing you and 'go with it'?

do you see how this isn't at all your choice to make--how this is all contained within a person--no matter if you never came across someone and 'vibed' their gender/pronoun?

hey Kobi--

i'm in no way wanting to control thoughts.

i do question the validity in *anyone* putting in their 2 cents on how another person identifies.

i don't think a 'vibe' or 'feeling' ought to be a factor in 'gender-ing' another person.

and as the 'vibe-theory' was presented, i find myself with a lot of questions (and yes, i did read Sachita's entire post).

i don't understand the process of going from learning about someone's identity and then doing a little 'remodeling' of that (however internal the process), and ending up at some 'conclusion'.

identity is not usually up for debate, despite vibe or attraction--and forming a 'conclusion' on another's identity skates really close to a kind of thing that sometimes happens where a person wishes to redefine a person for their own comfort level.

(and Sachita as much says this, "if I'm wrong, someone disputes then I change the words but in my heart I never change. I see it how I feel it.")

the thing is, it doesn't matter to me if Sachita (or anyone else) keeps that kind of gender-ing an *internal* process--it's still creates the dynamic where a totally and completely other person 'reacts' to an identity as if it's optional and debatable, deniable. again, this is why i used the example of he-ing Sachita if i were to suddenly decide that she's 'a man'.

lastly, i didn't go inside of Sachita's head and steal her private thoughts--they're posted right here for all to read. and while i don't care for thought policing--i don't think that applies to a person publicly describing her process of "feeling" -gender, and utilizing that "feeling" as a barometer for which *she* determines another's gender.

I am going to answer this even though you didn't ask *me*.

If I met a Lesbian who was married to a man, sleeping with him...I would totally take her at face value. Because to *me* who a person is sleeping with does not define who they are. I am married to a transguy and I am not straight, so I hope nobody tries to take away my Femme.

I don't think that there is such a thing as "thought police" either. That would require giving away ones power. Just because I see things differently than the next person doesn't mean that I am trying to make them carbon copy me.

I have a dog named Kitty. If that helps?

So, then, if I say, "You're not really a butch, and I can clearly see that by the fact that you use blue font and you use female pronouns" that's ok with you?


Dylan

P.S. I've dated and slept with that lesbian you speak of...and her husband

There's a world of difference between knowing the difference between a dog and a cat and having a secret grin and thinking "oh, I know otherwise" when someone tells you what their gender is.

I can't change how I feel about something but I do respect someone's ID, for sure. It really isnt about gender for me as it is essence. It's probably complicated for me to fully describe. Let me think about the words more.

well first of all I never look at a person and just assume who they are. I'm likely to watch and study and yes my vibes have been wrong. I'm human.

What I think is "awww that sucks" because I know what it's like to live a lie.

this just keeps getting better. not really.

That is, I think, because it's completely derailed from Linus' original topic, which was about transmen and whether we ever stop calling them "trans" and just call them men.

Thank you for the new word! I'll do my best to use it from now on. You're right, having the word "sexual" in there draws attention in the wrong way--just as attention is drawn in the wrong way by the word "homosexual." We've probably all seen people get totally hung up on the "sexual" part of "homosexual" and try to reduce us all to nothing more than our sex partners. I guess it's probably the same kind of dynamic in both instances. Maybe that's one reason so many people think it's okay to demand info about a transexxed person's genitalia, because of the word "sexual" in "transsexual." *sheesh, sometimes it seems like the world is populated by three-year-olds when otherwise-adults get so obsessed with other people's body parts*


Kobi, what I meant was, there's this word Transgendered that many people use an umbrella term for all those who don't fit the gender binary; when used in this way and applied to the word Butch, it means a Butch who might otherwise be described as third-gendered, other-gendered, gender-queer, male-identified, or any number of other ways. What these different descriptions all have in common is that they are about female-bodied Butches who do not legally transition because they are not men.

The confusion arises because the wider Transsexed community uses the word Transgendered as a synonym for Transexxed (Transsexual), makes no distinction between the two terms, and doesn't always recognize the usage of Transgendered to mean "transgressing gender binaries."

What's been happening because of that, is that people in our community now mean different things when they use the term transgendered--it just causes lots of confusion, especially when Transsexed men use the word transgendered about themselves. Everyone doesn't know what they mean, because of the other definition of transgendered that is about female-bodied Butches, yanno?

What causes MORE confusion is that so many of us abbreviate and just say "trans" instead of specifying one or the other, transgendered or transsexed. I'm guilty of that myself, although I am consistent and only say "trans" when I mean "transsexed."

Of course, when someone says "Transman" or "Transwoman" they are referring to transsexed individuals. I don't think there's any confusion about that use of "trans."

Does that help?

and then there is heterosexual.

all i can think about are straight people doing the nasty. :poc-cool:

i think about them dancing together in bars. it just doesn't look right.

Getting back on topic
 

I'm not quite sure what you mean by "as always trans something," Linus. Do you mean, do we always see a transsexed individual as transsexed even after they finish gender reassignment and are living wholly as themselves?

Or do you mean, do we always categorize people as transsexed if we find out their outsides don't match their insides?

I can answer your last question easily--yes, I view Transmen as men and Transwomen as women. It's especially easy for me to see the man in a Transman, even before transition, and there pretty much isn't anything that makes me change how I see him unless he tells me himself that he made a mistake and isn't a man after all. That's only happened once that I know of.

It's the idea that we always categorize "transsexed" (I'm a little icky about this as it feels like we're transgressing on intersexed individuals -- ah, English. Such a fun language) individuals as always "trans" man or "trans" woman.

Some female bodied, male-identified do not identify with the "trans" idea, whether before, during or after medical treatment or even without. They see themselves as male only. No trans anything.

The thought that started this was whether the LGBTQ community assumes that someone like me has to be trans (I do identify as trans but I'm experience as an example rather than using someone else).

Does that clarify?

could you elaborate on "someone like me"?

also, are you asking whether to be a part of the lgbtq community, one would have to identify as trans forever and a day, or would dropping the trans descriptor bar you from membership?