To Lisa: I applaud your restraint; I'm not sure I would have withheld my tongue.

To H Farmer: Nice try, sweetheart. I can understand your anger, nobody likes to be considered a target, especially an editorial target. But by identifying yourself as a 'non-op' transsexual you've brought it on yourself.

As Lisa and Sharon have pointed out already, there is a huge difference between 'non-op' and 'pre-op'. A 'pre-op' stage can be minimal or lengthy depending on circumstances, a 'non-op' choice is - well, just that, a choice. Regardless of the sacrifices and hardships you have endured, your self-chosen status as 'non-op' places you out of the HBS (transsexual) identity. You can think of yourself as a woman if you wish, and I'm sure you have a lengthy history to support your reasoning for choosing 'non-op' status (including, as you have admitted, your reluctance to lose your 'sensitive nerve endings' for enjoyment of sex) but unless you actually *do* have a firm goal of SRS, and some plan or manner or means of getting there, then you are not HBS.

HBS (or transsexualism) is a congenital neurological intersex condition where the gender- cognition structure of your brain (your gender identity) develops in opposition to your body sex (genitals). HBS is a biological condition that is inborn. You can't learn it, you can't nurture it along, you can't 'think you might have it'. If you are HBS you know it as soon as you become gender self-aware. Once aware, HBS people will not rest until they have corrected their bodies to match their brains.

I believe there are several striking and unique symptoms of HBS that define it. They are:

1. From a very early age, at the point where cognizant gender awareness develops, people with HBS have an innate awareness that their body sex is wrong. (This awareness may not coalesce into understandable form until later in life, but usually prior to puberty.)

2. HBS articulates itself through an unrelenting compulsion to correct that sex dichotomy.

3. People with HBS are unwavering in their gender identity, regardless of time or circumstances.

Further, I maintain that the absence of any one of these symptoms suggests something other than HBS. If I interpret your letter correctly, you fail to satisfy criterion #2. I haven't enough information to evaluate you against criteria #1 and #3.

As a side note, it appears that you do not fully understand or appreciate the meaning of the term 'autogynephilia' (love of oneself as a woman). For an eye-opening appraisal of autogynephelia you may want to read J. Michael Bailey's "The Man Who Would Be Queen", wherein you will discover that neither having a vagina, nor being focused on SRS are its defining symptoms. In fact, as I have previously mentioned, SRS - and thus gaining a vagina - is the single purpose-driven goal of HBS-born women. Your allusion to autogynephilia is, in fact, a description of HBS. Autogynephilia differs only inside the brain. Where HBS women subside into domestic and social normalcy after SRS, autogynephiles become excited by their own bodies and are actually sexually aroused at their new, female image. Autogynephilia can be thought of as transvestism taken to the extreme. Nothing on the TS-Si website suggests that any member even remotely resembles or acts in a manner that would befit the label 'autogynephile'. However, your mention of retaining your penis for its sensitive nerve endings (read: pleasure pole) strongly points toward autogynephilia as *your* reality.

I fully sympathize with your dilemma and can even understand your concern at feeling singled out and chastised, but nonetheless your rebuttal fails to deliver any meaningful insights or legitimate criticisms. In short, in my eyes anyway, you've only dug yourself a deeper hole. Scholarly rebuttals usually contain clear points of contention that illustrate topical inaccuracies with the intention of enjoining meaningful debate. Ranting because you feel persecuted is still just ranting; I failed to distinguish any scholarly intent in your reply.

Kelly M, Idaho

Isn't it interesting how the "non-op" can always find some excuse for hanging on to that little piece of anatomy; yet want all their documentation to get changed. I do think that Lisa's responses were quite restrained.

I must confess that I have not read many of the articles on your site, so perhaps I come at this from an uneducated angle. But though you are perhaps justified in many of your points regarding the term "non-op" - and certainly, I can understand why, as an organisation dedicated to the advancement transsexual rights, you want to make very clear the difference between sexually-driven fetishists and bona fide gender dysphoric transsexuals - it seems to me that the real issues have been clouded somewhat by matters of linguistic prescriptivism.

After-all, if one genuinely has severe gender dysphoria, but for whatever reason - whether medical, emotional, or intellectual - cannot or will not have surgery, then the 'term' pre-op does not really apply to them. Sure, they may wish for SRS. Sure, if they could flick a switch and be irreversibly changed into a woman, they would. But if one is never going to have surgery, by very definition, they are non-operative; if one is in this situation, why can't they describe themselves as such?

Which really leads on to the main issue here, that of SRS. Certainly, if one has profound genital dysmorphism due to their transsexuality, then SRS would seem to be a logical step in treating this dysmorphism. But to assume that all transsexuals see SRS this way does not seem to be a logical conclusion, because the simple fact is, there are a lot of transsexuals who don't. Why? Well, because SRS isn't just flicking a change that changes one's entire body. SRS is a highly intensive, expensive, and detailed process, that - at least in the case of MTF surgery - can be very effective, but still, no matter how well performed, cannot create a reproductively-active, genetically female body.

Now don't get me wrong. Being a woman is about far more than having children, and to suggest otherwise is no more than bigoted misogyny on the grandest scale. But SRS is a treatment; it is not a cure. There is absolutely nothing in the world that can turn a genetic male into a genetic female, whether we like it or not. If SRS eases your gender dysphoria, and allows you to be happy as a person, then that is fantastic, and it is worth every cent and hour of your life you paid to get there. But for some of us, SRS simply can't deliver what we really want - to have been born female, with functioning ovaries, to have never had the burden of masculine levels of testosterone raging around our bodies, to be XX instead of XY. Does this make those who do transition any less a woman? Not at all. But choosing not to take insulin does not make one less of a diabetic. Refusing to engage in the immensely difficult process of chemotherapy does not make one any less a victim of cancer. Likewise, though the number of truly transsexual people who refuse SRS may be low, if not impossible to quantify accurately, refusing SRS (if they would accept it under ideal circumstances) does not make one any less of a transsexual. It does not make one a self-deluded nymphomaniac transvestite, either.

I get a sense of sincerity from your letter Nick and a genuine regard for the well being of all those who have suffered conflict between physical and mental sex. Your letter is quite unlike the general attack that someone expressing the point of view you currently hold. For that I both commend and thank you. I share your obvious concern for all those affected.

I would ask that you take the following point into consideration, perhaps then you may change your point of view. If not we may perhaps agree to differ and maintain respect; I hope so.

One of the great tragedies of this topic is that a great many people who claim "transsexuality" who may even be accepted by some medical practitioners as "transsexual" are not in fact suffering the condition. A great deal of confusion has arisen over the years as to the criteria for diagnosis since Hirschfield, Harry Benjamin and others first laid out the symptoms. At the time these doctors were practising medicine finding a surgeon who was prepared to perform surgery was hard enough and then finding a hospital or clinic that would allow their facitities to be used was even more difficult, certainly in USA Hence the reason Christine Jorgensen from US and Roberta Cowel two years earlier from Britain both sought surgery abroad. When you consider the lengths to which these women were prepared to go in order to correct their anatomy it places in perspective the depth of the effects of their conflict.

More than fifty years later both the quality and availability of surgical treatment at a relatively affordable cost both locally and abroad provides a stark contrast to those early days. Yet, there are a great many who claim to be transsexual who make no effort whatsover to work towards surgical correction despite it's availabity. This fact alone displays an absence of one of the most classic symptoms of conflict between anatomical sex and brain sex. For the genuine cases surgical correction is not a matter of mere choice it is an all consuming necessity that dominates and controls all of the individuals thoughts and actions. Usually to the detriment of all else in their life. Speaking personally I would have preferred death on the operating table rather than to continue my life as it was.

If this symptom is absent, then it is my opinon; and it is an opinion based on personal experience as well as many years of work in this field; the person or patient does not in fact suffer transsexuaity or Harry Benjamin Syndrome as many here prefer to call it. All we ask is that these people do not attempt to speak on our behalf or describe their own condition as either "transsexuality" or Harry Benjamin Syndrome. Sadly many come here and to other forums and public meetings and disregard this simple request.

I harbour no animosty or feel any ill will to those who experience the very real distress that is caused by the other issues you have raised. I genuinely believe they should be treated for what ails them and for the condition that affects them. Just do it on their terms and symptoms not on criteria borrowed or stolen from us. If you simply "don't believe it's worth all the time money and hassle, what you got emphatically is not transsexuality.

Hi Evangelina, thanks for your reply. Having read your post and some other articles on TS-Si, I think I am starting to understand where you and the other members of this site are coming from; certainly, it is unscientific and fallacious to reduce to gender to a social constructivist framework, given the experience of 'true' transsexual people, and I can see how the "non-op" label, especially when used by (in truth) non-transsexuals, poses a real issue.

I guess the problem is, for those of us who are still questioning, the labels are evading us. Sure, we can say that we pre-op, but that is to suppose something that may not be true about ourselves, and we do not wish to delude ourselves about the true nature of our gender any more than we already may be doing. Likewise, we could say that we are transgender, but that would be to buy into the kind of hardline social constructivism espoused by the TG movement at large, which like for transsexuals in no way matches up with our experiences, either.

Really, we are just confused, and looking for answers, and for some of us, Dr Benjamin has a definition. Type Four on the Benjamin scale describes one with undecided or confused gender feeling, is typically asexual, for whom neither cross-dressing provides no relief and for whom psychotherapy that attempts to convince one they are indeed male-gendered is in most cases unsuccessful. And this is where the whole "non-operative" thing comes in, for it not invented by the TG movement, but the term Benjamin himself used to describe these people, who have low-moderate gender dysphoria but are not 'just' crossdressers.

Of course, and this is whence the problem arose, this label was supposed to be for clinical purposes, not self-identification, and unless one truly fulfils the criteria laid out - of which confusion in gender identity is an integral part - then calling oneself a non-op transsexual is indeed linguistic deviation from the term's original use. However, for Dr Benjamin, there was a real difference between their gender dysphoria, rooted in innate perception of themselves, and that of transvestites, rooted either in sexual fetishism or disassociation from socially-constructed perceptions of masculinity and femininity. Type Four (non-op) and Five (moderate-intensity) people are not Type Six (true) transsexuals, indeed - at least, at their current stage in life; they may be in the early stages of "true" HBS. But they are not stealing the word "transsexual"; it was the word Benjamin himself gave them.

So, from my own personal experiences, I guess this is really where I am coming from. I have been raised as a man, but have never strongly associated with my gendered body, and the way in which is has developed in opposition to how I would prefer it to be (i.e., female) is over time becoming a source of increasingly dysphoria to me. I have long identitied as asexual, having never experienced any desire for sexual contact with anyone whom I was not already in a romantic relationship, but this is without a doubt more a product of my ambivalence towards my genitalia than a lack of sexual attraction, despite my low sex drive, as I do enjoy sex and find the female body (and to a lesser extent, the male one) sexually attractive. I have never been turned on by the thought of dressing up in female clothing, but I would certainly do so for my own self-expression were I in different social circumstances, and despite being somewhat against the rigidity of modern expectations of gender performance (much of which is simply power politics, with little basis in physiological reality), I identify much more strongly with the transsexual than the transgendered community - one chooses what they wear, but they do not choose to be dysmorphic about their biological sex.

Given all of this, I sound fairly pre-op really, but even if this is indeed the case, it is not really a label that I myself own, nor with a family history of mental illness that did not elude me in my youth, feel confident in taking ownership of. Maybe I really do have HBS, and am in the early stages of it. Maybe I am genuinely ambivalent to my sex, and being rather "feminine" for the masculine role in my society, would feel more comfortable as a female. Or maybe my mind is just doing strange things to me again, as it has in the past. I don't know. What I do know is that Type 4 on the Benjamin scale fits what I experience, more than anything else, and for that reason I self-identify as a non-operative transsexual, even though in today's climate, if not in Dr Benjamin's, that term is far too politicised to be of any practical use. I hope one day science can give us a greater understanding of all of our experiences, that we can all live free from discrimination.

The taxonomy is such a hot button for so many people that I try to avoid it. But our lot at the moment is that we cannot completely.

As a preface, I am post-op and regard myself simply as an adult female. I was a transsexual when I was transitioning between sexes. And that is (almost) no one's business but mine.

Otherwise, labels evade me too!

I do think a lot of people at all ages are trying to sort out who and what they are in terms of gender and sex, and that there are limits to classifications, even if originated by Harry Benjamin! And they all deserve sympathy, decent treatment, and human rights.

But let me say this: you might be surprised how many "non-ops" with the feelings you have (as opposed to the good-time Charlene's) find themselves post-op and happy, after just a very few years.

And many of these eventually are surprised by how unpleasant it is to have a drunken man in a cocktail dress and heels vamp through your bathroom looking for sex while you privately pee, he loudly claiming his rights because he is "just like you" except more secure in his "femininity."

is only an issue if an individual is placed into a defined category they have no wish to be placed into and do not meet the definition criteria to be placed into the category to which the would wish to belong. Indignation follows in either case. Taxonomy however is the very foundation of the case for HBS as a defined medical condition.

If people's feelings get hurt in the process it is unfortanate and I do have sympathy. However life is not an interaction in a kindergarten playground and realities ultimately will prevail. To put this another way; others try to define my HBS condition as "transgender" that is my biggest hot button and I can get quite cross about it. Taxanomy is fine when applied scientifically. Unfortunately many definitions used in reference to transgenderism have no scientific basis. So how can you use a science (taxanomy) to define something which is non scientific?

One interesting point that these (refreshingly cordial) exchanges raise in my thinking is the fact that the word of Harry Benjamin is treated as if it is in some way final and should not be questioned. The good doctor described transsexuality and transvestism and grouped them almost as if the were all part of the same issue. I have become quite sceptical over the years of that approach particulary regarding his sixth group. It's simplicity is however attractive, I have begun to wonder in recent years if Benjamin's sixth catergory has at it's roots a quite different cause than his first five.

Critics have misconstrued Dr. Harry Benjamin's intention when he constructed his orginal graph of relative "intensity".

Benjamin constructed it following Kinsey's example (in a very different connection).

Anyway, Benjamin saw the graph as an investigative tool. He explicitly refers to it as a starting point in his books, a way to organize the meager data available to him at the time.

He fully conceded that better tools for more rigorous analysis were needed down the line.

Please, consider for a a second what is really being said here. It is a contradiction to say that a person is capable being one gender while inhabiting the body of the other, and then to turn around and deny that same person their gender identity just because they choose not to have a particular surgery. To address the concern about sex, if a man has sex with me, it is a heterosexual act, even if I have a penis. Sex with me does not make a man gay. Granted, I have to find men who are very comfortable in their own sexualities, but that is not always a bad thing. I deserve to be treated as a female, just as much as a pre-or-post op does.

Twilight Princess,

I have to say that's the LEAST convincing argument I have ever heard. If you have a penis and have sex with another male, you ARE homosexual and so is the male that had sex with you.

Your "Gender Identity" is NOT female if you "choose" to not have SRS; Being Transsexual, you are DRIVEN to have the surgery, it is a life time desire to have your body match who your brain tells you that you are. What is being said is that we are ONE GENDER and had no choice in the gender of the body we inhabited; But when possible we CAN correct the body to match our brain gender.

Sorry Love, BUT you are NOT female, you ARE a chick with a dick, a man in a dress wanting to play being a woman and retain the male privileges.

Two people sitting at an airport, both dressed like pilots, but only one knows how to fly a plane. Does being dressed like pilots make both of them pilots? I think not, as being able to fly a plane makes one a pilot, although I suppose we could call a pilot in training a pre-pilot! LOL

I don't think, however, that if one drops out of pilot school and has no intent to ever fly that they'd now be called a non-flying pilot, even if they do wear a pilot's uniform. Then again, I'm just a poor helpless dummy from Duke University, so what do I know!

So on to non-op, pre-op, and post-op I go . . .I'm not going to make generalizations regarding who is and who isn't a transsexual, but then again, just because one wished to claim they are a transsexual doesn't necessarily make them one. Then again, I don't understand why some make such a big deal out of all of this, as if being transsexual is or isn't the gold standard of labels.

It's just a label, not any better than any other label. It just has a specific meaning. Some might think it's cool to be called a pilot, but if they can't fly a plane, they're not a pilot. Likewise, a transsexual is someone who changes their physical sex to match their brain sex.

There are many different types of cross-gender behavior, but just because someone is cross-gendered doesn't make them automatically transsexual. However, please keep one thing in mind, transsexuals often try to fight against their dysphoria, due to a desire to avoid rejection by family and society in general. As a result, they might, for a time, try to convence themselves they don't need to transition, but in the end, they all do transition as much as they are able, or they end their lives.

For someone claiming to be a non-op, I can't say whether or not they're a transsexual trying to convince themself that they don't need to transition or someone who really isn't a transsexual. If they are a transsexual, I can assure you that living in a crossed brain/body state is like damming a powerful river. The water will build up and eventually reach the breaking point of the dam, and you will transition.

This, I believe, is the reason for having a good therapist, as they can help one figure out who they are and what they need to do to be happy. One reason those who call themselves non-ops get pre- and post-ops annoyed, is that they can sometimes have the attitude that others don't have to transition because they didn't. I'm sorry, but that type of attitude makes it very likely that the person saying such things isn't a transsexual, and if they are, they'll eat their own words later.

Here's an example for you of such a non-op, who most likely isn't a transsexual, which is perfectly ok, but they're probably not a transsexual, once again. A friend of mine had posted in their excitement that they were soon going to have GRS.

A "non-op" wrote them saying things like. "Think very carefully before you do this!!! You'll lose the ability to have sexual intercourse! I was 98% certain I wanted GRS, but had sex with a beautiful woman and found I love having intercourse [using his penis, of course], and so I didn't do it. So I decided to be a non-op!"

Sorry, but this is complete nonsense!

-- First, post-ops can still have intercourse just fine, thank you very much.

-- Second, saying one was nearly certain they wanted GRS, but now doesn't want it, sound like they're trying to decide what color of car to buy! If one is transsexual, they're brain is cross-sexed, meaning they think and see themselves as the sex opposite to their body sex. One cannot turn this on and off, and it most certainly isn't something one turns on and off like saying "Yep, I want one of those GRS jobs, oh wait! I changed my mind!"

-- Third, a MtF transsexual wants to have sex as a female, not as a male. If you enjoy having sex as a male, using a penis, that's ok, but you're definitely not female-brained then, and therefore, you're not transsexual.

Could one such person have a partially cross-sexed brain, maybe, I don't know. Find a good therapist to help you sort this out if needed, but just calling yourself a transsexual doesn't make you one any more than calling yourself a pilot makes you one of those, unless you fly planes.

I can't fly planes, and therefore, I'm not a pilot, nor do I think pilots are more or less important or valuable than me, but they do have an interesting job! :-)

Seems like a pretty intelligent comment, once one looks past the Duke thing.

Wow this actiually hurt me. Congratulations. I'm still going through some confusing sexual things but in my mind gender has nothing to do with sexual orientations so that mess is secondary to my problem of just wanting to be accepted asa female. I have known since a young age deep down that I should have been a girl yet I have grown comfortable with male genitalia wich I believe genitalia does not define what gender you are. It took me 20 years of confusion to fully accept that I am female and yet I have no feeling need to have srs or whatever to change my genitals.the only need I have is the very real very painful need to be accepted for who I am and to be able to finally begin living my life. I've been uncomfortable and depressed and lying to myself for so long. Your ignorance to a trans issue you don't umderstand hurt me a little. I've often thought about not being accepted even by people living trans thinking they're better than me. People who I jave such great respect and draw inspiration from it is painful. But not as painful living the way I have been. At this point no words could fool me. I've dealt with this mostly on my own anyway. So why listen to anyones generalized bulls**t now. There is no turning back from where I am now. I will live as myself or I will be dead. Unfortunatly I cannot afford to do anything about it at the moment. Just prayer and my own strength and prayer for more strength.

I'm not sure what male privelages you are talking about. I wish I wish I could just be a man. I cant. Its not an option. It is painful to see myself as a man and keeping male genitalia could only complicate sex life. I am also bisexual. Does that also make me less of a woman because I dint want a vagina for penises to penetrate. I am not aroused by two men baving sex or tbe act of anal sex which by the way is not always practiced by homosexual men. I am turned off by tbe idea of a man wanting to be anally penetrated. I am not aroused b anything involving men in drag. I am not totally comfortable with any of that. I've had some difficulty even getting along wih some dragqueens and cds (which are not synonyms) mostly at my fault that I jist don't understand them. I am more attracted to women then men in many ways. My feelings towards males is still complicated. But there are males who i have felt some strong romantic feeling for althougb j am not typically aroused by the male body. I've never felt that it was gay when I have had thougbts about a male nor have I felt straight in thoughts of females. Simply because I have never seen myself as male other than knowing that I was ina male body and my structural differencces to "real" females. Again I believe none of this has a single damn thing todo with what gender I view myself as. You can do whatever the f**k you want in your sexlife as male or female so why do you place these restraints on trans people. Its simply making the outside match the inside and f**k those who cant understand. My genitals are just part of who I am now. And I don't think its based on fear or confusion. I'm through with confusion and Ive feared many things becoming a man, people, ridicule, myself, being trans, living trans, living and I cant be afraid anymore. My life has gone through dramatic changes in the last few years and I've just been a zombie before now totally awakened and I've lost things and all that's left is all that matters to me my true self. s**t I've said too much and I really have no idea and no need to convince you that I am trans because only I know. Its just been an uneventful day and I apologize to anyone reading my insomniac ramblings from 4 in themorning.

I want ti make clear I did since I was a child want to have been born a girl. I would pray at night that I would wake up a real girl and just be normal. I have had weird sexual things in the past that caused me to question what I was exactly. Before I knew about trans I thought I was only crossdressing and discovered pornography young and those things had very negative effects on me mentally that may have lead me to being nonop not that I view nonop as negative. Everyone is different. just that I didn't always want to be a "chick with a dick". Which is a degrading stereotype of transwomen. That is not what I had in mind. Andnot what I have in mind now. I only want to be myself. This is not sexually driven andthis is the things that i keep reitterating that bothers me about peoples views is that people think being trans is about sex and fetishes. Of course I think I still broke one of your rules that I wavered my gender identity or whatever. I personally disagree because I again don't believe my penis makes me a man. My male body structure makes me feel like a man and is what distresses me causing me to have lived my entire life like a hermit and if my parents had sought professional help for me may have saved me from ugh I cant even define what Ive went through(all in my mind because I'm a hermit and had not much of a life) that I'm not sure still yet that I will recover from. I understand the reasons for your views and I disagree and it saddens me. You surely don't care but I'm being as honest as I can and trying as hard as i can to articulate my feelings.its just that I cant take advice from anyone on this. I feel that things like this do not really help people and can only cause more confusion. Its possible if I had read something like this not long back may have sent me backwards wasting more of my life away. Its a bit of a mindf**k for me that I feel that I can completely relate to another trans person besides one that one damn thing that makes me not a woman. The thing that it took so much time to convince myself didn't make me any less of a woman. Now I'm toldagain nope you're actually just a freak perv. It only counts if youre going to get rid of it. Reminds me of following and speaking to god then despite all that i like the samesex so im not welcome. Except I coukd just quit cbristianity. Theres thankfully plenty of accepting trans people. If this is a popular view makes me wonder what my ftm uncle would have told me had I had that one chance to speak withhim instead of being locked in my room. I always pictured it more pleasent than this. Im sorry if my existence and my "lifestyle" whatever the heck that means well whatever it does to the general view of transspeople. But however i am what i am born .aturally or influenced unnaturally it is not my choice. If it was i would choose to ne what you consider normal. Honestly. Ive rather have been dead than trans but I've survived with god and with recent support from friends. I know I just cant stop typing. Im done now sorry.

Our position has always been and remains that you can do whatever you want with your life. We defend that right endlessly in political, social, and religious forums. We are on your side.

However, which sex you desire to have sex with has nothing to do with being transsexual. Sexual desire (hetero-, homo-, or bi-) is a separate genetic stream. You can be a woman and desire men. You can be a woman and desire other women. Or you can desire both men and women. Or neither -- be an island unto yourself.

If you tell me you are gay, lesbian, bisexual, or straight, you tell me nothing about whether you were born transsexual.

The need to bring your body into conformance with the physical sex you are is a critical diagnostic for transsexualism. If you think you were born transsexual but do not want (or need) sex reassignment surgery, perhaps you are transgendered or even a pre-op transsexual in the very early stages of transition where confusion and uncertainty are often the norm. Transition is ongoing: it does not begin with a therapist's blessing or end when the final stitch dissolves after surgery.

Think of transition as a process rather than a finish line to be crossed or a box to be checked.

You seem to be very early in the decision process. That you say you are comfortable with your male genitalia (or that you've grown to accept them as a permanent attachment you are unwilling to change) suggests that you are not yet at the point where you can determine if you are transsexual or something else as yet undetermined.

We wish you all happiness in whatever your final decision becomes. If you wish to discuss the issue further, please write us. We are here to help, not argue.

And while you are here, we invite you to read all the other articles at TS-Si besides this single column written back in 2007.

As I've said I'm not taking your opinions or facts if you want to call them. I was in early stages when I was 12. I know plenty about myself. My commetss on sex were only in response to others statements here that I am a homosexual man for having a penis which is simply a disturbing message to see open to the public. If this website had not been at the top of google search I would ignore it. The fact that it is worries me for others safety. I only want to have an alternate view present. I am not confused. And fromwhat I've heard from several respected transpeople it is not uncommon.

Ah there you go again. Who said you were a homosexual man? Not Sharon or I (the only ones who can speak for TS-Si).

There are a lot of comments from readers just like you and they run the entire gamut of opinion. We seldom censor comments unless the person making the comment becomes abusive or it becomes obvious that they are simply trolling to start an argument.

So, who told you you were homosexual anyway?

Who on this site said you are "a homosexual man for having a penis"? Most certainly, it was neither Lisa nor me. Moreover, you will have to look hard in the comments here to find such a statement.

So, can you be specific? Where exactly did you see that statement?

I said it in reference to "TwilightPrincess" almost a year ago. TwilightP said:

Please, consider for a a second what is really being said here. It is a contradiction to say that a person is capable being one gender while inhabiting the body of the other, and then to turn around and deny that same person their gender identity just because they choose not to have a particular surgery. To address the concern about sex, if a man has sex with me, it is a heterosexual act, even if I have a penis. Sex with me does not make a man gay. Granted, I have to find men who are very comfortable in their own sexualities, but that is not always a bad thing. I deserve to be treated as a female, just as much as a pre-or-post op does.

My Reply said:

I have to say that's the LEAST convincing argument I have ever heard. If you have a penis and have sex with another male, you ARE homosexual and so is the male that had sex with you.

Your "Gender Identity" is NOT female if you "choose" to not have SRS;

Sorry Love, BUT you are NOT female, you ARE a chick with a dick, a man in a dress wanting to play being a woman and retain the male privileges.

Now how you think that applies to you, I have no idea, unless you are "TwilightPrincess" posting under a new name.

Hi. I'm curious how you think a fully transitioned woman "with a dick" maintains any male privileges.

You girls are so deep into this tribalism bulls**t it hurts, but like it or not, you can't actually claim ownership over any of these terms anymore than any of the rest of us. Your arguments over vernacular are pedantic, ultimately meaningless, and serve no purpose except to put down those who don't fit into your narrow worldview. You reinforce it every time you call them "fetishists" or "crossdressing men;" much the same turns that the mainstream world directs at "true" transsexuals, as you put it. You do realize you can reject hatred and stereotyping without deflecting it onto a smaller subset of your own group, right?

Stop othering people.

Keep your patriarchal transgender terminology to yourself.

Second: We are not the ones doing the separating -- you are by claiming to be transsexual but keeping a penis and then declaring yourself a woman by fiat.

Third: Do not put words in our mouths. Read the whole site (including the science articles) and not just a single 4 1/2 year old article (which one of your friends sent you to it and told you to provide a comment?). We publish a variety of opinions intended to encourage thought and rational discussion.

I realize the science articles present a challenge to some, but they are well worth it. Tell your friends about them.