Non TS/TV males who post as women on WP, testimonials wanted, enquire within Options

[the fieryangel]

In the project that I'm currently working on with Peter, Greg, and Eric, I'm writing the chapter on Users. In the section discussing the systemic bias, I'm going to try to go into detail as to the gender gap and possible reasons why this exists.

It's obvious why TS/TV individuals post as women, so that's pretty self-explanatory (dare I say "normal"?) However, it would seem that a great many non-TS/TV males contribute to WP as females, either via sock puppets (à la Kristen Erikson) and also as their main personae. I'm looking for people who would be willing to discuss how posting as females changes the experience on WP. I would also be interested in women who post as males and why they do that. (I know of at least one experience of this happening and I'm sure that there are more....)

Just send me a private message here and we'll discuss it.

[that one guy]

Really Ottava, you're going to use NARTH as a resource. That alone is just wrong.

[Somey]

Really Ottava, you're going to use NARTH as a resource. That alone is just wrong.

And on top of that, the article doesn't even say what he apparently wants us to believe it says. And this isn't the first time, either...

At the same time, I would agree that it's a very bad idea for physicians to agree to perform SRS operations if the person requesting them hasn't had a significant amount of psychological, if not actual psychiatric, counseling. Thankfully, I believe that's considered standard procedure in the USA, though there are probably surgeons who would do it without that, just for the money.

[Ottava]

Really Ottava, you're going to use NARTH as a resource. That alone is just wrong.

And on top of that, the article doesn't even say what he apparently wants us to believe it says. And this isn't the first time, either...

At the same time, I would agree that it's a very bad idea for physicians to agree to perform SRS operations if the person requesting them hasn't had a significant amount of psychological, if not actual psychiatric, counseling. Thankfully, I believe that's considered standard procedure in the USA, though there are probably surgeons who would do it without that, just for the money.

Really?

John Hopkins's press release on the matter.

They halted it 100%. Not "until major counseling".

"A second, smaller category of the sex unit’s patients suffers from serious “disorders,” like gender dysphoria—the technical diagnostic term for people who think they’re trapped in the body of the wrong sex—and paraphilias such as transvestitism and pedophilia. These people, according to Paul Costa, Ph.D., an expert in personality assessments, “are more problem-prone as well.” Besides their sexual conflicts, they have a tendency toward high levels of anxiety, hostility and neuroticism." - Johns Hopkins.

That isn't the commentary of a group who believes that these people are "normal" or "psychologically sound".

More:

Controversy over sex-change surgery at Hopkins raged, both in the media and inside the institution. “This was taking place at a very conservative place and in a highly charged atmosphere,” Schmidt recalls. “It’s pretty rough surgery; some people consider it mutilating. And, of course, the scientific side of it is pretty damn weak.”

Finally, in 1979, the unit’s then-director, Meyer, published a study questioning certain benefits of the surgery that helped convince the Hopkins hierarchy to eliminate its sex reassignment program entirely. But that early foray into gender reassignment here has maintained a long media shelf life. Before a recent case conference, Strand passed around a copy of a New Yorker essay containing a sex-change joke punctuated with a reference to Hopkins; it was published last May, nearly two decades after the Hospital last performed such surgery.

To psychiatrist Wise, who’s been with the sex unit since 1974, its strength lies in a set of practices poles away from the New Yorker portrayal. Not being “buffeted about” by all the societal changes of the ’70s, ’80s and ’90s on issues like gender dysphoria is one of the qualities that makes this group stand out, he says. Without looking beyond mainstream America, the unit’s been able to see thousands of men and women through deep sexual conflicts.

They even say that there was no science backing the surgery and their own people wanted it stopped back then.

Instead, they counsel people to accept themselves instead of helping them alter their bodies to match their psychological illness.



P.S. - Somey, the quotes from Paul McHugh in NARTH piece are damning and say 100% reason why the stuff is a psychological disorder and not something that we should indulge in others. You have not proven that the quotes are wrong. Hard to deny this quote from him: "I have witnessed a great deal of damage from sex-reassignment. The children transformed from their male constitution into female roles suffered prolonged distress and misery as they sensed their natural attitudes. ... We have wasted scientific and technical resources and damaged our professional credibility by collaborating with madness rather than trying to study, cure, and ultimately prevent it."

He published the quote in his book discussing the matter.

"As for the adults who came to us claiming to have discovered their 'true' sexual identity and to have heard about sex-change operations, we psychiatrists have been distracted from studying the causes and natures of their mental misdirections by preparing them for surgery and for a life in the other sex. We have wasted scientific and technical resources and damaged our professional credibility by collaborating with madness rather than trying to study, cure, and ultimately prevent it." p. 228 Dr. Paul McHugh, one of the few world experts on Sex Reassignment Surgery and has a background that few can compare.



By the way, Thekohser below -

Males have XY Chromosome while females have XX. That difference provides for more of a genetic difference than the humans and the chimps of the same gender. The point is to illustrate that even if a man "thinks" he is a woman, that Y is doing things that would not happen in an XX.

Here is a source. It is a very common statement. I'm surprised you haven't seen it before.

This post has been edited by Ottava: Tue 8th November 2011, 2:43am