Ishtara Rothschild

JeanneAnne wrote: Ishtara Rothschild wrote: Don't you mean micropenis conditions, gynecomastia, and hypogonadism instead of hypospadias? Hypospadias is merely a misplaced urethral opening, although it sometimes goes along with the aforementioned conditions. Hypospadiasis can range from a slightly undershot urethral opening to a complete failure of the scrotal & **bleep** raphe to close. To my mind, mild hypospadiasis is one end of the continuum of developmental intersex conditions with mild clitoral hypertrophy at the other. Gynecomastia isn't even an issue of development but is an endocrine condition, rather. But this urethral misdevelopment has nothing to do with an intersex condition. There are no female gender characteristics, it's just that the urethral tube shows an abnormal development. I also don't know if I would list clitoral hypertrophy or clitoromegaly as an intersex condition. I'd put this down to normal phenotypic variation, just like labial hypertrophy, or mammary hypertrophy (commonly known as giant boobs). Or an oversized nose, for that matter As for gynecomastia, why is an endocrine condition not a developmental condition? The neuroendocrine system is exactly what causes the development of different gender traits. If it's out of whack, there is usually an underlying genetic predisposition. Of course there can be environmental factors in some cases, such as gynecomastia caused by lavender soap or soy products, but those are exceptions. If the excess estrogene is produced by the own body and not artificially introduced, there are genetic factors at work.

Void Singer wrote: I would tend to disagree. identity of any form is largely malleable based on environment. absent social cues and correction the only gendered behaviors that remain are physical structural limits and personal taste, which vary continuously for most things, although a few have higher edge distribution thanks to structural differences (to which scale seems to be more determinant) I don't think that's true when it comes to sexual and gender identities, which are the most prominent gender-typical traits. In case of sexual identity / orientation, it's pretty obvious that attempts to change these traits or pray them away never work out, even if the individual actively tries to change his or her sexual orientation. The same has been found in regard to gender identity. During the 1950s - 70s, physicians often recommended that victims of botched circumcisions, male children suffering from extreme forms of micropenis conditions, and intersexed children should be raised as girls and undergo sexual reassignment at some point. But many of them failed to identify with their assigned gender and suffered from depression. The case of David Reimer was a prominent example. And of course there are transsexuals who are born with a female brain in a male body, or vice versa. Many a parent has found that kids can't be forced to play with toy cars if they'd rather play with dolls. There really is such a thing as a female or a male brain structure, even if that might sound outrageous and offensive to feminists. Savic and Lindstrom have even found that gays and heteroseuxal women share the same brain symmetry, whereas lesbians and hetero men share typically male neurological characteristics (link). Quote: Gay men and straight women share some characteristics in the area of the brain responsible for emotion, mood and anxiety [...] Brain scans of 90 volunteers showed that the brains of heterosexual men and homosexual women were slightly asymmetric with the right hemisphere slightly larger than the left, Ivanka Savic and Pers Lindstrom wrote. The brains of gay men and heterosexual women were not. Then they measured blood flow to the amygdala -- the area key for the "fight-or-flight" response -- and found it was wired in a similar fashion in gay men and heterosexual women as well as lesbians and heterosexual men. Of course there are environmental factors as well, but since even our developmental response to different environments is ultimately hardwired in our DNA (environmental stimuli can literally switch genes on and off, but only genes that are already there), nature always trumps nurture. Nurture, i.e. the environment, can only activate or disable different hardwired options.

Perrie Juran wrote: As I said before, if someone clicks Yes on the permissions window, there is no way for them to EVER remove themselves from it. Doesn't relogging revoke an animation permission? So does "stop animating my avatar" in the viewer menu, afaik.

Don't you mean micropenis conditions, gynecomastia, and hypogonadism instead of hypospadias? Hypospadias is merely a misplaced urethral opening, although it sometimes goes along with the aforementioned conditions. Gender is very much a biological reality imho, but since both biological genders have varying amounts of both estrogene and testosterone -- even normal XX and XY karyotypes -- gender can be a rather fluid state. However, the majority of humans have rather unambiguous gender characteristics (both physical and behavioral; the latter is not to be confused with gender roles, which are indeed a bit of a social construct) and an equally unambiguous gender identity.

Almost all currency is "pixels" nowadays If you buy a copy of MS Office and pay with your credit card, you're also purchasing digital data with digital money.

Sasy Scarborough wrote: I for one can only imagine how hard it must be coming to Second Life and getting completely lost in all that is English. It's not hard at all I love the English language. When it comes to spoken language I prefer German, but writing in German is awkward and long-winded. When reading books, writing blogs, posting in forums, or roleplaying in SL, I'll take English over my mother tongue any day. Besides, aren't all languages native languages? With the exception of Latin and Klingon of course

Persephone Emerald wrote: I realize hermaphrodite is not the most accurate or politically correct term to use, but I used it once in my post to clarify the meaning of intersexed for any neanderthals who may not know how to use a Google search when they come across a term with which they're not familiar. Hermaphrodite is the correct biological term for an organism that has both male and female reproductive systems, both of them fully functional. Many mollusc species are hermaphroditic, for example. The Ancient Greeks used the word for physically intersexed humans, which is probably the origin of the term (not sure about that, I'd have to look it up). It's true that some people nowadays object to the use of the word when referring to humans, but that's mainly because it's inaccurate. There are no human beings with two functional reproductive systems. Physically intersexed people merely have physiological characteristics of both genders. In SL, however, the term is very popular, and quite accurate to boot. After all, SL herms roleplay people with two sets of functional genitalia. I have never met anyone in SL who called themselves intersexed, but I have met hundreds of hermaphrodites. You cannot deny these avatars the right to name themselves that way. It's the same as the word shemale. Many transsexuals object to this word, but some refer to themselves in this way, especially trans women who work in the sex industry (an industry which also uses the word hermaphrodite btw, namely for female actresses who wear male latex or rubber genitalia in order to roleplay functional herms). I use to refer to my avatar as a shemale too, and I'm proud to be one in SL. Our world, our self-appointed labels.

I've only played the original Portal. As soon as a bunch of droids started shooting at me, I froze, got blasted to bits and gave up. It's a bleeding shame. It could have been such a great game and I really enjoyed the first levels. Why the heck did they have to turn it into a shooter and ruin it for us people without reflexes? ETA: This is the reason that I don't play computer games anymore, except for sandbox MMOs. It's also the reason that I don't drive a car Even MMORPGs... they used to be so relaxing back in the day. EQ for example. Sit in the back and chat with the druid while watching the tank do his thing, and stand up every other minute to cast a healing spell. Good times. All MMORPGs that came out later were pure stress. Why does everything have to be so hectic and complicated nowadays?

Btw, I think many cases of bisexuality are simply a higher tolerance limit for masculine traits. I usually find only those men attractive who look somewhat feminine. Add more muscles and/or body hair and I suddenly turn into a hetero.

Kevyn Aucoin and Shane / Courtney look gorgeous as women. Ru Paul is attractive too, but his narrow-set eyes always out him as biologically male.

Funny that you should post a photo of Bill Gates, albeit in a different context. I always thought his face looked somewhat feminine I actually don't find him unattractive.

Annika Hansen a.k.a. Seven of Nine is very attractive, but if she wasn't so well endowed, I think she could also pull off a male look without makeup. She doesn't have the typical heart-shaped, soft, juvenile-cute female face with wide-set eyes that is usually perceived as most feminine. Her eye distance and jaw line could make her pass for a young man.

Pamela Galli wrote: As far as having "a gender identity at all", not sure how anyone's gender identity affects anyone else. Only insofar that people present themselves as one particular gender in public, which completely changes other people's reaction to them. I wonder how friends and neighbours would react if somebody did in public what Andrej does on the catwalk, i.e. wear traditionally male clothes today and a dress tomorrow. I think it might be a bit confusing, especially if both looks are very convincing

...humans might look like Andrej Pejić, a photo model who successfully models both male and female fashion: S/he (technically "he", but I have no idea what s/he identifies as) has modeled for designers such as Gaultier in both men's and women's shows, s/he is one of FHM magazine's 100 Sexiest Women in the World 2011 and also ranked in the top 50 male models list, and one of hisorher goals is to be photographed for Playboy magazine. I'll keep my finger's crossed for her or him :) If it works out, I think the photos should simultaneously be published in Playgirl. What about you, do you find androgynes attractive? Do you think there is any need for them to have a gender identity at all? I'm inclined to think that somebody like Andrej has evolved beyond that. And I really like the idea of being able to wear whatever the heck one wants :)

Dagmar Heideman wrote: Regardless of what some might think, Miriam is not a fetishist. I would never think that. I said that German medical practicioners would judge her to be a fetishist for not wanting to undergo SRS. Personally, I think that everybody who identifies as a trans woman has the right to call themselves a trans women. Anyway, as Carole has hinted, randy males like myself shouldn't talk about the concerns of a group that they don't belong to, so I probably should stop doing that And since I never had the pleasure to make Miriam Rivera's acquaintance, I only know her published statements and can't discuss her private motives.

Carole Franizzi wrote: Maybe the president of SL Movement for the Rights of Shemales is just a randy male trying to get his kicks by having boobs of his own which he can unveil any moment he wants a peek. Not that I'm the president of any kind of civil rights movement, but since I wrote about some TG and TS issues in this thread and happen to be "just" a gender-bending male who enjoys having virtual curves for whatever invalid and disgusting reason, I kind of feel addressed by this quip. You're completely right, I should stop posting about problems that I only know from other people's accounts since I'm "just" a randy male and not a randy TS (whatever the "just" means in this context). Ultimately, this also goes for white black rights activists (who you already mentioned), bi- and heterosexual gay rights activists, Relay for Life organizers who never had cancer, or male feminists. Heck, even for female feminists who never had to suffer through everything they're trying to raise awareness for. I mean, who is qualified to talk about things like female genital mutilation but the victims? Who has the right to openly support gay marriage other than gay people? Others have never walked a mile in their shoes. Of course they don't have to be indifferent, but they shouldn't presume to speak (up) for others.

Have you ever played a game like WoW? If so, you surely must have noticed how infantile, asinine, aggressive and antisocial many players are. Well, these people get to own land here. Almost all places in SL are owned by residents, and many of them don't have a full set of social skills. Perhaps that helps explain a few things.

Dagmar Heideman wrote: No, you were complaining about people who assume one thing about transsexuals (valid) while asserting your own broad assumptions about the majority of transsexuals (not valid). Agreed. I can see that Thailand was a bad example. However, I've also based my comment on people I've talked to in SL, in forums, and on transgender dating sites like Travesta.de. I believe that transsexuals who are content to be non-OP trans women are more common than people think. No legitimate transgender therapist, psychiatrist or physician is going to push a transgendered person who is not a transsexual into SRS. Quite the opposite is true. Part of the whole point of the the medical community following the Standards of Care is to screen out people who should not undergo SRS. No doctor in the United States is going to even consider SRS without at least one letter of support and many require 2, 3 or even 4 letters (1 from a therapist, 1 from an endo, 1 from a psych and 1 from primary care physician) Health insurance in the United States does not cover SRS for most candidates. While some health plans offer it as an option, very few employers adopt the option, and the conditions to qualify under medicare are so onerous that it is extremely rare that SRS will qualify for medicare coverage. I can only speak for the situation in Germany. Around here, sex reassignment therapy including SRS is paid for by the public health insurances if a medical professional decides that it is a medical necessity (due to depression etc.) In order to be approved for hormone replacement therapy, which is the first and sometimes the only goal, people pretty much need to show their willingness and desire to go all the way. In addition, SRS is the only way to get a female first name and legal female status. That is the pressure I was talking about. Unless German trans women completely reject all aspects of their biological gender, they can't easily get HRT and will never be able to live as a woman since they are stuck with a name like Richard or Dieter. Which perfectly fits the topic, because this means that they don't get to choose their own label, their own identity, or even their own name. Either they want a complete sex reassignment or they can't possibly be transsexuals, so the medical opinion. Those who want to be halfway there (like Miriam Rivera, whom you mentioned in another thread) are thought to be fetishists and supposed to seek a different kind of therapy for what is still thought to be a disorder. Not only that, they are also faced with rejection and sometimes outright hatred by a part of the German trans community. If I understand you correctly, the situation in the USA is similar insofar that legal female status also requires SRS? Don't you think that is a certain amount of pressure to opt for surgery even if a trans person has second thoughts?

Are they really going to reduce the 22 million SL accounts to a more reasonable number, which will probably come down to a mere 150k residents? Not that I'd disagree with this decision. I think it's great that they are trying to keep the asset and inventory database as lean as possible. But does this mean that we will have to log our alts in every two months? Do you perhaps have a link to this announcement?

Dagmar Heideman wrote: Dogboat Taurog wrote: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-pacific-14926598 of course having a recent photo of yourself on your passport would be a ridiculous idea lol Let me clarify since you clearly don't get it. The photo for transgendered people is recent. That's the problem. For example, if the photo of a person and the person themself presents as a woman e.g. Miriam Rivera: but the gender says "male" it gets the transgendered person immediately flagged and often leads to a very uncomfortable, invasive, humiliating experience. It is not trivial or funny. I go through it every year several times a year. Australia and most countries wont allow a transgendered person to have the gender with which they identify and present on any government issued ID such as a driver license or passport unless they have had sexual reassignment surgery. That generally cannot happen until they have lived as a their chosen gender, undergone HRT, and attended gender therapy counseling sessions for at least a year, after which they can only get the surgery after receiving a letter of recommendation from their therapist and have saved up 5 figures for the surgery (which is not covered by insurance in many cases). On top of that, some transgendered people cannot undergo SRS for medical related or economic reasons. There are also transgendered people within the spectrum who are not able to fulfill the criterion to get SRS and live their lives as a non-op. So that means most transgendered people have to live for years or indefinitely dealing with being harrassed and humiliated every time they go to the airport, get stopped for a traffic ticket, or go through some other kind of checkpoint. This legislation is an important step towards ameliorating that situation for transgendered people. I agree 100%, but it is interesting that you chose Miriam Rivera as an example Not only am I a huge fan of her, she is also one of the non-OP and doesn't-want-OP trans women that I mentioned in another thread. Miriam has been quoted as saying "My mother always says to me, 'Why would you want to be half-and-half? Why don't you want to be a complete woman?' But I just love myself and I'm really enjoying my life".

Madelaine McMasters wrote: And head shots aren't all that useful at identifying heads either, it seems... http://www.sciencenews.org/view/generic/id/334420/title/Same_face%2C_different_person Headshot victims can be hard to identify, so I'm inclined to agree that headshots aren't much of a help.

True. There is also the fact that many kathoeys in Thailand work as prostitutes, which in part explains their social acceptance. They often earn enough to financially support their parents and extended family, which is why economically poor parents are very supportive when they notice that their little boy prefers to play with dolls and probably guide him in this direction. It might be that some kathoeys would have grown up to be gays with a 100% male gender identity in a Western country. But I very much doubt that they would have had an easier childhood and adolescence. Personally, as a bi and somewhat gender-confused person who all peers and family members mistook for being gay, I sometimes wish I had grown up in a place with a third gender role and sexuality template.

Dagmar Heideman wrote: Let me clarify by pointing out 2 things. First, there is a difference between a MtF transsexual and a MtF transgendered person. The former covers those that by definition fulfill most (some will insist all) of the pathology set forth in the DSMV, which always includes a substantial amount of discomfort with having a female mind/indentity and a male body. The latter covers a much broader group that includes people with gender identity issues such as gender queer, drag queens, fetishists and crossdressers. If you are counting those in the latter broader category then it's not surprising if you find many people who have little to no discomfort about the fact that their body is male or that wouldn't have it any other way (almost all drag queens and crossdressers fall into this category). However if you are talking about the former category, then that simply doesn't comport to the reality of being a non-op transexxual. Second, there is a big difference between coming to terms with the reality of one's situation as a non-op, being at peace with it, and even taking pride in the ability to face life every day as a non-op, and "not wanting it any other way." All of the non-op transsexuals I know of (and I was in that category for several years) would opt for SRS if their related concerns could be addressed be they medical, economic, social or legal, but for most of them, those issues cannot be addressed with enough certainty and so they remain non-ops. They are not self-loathing because of it. I was comfortable with my situation as a non-op. That hardly translates into preferring being born with male genitals over being born with female ones, and if you understand what transsexualism is, that's a very bizzare claim to make about the majority of transexxual women. I don't know if I would list drag queens, fetishists and crossdressers as people with gender identity issues. Some might be at odds with their traditional gender role, but at least for fetishists and cd's, it's usually either about temporarily transforming oneself into one's object of desire or being sexually attracted to traditionally female clothes. Think of latex or rubber fetishists. Some might wish they really were a latex doll, but most simply enjoy feeling the material on their skin. Anyway, there definitely are M2F transsexuals who don't identify as biological males, grew up hating their male body and sought to feminize themselves to a large degree, identify with the female gender role and officially live as women, but still feel very attached to their male genitalia. I mean, that thing can really grow on people You might choose to call them transgender rather than transsexuals, but transgender is a bit of an umbrella term without a clear definition. As far as I'm concerned, these people qualify as transsexuals in all regards, with the one exception that they have either arranged themselves or were never at odds with this one single aspect of their biological gender. Like Dillon, I have met more non-OP and "do-not-want-OP" trans women than M2F transsexuals who desire a 100% transition. PS: Another common misperception is that trans women are heterosexual according to their gender identity, or in other words biologically homosexual. Most that I have talked to were either bisexual or biologically hetero, i.e. attracted to women, and some were mainly attracted to fellow trans women. Sexual identity says nothing about sexual orientation. (That's another problem with the German legal situation btw. M2F transsexuals who are married to women are required to get divorced in order to legally live as women, even if the couple has children).

Dagmar Heideman wrote: Please do not paint non-op MtF transgendered people with one broad brushstroke. I don't. That's exactly what I was complaining about. People who assume, and sometimes even demand, that all transsexuals must have a sex reassignment surgery as their final goal are the ones who are using the broad brush. People can hate their masculine body without hating the one part of it that can be the source of great physical pleasure, and without wanting to part with it or trade it for something of questionable functionality. While it is true that there are lots of MtF non-ops, those that categorically "wouldn't want it any other way" are not the majority. Most have medical or economic concerns/issues that prevent them/influence their decisions regarding undergoing vaginoplasty. How can you be sure of that? All we know for sure is that "shemales" are a lot more common than post-OP M2F transsexuals in countries such as Thailand, where an intermediate or third gender is more or less socially accepted. We can't know how many of them actually want a sex reassignment surgery (which is not a vaginoplasty btw. Vaginoplasty refers to cosmetic surgery such as a labia reduction, afaik). We also can't know how many M2F trans women in the Western World only undergo surgery because Western societies would otherwise not accept them and regard them as sexual deviants, because their doctor / therapist suggests it, because their health insurance pays for it, and because they have unrealistic expecations about the end result. It's a bit difficult to not take offense at that kind of characterization for SRS. It's kind of like saying "...any form of expression as an African American other than by being a house n****r..." It also reinforces the undesirable stereotype that post-op transexxuals are all sick people engaging in self-mutliation used by bigoted reactionary evangelical hatemongers. I understand that you are about as far as can be from that category of people but some thought in choosing your words would have been appreciated. :smileysad: I agree that this came out wrong. I was only talking about transsexuals who are pressured into a sex reassignment surgery and only take this step because they would otherwise be denied a female social identity. (And even a female name in Germany, since names are required by law to be gender-specific and name changes are not easily permitted). Of course trans women who deeply and desperately desire an entirely female body are not trying to mutilate themselves. I'm sorry if my comment seemed to suggest that. But as you said yourself, it's not as simple as waving a magic wand to get a set of fully functional sexual genetilia and reproductive system. It's sadly impossible. The current surgical solution with its great risk of post-surgical complications comes closer to mutilation than to an actual sex reassignment. Still, I can see that people who need to take this step in order to be able to feel comfortable in their own body have no other option and do not seek to harm themselves.

Madelaine McMasters wrote: Ishtara Rothschild wrote: I agree, and I would never presume to do that. I'm not mother nature Only hindsight can tell what was viable and what turned out to be not. Well, I don't believe you did so seriously, but you did hint that a particular individual might be a member of a certain group that will go extinct soon enough! I share the frustration that drives such commentary but eventually bite my tongue because I seem to run into more of them every day. I skipped over the chance to reproduce, so my particular genes aren't going anywhere, but I also can't quite banish the thought that folks who share my disposition are also headed for extinction. ;-) True, that was a bit out of line and probably also wishful thinking. For all I know, conservative and anti-liberal fundamentalists might outbreed liberal-minded people in the near future. After all, things like "be fruitful and multiply" and the reduction of women to their mere reproductive functions were probably the reason that patriarchal religions and the accompanying ultra-conservative, intolerant mindset have so strongly been selected for in the past. Groups that still hold on to these archaic values in the modern day Western World appear to reproduce at a much faster rate than liberal intellectuals, and populations in less developed and consequently less liberal countries reproduce even faster. The countries that I see as the most enlightened and tolerant show negative birth rates by now. I guess this means that people like the delightful db are the future, but I hate to admit that.