View Full Version : Cindra Feuer's "Is there an i in LGBT?"
The other day, I ran across an article in the PRIDE05: The Official Magazine of San Francisco Pride 2005, entitled: "Is there an I in LGBT?". It was written by Cindra Feuer, and examines some issues involved in whether or not to add an "I" to "LGBT". I recommend the article which contains the thoughts of Betsy Driver and Emi Koyama.
Lately, I have been reading more about how intersex lives are shaped by the gender binary. I think that writers should be careful when using the term "gender binary" because confusion in using the term, which often seems to have shifting meanings when used in various contexts, can mis-represent intersex lives. Cindra Feuer's article contains an example of this confusion. Near the beginning of the article, she writes"
"Naturally, there's an allegiance between lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) and intersex (I) folks: Both groups live outside the boundaries of the gender binary with its stereotypical male and female roles, and both share an experience of stigma and discrimination."
I agree with these sentiments. In our intersex lives, often the inability of doctors to be able to answer the question of "Is it a boy? or "Is it a girl?" is a profound challenge to the gender binary, where children are clearly expected to be born with a visually "normal" body appearance. Intersex births are often seen as a "social emergency" requiring infant genital surgery for reasons that are mainly cosmetic in nature. This gender assignment is often followed by years of shame and secrecy in an effort to re-enforce the physical assignment on a social and psychological level. This is a very important aspect of the gender binary.
Later in the article, she writes:
"Driver and Mbessakwini both identify as "queer", and do many others who are intersex, even without "same-sex" partners. They've been made to feel that they inhabit an extra-ordinary body, and therefore align themselves with other sexual minorities. Other intersex individuals don't feel that way at all. They think of themselves as sexually straight and don't have an experience of being outside the gender-binary paradigm."
I have many problems with this statement. The first is that is reduces the gender binary to a question of whether a person is gay or straight. It implies that straight people live "inside" the gender binary, while gay people live "outside" the gender binary, without much reflection on how issues of sexual orientation are informed by issues of gender identity and other cultural issues. Another problem is the statement that straight intersex people "don't have an experience of being outside the gender-binary paradigm." Excuse me. I underwent infant genital surgery because my body did not fit the standard visual definition of what male and female bodies should look like. I can assure you that such an experience is "outside the gender-binary paradigm" independent of my sexual orientation.
Peter
At least they've gone a long way since several years ago when they printed that intersex people are "both male and female. Also known as hermaphrodites."
Anyway, I want a copy of the article. How can I get one?
Hi Emi,
It's good to see you posting here. A couple of days ago, I noticed that you have some very interesting new material on the Intersex Initiative site. You really clarified some issues that I vaguely felt about the work of Dr. William Reiner. You can probably get a copy of PRIDE05 from the SF Pride office, or if you just want Feuer's article, I can make a copy of it and send it to you if you PM me an address.
Peter
nimo6211
06-08-05, 06:46 PM
I somehow like the conventional idea of gender being either male or female and that there remain the separation from their sexual orientation. Intersex is really a totally separate issue which affects the biological and need to be separate and apart as well and not lumped in with one's sexual orientation.
Our issue as intersex is rather complex and is not exactly of our choosing, whereas sexual orientation is. You choose to be either heterosexual, homosexual, bisexual or whatever other category of sex takes your fancy.
Given the above reasoning, I would oppose the "I" being intergrated into the LGBT. That of course is my opinion, others may differ.
Now that it has been brought up, I am interested in finding out more about what people think about adding the "I". In San Francisco, the Human Rights Commission has recently tabled the idea of adding the "I" to its LGBTAC (introduced by an intersex member of the group) because more intersex community input is needed before taking up the idea again.
I am torn about the idea. It is proving to be controversial, with some people who I highly respect supporting adding the "I", and other people, who I also highly respect opposing adding the "I". After reviewing what I wrote earlier, I am leaning towards opposing adding the "I" at this time. Cindra Feuer is a very bright woman, and if after her extensively interviewing people for her article on the topic of adding the "I" she still got important aspects of the story wrong, then it just goes to show how difficult public education around intersex issues can be. So I agree with Nimo that the issues are complex, and that adding the "I" might only further confuse people if adequate public education is not done. At this time, I believe that our limited resources and energies should be spent on spreading the word of the recent San Francisco Human Rights Commission's Intersex Report that the human rights of intersex people should be respected.
In the end, the LGBTAC will make the decision on whether to recommend adding an "I", but for now I think that the issue should remain tabled until there is more discussion among intersex people about it and strong support is found for the idea.
p.s. The "AC" in LGBTAC stands for "Advisory Committee"
Peter
Peter,
Can you scan the article by Cindra? I'd like to see it (she was supposed to send a copy--then again, I haven't been to the PO box in a few days). I could also post it on the site for others to read.
Betsy
nimo6211 wrote:
<< I somehow like the conventional idea of gender being either male or female and that there remain the separation from their sexual orientation. Intersex is really a totally separate issue which affects the biological and need to be separate and apart as well and not lumped in with one's sexual orientation. >>
I don't particularly like the conventional idea of gender being either male or female, but it doesn't fix the problem if you simply added "intersex" to the mix; in fact, it would only make it worse. See a discussion I recently took part in on someone's LiveJournal:
http://www.livejournal.com/users/deled/2794.html
If Peter could send me the article, I can scan. I'm sure Betsy can do the same too.
My addy: Intersex Initiative, PO Box 40570 Portland OR 97240.
MelissP
06-09-05, 12:17 AM
I somehow like the conventional idea of gender being either male or female and that there remain the separation from their sexual orientation. Intersex is really a totally separate issue which affects the biological and need to be separate and apart as well and not lumped in with one's sexual orientation.
Our issue as intersex is rather complex and is not exactly of our choosing, whereas sexual orientation is. You choose to be either heterosexual, homosexual, bisexual or whatever other category of sex takes your fancy.
Given the above reasoning, I would oppose the "I" being intergrated into the LGBT. That of course is my opinion, others may differ.
Hello Nina,
After you peel away all the leaves from the artichoke, what's left? Does
the "gender" artichoke even have a heart (edible or not)? or is it all just
the dust on a buddhist's mirror? The gender ppl believe it's there and so
very real, but they can't explain it to someone who wasn't genderized.
Are real things real enough that you can point to them irrespective of
words? Or is it like the chapter in "the Martian Chronicles", where the
human and the alien have no perception of each other's lives?
Then again while it's true to say that IS is in a completely different
catagory from "gender", so many times there is more than 1 possible
solution to a physical situation, and the only right answer is individual
choice. But to say that the act of choosing bears any relationship to
gender of the t'ppl seems incorrect. Decisions can be made based on any
set of values/judgments.
What I would like to disagree with you on is the part where you say
that sexual orientation is of our choosing. That is not yet in evidence,
at the very least. I doubt it ever will be. To decide to pursue one's desires
in reality is of course a choice, more or less. Yet that point is the main
tool of homophobes and bigots. I don't think that anyone has ever sat
down and rationally picked what their needs and desires should be. The
ones who think they did seem more to be fooling themselves. The bigots
don't care about the humanity of others, so it would seem like an
acceptable logic to them. But if it were true, then you're able to make
everyone in america turn gay just by passing a law that says they have
to be. Umm, yeah ...
Even the distinction between IS/bio-sex and sexual orientation isn't pure.
Ok. Raise a girl as a boy and never ever tell them. Sure, they might find
out eventually, with a little bit of luck. In the mean time, suppose they
find themselves attracted to males. Are they gay? Should they be told
that they're an aweful fag who is willfully choosing to sin? and treated
like they should easily be able to stop? Or were they a female with an
occasional str8 urge? IF you'd treat the glb as though their desires don't
matter, then who will decide what is right and proper for an IS person
to be? Dr Reiner? (yipes ...)
That's all my ranting for now. Goddessnight ... :-)
I find it difficult to understand why intersex people would be interested in making an alliance with the Gay & Lesbian communities by including adding
“I” to the glbt . It would appear that in doing so would only give general society more reason to think that a person with a intersex condition is gay.
What would be the advantage in doing this ? Does it really give a bigger stronger voice for the IS folks ? Where is the actual connection ?
Which group would actually benefit the most for there own cause ?
I realize that some IS people are what is termed as gay but by comparison
the numbers are rather small from what little information I could glean from various sources. From what I can see the gay lesbian agendas are different in many ways from the needs and wants of IS people.
Just some of my rambling thoughts concerning this.....
Some folks here know my opinion on this question, but I'm witholding sharing it right now until I read the article. Peter indicated he sent me a copy but it wasn't yet at the PO box today.
The reason I am not offering much is I want to see if the author got my point in the interview. Once I read it, I will add more---my take on it may surprise you.
Betsy
Jolinn wrote:
<< I find it difficult to understand why intersex people would be interested in making an alliance with the Gay & Lesbian communities by including adding "I" to the glbt. >>
I have never advocated for the addition of the "I" to "LGBT" in any way, but the LGBT communities are adding the "I" whether or not we like it. I believe that the pragmatic response to this trend is to request that they make the "inclusion" genuine by sharing their resources with us in a way that is meaningful to us (or else they must remove the "I") instead of simply asking them to remove the "I."
<< What would be the advantage in doing this? >>
Adding the "I" itself has no advantage. But if adding the "I" would allow an LGBT (and now LGBTI) organization to do something that is helpful to us, I wouldn't object to their "inclusion." And if they are not helpful, then that's the time to ask them to stop the false advertisement.
<< Where is the actual connection? >>
"The first report of corrective surgery [for ambiguous or unusual genitalia] published in the United States appeared in the American Journal of the Medical Sciences in 1852, but surgery did not immediately replace more traditional social prescriptions designed to fit hermaphrodites into a dimorphic model of human sex. Only after homosexuality became a matter of discussion in American medical journals did the frequency of normalizing surgeries increase." -- Christina Matta, from "Hermaphrodites, homosexuality and surgery in the United States, 1850-1904" published in Perspectives in Biology and Medicine, winter 2005;48(1):74-83.
Although my total experience with this alphabet grouping does not extend back many years to know when it was first formulated, I do recognize that I am the "T" in that grouping. I am not gay, and therefore sometimes I feel uncomfortable when my being T presumes that I have a difference in my sexual preference. However, with that being said, I feel deeply indebted to the gay community, because of much of their work, my life has been made much easier. And still, being T has little or nothing to do with being LGB.
I'm in the fortunate position of being able to influence changes to my office's HR policies on these issues. There's only 7 of us in the office, mind.
So far, the only change that I've made is to make sure that anti-harassment policies deal with instances of "perceived" difference, as well as "actual": you don't have to fit a category to have someone assume that you do.
This might be a stupid question, but is it useful to include intersex as a specific category? I'm going to propose this, as well as a couple of other changes. At the moment, the categories covered are very broad (they're also non-exhaustive) but include the phrase "sexual preference". To my mind this brings up "gentlemen prefer blondes" rather than what it's supposed to. I know I had no choice in mine, and it's a long time since I've even tried to exercise a preference...
Meadow - thinking about the "perceived" difference, most people are going to assume that anyone T is going to be gay either before or after transition, or bi...
Lady_Ultima
06-10-05, 10:18 PM
I personally think it would be a good idea to add 'I' to LGBT- the queer community has a large base of money, influence, and supporters, and is generally very accepting of all differences. They would be able to help; also, thought the issues and needs of queers are different from the issues and needs of intersex, the problems have their source in the societal insistence on the gender paradigm.
Going on in that subject, Cindra in her article says that sexual orientation is different that sex/gender- that sexual orientation is separate from the gender paradigm. Now, technically, I agree- one's biological or pyschological gender has nothing to do with sexual orientation. However, in the sex paradigm of general society, heterosexuality IS an assumed part of the gender paradigm- without any evidence to the contrary, boys are assumed to like girls and girls are assumed to like boys, and it's a HUGE deal for most people if a boy likes boys or a girl other girls.
Also, I think Nimo saying sexual orientation is chosen is rather silly; the very idea of sexual orientation- that one is attracted to the opposite gender, the same gender, or both- assumes that it is not a choice, since no one can choose who they are attracted to- sexual attraction is an irrational thing. Also, as MelissP mentioned, all accepted evidence points to the conclusion that sexual orientation is not chosen or changeable. Now, sexual activity- who one actually sleeps with- certainly is chosen, and that seems to be what Nimo means, rather than actual sexual orientation.
Lady_Ultima
06-11-05, 12:13 AM
Ooops.... I said Cindra said gender was not related to sexual orientation... actually, that was Peter, wasnt't it? Sorry. What I said to that comment still stands, though.
Now that my name has come up again, I will repeat what I said before:
"It implies that straight people live "inside" the gender binary, while gay people live "outside" the gender binary, without much reflection on how issues of sexual orientation are informed by issues of gender identity and other cultural issues. Another problem is the statement that straight intersex people "don't have an experience of being outside the gender-binary paradigm." Excuse me. I underwent infant genital surgery because my body did not fit the standard visual definition of what male and female bodies should look like. I can assure you that such an experience is "outside the gender-binary paradigm" independent of my sexual orientation."
I never said that gender is unrelated to sexual-orientation. I believe that to be a lesbian, that a person is required to be a woman, even if being a "woman” is open to a broad array of interpretations. A major reason that hermaphrodites were studied extensively in the nineteen century is that we were seen as both a problem for the definition of gender, and whether we as individuals were really homosexual or heterosexual was a matter that came before the law. What I was trying to say, that might have gotten lost in translation, is that various definitions of the gender-binary can be confused. Sometimes, the term "gender-binary" refers to the binary nature of heterosexuality. LGB people can be seen as living "outside" of heterosexuality, and by extension "outside" the gender-binary. For intersex people, the gender-binary is can be a problem of being born "outside" of "normal" expectations of having a clearly male or female body. So, when using terms like "inside" the gender-binary and "outside" the gender-binary, confusion can arise if one does not keep track of the various ways in which people can be "inside" or "outside" of the gender-binary. Personally, I don't find terms like "inside" and "outside" the gender-binary too valuable.
Peter
prince....ss?
06-11-05, 12:16 PM
Hello all well if we are taking votes here I vote to keep my “I” out of that alphabet. I may get an argument from this but being LGBT is not a birth defect. My “I” is a birth defect and my surgery was not at my request. It is nice that apparently most of you that are IS are able to identify sexually and gender-ly as man or woman. From this your sexual preference has nothing to do with being IS. I myself may legally be labeled a woman but in fact I am not a man or woman by sex or gender. So then how do I fit into the LGBT framework? I don’t!!! I also don’t like the idea of non-IS people setting standards for us to fit with in their guidelines.
My final thought is if you identify as LGBT and happen to be IS that is fine, do with them whatever you feel is necessary. But MY IS condition has absolutely nothing with the LGBT community and they have nothing to offer me. And if the “I” is included, then they will be excluding me and forcing me out of my “I” community.
Perhaps we need a non-gendered community. Oops I guess there is no such thing as a community of one. But I guess nobody is worried us non-sexed people… it not like we can reproduce more of our kind.
I think one of the things that is difficult for many to remember is those that are not generally heard from. It's easy for each of us to think that all the rest are just like yourself, when in fact, nothing could be farther from the truth. That is something which is true for each of us.
One of the most difficult things I face as I am out there being pretty out and doing interviews is how to take myself out of the equation. That is, how to look at the big picture and not just my needs and wants, which often are not the needs and wants of others with intersex.
A large group of people I often think about and consider when giving a talk, an interview, or simply explaining intersex to the person sitting next to me on the bus is those we never hear from, at least publicly. Much of those exchanges take place out of the glare of a message forums and other public places---they take place quietly after talks, and simply via email or phone.
The overwhelming majority of people I meet identify as male or female--not intersex. A good number of them can't stand the word even after it is explained that it isn't even our word--it's one medicine and scholars put upon us and how they label us. Most folks with some type of intersex are simply out there living their lives and not talking about it. Whether their silence is shame, secrecy, or reflective on how much of a role their lot in life means, it's a rather loud silence. One thing however that I hear time and time and time again--from those who are LGBT and I along with those who are not (most are not) is that most are not particularly interested in seeing an I in the alphabet soup because it doesn't address the important issues as they see them; they are upset over the surgeries, they are upset over the way they are treated because of their queer bodies. To them, adding an I is just another form of stigmatization--by a group of people who should know better.
It's for that reason, I am very cautious on it. I think it's mostly done because groups see it as trendy--when being intersex isn't trendy at all, they see it as PC, when the biggest violation of political correctness takes place in our childhood, and they see it as an identity or behavior---something that intersex is neither for the vast majority of people born with some type of intersex.
In my caution, I usually advise to only add that I if it is going to be exceptionally meaningful--that is, they intend to actually work at ending early non-consensual surgeries, they intend to actually work at eliminating shame and secrecy instead of furthering it (you'd be surprised how much some LGBT folks actually add to the shame and secrecy without even recognizing it), and they intent to actually include intersex programming and voices. Too often, orgs add an I and then don't want to hear from those with intersex! That is a very bad thing.
The reporter for the article included a funny story I had told her while we were talking about the travails of dating. At first I was quite humbled by the inclusion of that story as the lead paragraph but after I read the article a couple times, I understand why it was included.
It's a mostly good article, even if she did give me a sex reassignment surgery (oh well---it's nothing I'm losing my mind over).
Once we get the article posted, I have some other things to write about it, particularly concerning Peter's statements on it as I feel what he posted was taken horribly out of context as the issue had also been discussed elsewhere in the article much differently.
Betsy
--sometimes it's not just the words, but the context
I like what Prince...ss had to say on this. I've kind of come to the point where, when I'm asked to tick a box on a form to define myself I'd rather see one entitled "none of the above" or "reopen nominations" - none of them really get my vote.
I'd also agree that the LGBT stuff is an unwieldy set of letters that suggests a sense of community and commonality of purpose that is pretty absent in reality. I don't think that's surprising. We're all sexual minorities in some way. Ethnic and religious minorities also get lumped together as if they're all the same. Remember the Sikh guy who got killed somewhere in Texas (I think it was there) in "retribution" for 911?
I suppose I feel I fit into one of the LGBT categories, but it's not really a good fit for me anymore. Out of a relationship and with no particular interest in another, asexual is pretty much how I feel right now. That'd be an "A" to add, perhaps? Another vowel might make it more pronouncable, anyway :)
The big question is what it does. In a business context, LGBT and I are just some of the groups that can be specifically highlighted to prevent harassment and other discrimination. Does it achieve anything? I don't know. Add a sense of comfort to people that do fit a category, I hope, and let others know that harassment is not considered reasonable behaviour.
M
Hi Morgan,
I appreciate that you are taking steps to change the anti-discrimination policies in the office where you work. There may only be seven people in your office, but what you are doing is very important. Although I have very mixed feelings about the "LGBTI" issue, I definitely believe that "I" should be added to anti-discrimination laws independently of "LGBT". I like that you mention the importance of "perceived" intersex status, which is a way of preserving some privacy for intersex people in possible future lawsuits. Good luck with your great work.
Peter
Lady_Ultima
06-11-05, 09:18 PM
Now that my name has come up again, I will repeat what I said before:
"It implies that straight people live "inside" the gender binary, while gay people live "outside" the gender binary, without much reflection on how issues of sexual orientation are informed by issues of gender identity and other cultural issues. Another problem is the statement that straight intersex people "don't have an experience of being outside the gender-binary paradigm." Excuse me. I underwent infant genital surgery because my body did not fit the standard visual definition of what male and female bodies should look like. I can assure you that such an experience is "outside the gender-binary paradigm" independent of my sexual orientation."
I never said that gender is unrelated to sexual-orientation. I believe that to be a lesbian, that a person is required to be a woman, even if being a "woman” is open to a broad array of interpretations. A major reason that hermaphrodites were studied extensively in the nineteen century is that we were seen as both a problem for the definition of gender, and whether we as individuals were really homosexual or heterosexual was a matter that came before the law. What I was trying to say, that might have gotten lost in translation, is that various definitions of the gender-binary can be confused. Sometimes, the term "gender-binary" refers to the binary nature of heterosexuality. LGB people can be seen as living "outside" of heterosexuality, and by extension "outside" the gender-binary. For intersex people, the gender-binary is can be a problem of being born "outside" of "normal" expectations of having a clearly male or female body. So, when using terms like "inside" the gender-binary and "outside" the gender-binary, confusion can arise if one does not keep track of the various ways in which people can be "inside" or "outside" of the gender-binary. Personally, I don't find terms like "inside" and "outside" the gender-binary too valuable.
Peter
OH... I misunderstood. Yes, intersex people, whether they are straight or queer, certainly have the experience of being 'outside' the gender binary of biology. I see your point about the limited uses of the inside/outside binary, but there are still obvious uses for it, imho.
And when I said that gender had nothing to do with orientation, I didn't explain myself very well. What I meant is that you can (obviously) be attracted to men, women, or both, no matter what gender you are.
Hi Lady Ultima,
I agree that gender is sometimes a difficult topic to talk about. The gender-binary is much bigger than femininity and masculinity. I am not very good at expressing these things, so I will quote from Judith Butler's new book, "Undoing Gender" about the problems that I perceive:
"To claim that gender is a norm is not quite the same as saying that there are normative views of femininity and masculinity, even though there clearly are such normative views. Gender is not exactly what one "is" nor is it precisely what one "has". Gender is the apparatus by which the production and normalization of masculine and feminine take place along with the interstitial forms of hormonal, chromosomal, psychic, and performative that gender assumes. To assume that gender always and exclusively means the matrix of the "masculine" and "feminine" is precisely to miss the critical point that the production of that coherent binary is contingent, that it comes at a cost, and that those permutations of gender which do not fit the binary are as much a part of gender as its most normative instance. To conflate the definition of gender with its normative expression is inadvertently to reconsolidate the power of the norm to constrain the definition of gender."
Peter
MelissP
06-11-05, 11:06 PM
I agree that gender is sometimes a difficult topic to talk about. The gender-binary is much bigger than femininity and masculinity.
Hi Peter,
But what /is/ gender? I'm not asking rhetorically. I asked Nina too.
Is it something real enough the you could point it out to someone
who lacks the experience of a gender conflict? Does it have a core
that could be explained to an alien.? Or is it just a artificial amalgam
of concepts?
Hi Mellisa,
An enlightened being might answer that gender is "dust on the Buddha mirror" as I believe you mentioned before, but I am not an enlightened being, so I cannot answer your question :-) More seriously, I think that it is very hard to come up with definitions of things like "life", "mind", "gender", and "intersex". I am afraid that we could very well get caught up in a series of debates about "gender" and "intersex" that would not do much to overcome the shame and secrecy that people born with intersex conditions live with...... I am sending you my "practical advice" as a PM.
Peter
melonaide
06-12-05, 06:40 AM
I just happened to read this and I'm wondering what people here would say to the question of my sexual prefference if I dated an IS man who was, for good measure, notably ambiguous. Would that make me somewhat lesbian?
To me, it all depends on how you look at gender. I personally look at the fundamentals....not gender in relation to society because thats a totally different complicated issue....but what is, imo, the bottom line deffinition of gender and that is the physical sexual way of catagorizing anything that lives.....and for me to look at it in somewhat of an abstract way to elaborate on my speculation would be to compare it to polarity. The earth itself hangs in its place by the opposition of polarity on an infinite number of levels....too many to describe when we can't explain the origin of the universe to begin with.....but one thing is deffinate.....that there are many forms of opposites and we further our knowledge by comparing one thing to another in a world full of different things. It creates a reality relative to only us.....the observers.....so it would be rather difficult for any human to step back and give an absolute on anything that we only have knowledge of in relation to something else.
So that brings me to the question on wether or not there is an absolute neutral anywhere in this universe....on any level.....making it not only not opposite to anything but not even being this or that enough to even be compared to anything else that is this or that.
That's taking it a little far but I wanted to put forth an idea solely to ponder because I have never met anyone as far as I know that didn't consider themselves either male or female no matter how much like the other sex they were.....but then again.....it is a big world and I have only seen a small portion unless someone else could bring it to my attention that they knew someone who could not ever significantly identify with one sex or the other....at all.....ever.....Not in decision making processes or a change of the way they feel or are from one to another but ultimately and permenantly being in the absolute center of genders.
prince....ss?
06-12-05, 10:43 AM
You have some interesting thoughts going on and are asking questions that possibly do not have answers. I have dug my head deep into the gender question and have only found answers that pertain to my life only. My answer is that I feel that I do not possess a gender I am precisely in the middle of the two options both physically and mentally. The good news is that I like the middle.
Your analogy about the earth’s magnetic poles was a nice try but off base, only because the earth’s magnetic flow has no neutral point. But I think I understand your query. I think what you are trying to determine is as if you have a glass filled precisely to the half way point. Is it filled half way with water or air. It is filled equally with both. That is where I am at. Am I half full or half empty? But others will have that glass completely full or completely empty. Some will have there own levels that will help them decide one gender over another. But only that individual will be able to make that determination for them selves.
Your quote; I just happened to read this and I'm wondering what people here would say to the question of my sexual preference if I dated an IS man who was, for good measure, notably ambiguous. Would that make me somewhat lesbian?”
First off does this really mater what it would make you? I would hope not.
I tried to give you a point my point of view on this topic but failed miserably. Then I realized the question is, pardon my expression “bull shit” for this reason: why do we need to apply labels to everything. If you loved this person why don’t you take the label “person in love” that would be much nicer. I’m glad we don’t need to apply all these labels to our names like doctors and layers do.
Prince….ss? DRC.KUG.WPTA.NRS.NVP.SRA.PB&J
I hope you get my point
MelissP
06-12-05, 11:41 AM
I just happened to read this and I'm wondering what people here would say to the question of my sexual prefference if I dated an IS man who was, for good measure, notably ambiguous. Would that make me somewhat lesbian?
Depends, you've already described the things you didn't enjoy about the
"normal" guys you've dated; maybe ... :-) what would be your cut-off point?
what is the boundary for whether you'd consider someone a {man} in the
first place?
That's taking it a little far but I wanted to put forth an idea solely to ponder because I have never met anyone as far as I know that didn't consider themselves either male or female no matter how much like the other sex they were.....but then again.....it is a big world and I have only seen a small portion unless someone else could bring it to my attention that they knew someone who could not ever significantly identify with one sex or the other....at all.....ever.....Not in decision making processes or a change of the way they feel or are from one to another but ultimately and permenantly being in the absolute center of genders.
I suppose it's entirely possible :-) Whilst I was growing up, I was surrounded
by males whom I couldn't identify with. And I was never allowed to socially
develop along those lines because I did not embody the qualities they held
true.
But along the way, I found a small bit of wisdom; that I have mutable soul
and while it may take the shape/form of my body which contains it, that
the taste/flavour of everything I am is a separate quality.
The container is taken on a different form. But it's too late for me to
truely identify as any sex in the essence of my self. While in the realm of
the physical world around me; of course I am what I've become, maybe
it was my destiny (at most). But all of that is survival and practicality
and mundane points of livings. It's at a different level.
But I don't think I'd be your type :-) Have a mellow sunday. May I ask a
question, if it isn't too personal? Your screen name is melonaide :-) does
that mean you're also some variety of "Mel"? :-)
While its not my intention to interrupt the current conversation, I suppose I have been reminded by a close colleague to always go back to the fundamentals in making decisions. The original question of this thread is whether or not I is or should be a part of LGBT. Since I am not IS and have no say in this, I thought I would propose a more objective viewpoint which perhaps would allow others to make a decision. This would be a comparison of "I" vs "LGBT".
First, how they are similar:
Both desire self determination, which should be a basic human right.
Both are conditions that were not requested at birth.
Both involve matters of sex, and how they live outside the lines of the typical man, woman, heterosexual relationship.
Both can be subjected to discrimination at various levels.
Both need a voice of reason to explain, while different, we are OK.
Now, how they differ:
LGBT - mental
I - physical
I hope this brings some clarity to the discussion. But, just to muddy the issue a bit, one can also compare and contrast LGB vs T, which differ in many ways and would be a whole other discussion.
Again, I don't mean to stop the current conversation, only bring the original question back on track.
Respectfully, Meadow
Sunshine1
06-12-05, 04:44 PM
I just have an adrenal gland that has a metabolic deficiency.
I understand the word intersex as a descriptive term for an external genital body part looks Intersex as w/ some or others that have maybe different chromosomes or genotype that doesn't match a phenotype but it's not an identity or way of thinking from at least me or those that I've talked with.
Maybe the word intergendered word help to be put into play for those with intersex condiitons and even for those that don't but have in common and which deserve respect a feeling, need of not fitting into any gender? I did some searches on intergendered and androgenous people in general and maybe intergendered is helpful to this thread topic? ohhh wait what about pangendered? lol gender is fun for me.
A lot of people with intersex conditions do fit into the "norm" of gender and respectfully they would be alienated even more from finding help or medical personal thinking their condition was one thing and not another. Medicine in general with the exception of Endocrinologists knows so little about the individual conditons as it is from my personal experience with this. Wow, you really have this! Nobody can tell your like me! Yes, I can have a period. Yes, We can and do have our partners children. No doctor, That's correct I don't have AIS ...CAH is different yes I do know what AIS and someone that has it who by the way is more beatiful and much more sucessful than either of us. Good job Doctors, correct the anemia has nothing to do with the CAH meanwhile you have cancer from something else that isn't going to be found soon.
Aimee Morgan
melonaide
06-12-05, 05:32 PM
You have some interesting thoughts going on and are asking questions that possibly do not have answers. I have dug my head deep into the gender question and have only found answers that pertain to my life only. My answer is that I feel that I do not possess a gender I am precisely in the middle of the two options both physically and mentally. The good news is that I like the middle.
Your analogy about the earth’s magnetic poles was a nice try but off base, only because the earth’s magnetic flow has no neutral point. But I think I understand your query. I think what you are trying to determine is as if you have a glass filled precisely to the half way point. Is it filled half way with water or air. It is filled equally with both. That is where I am at. Am I half full or half empty? But others will have that glass completely full or completely empty. Some will have there own levels that will help them decide one gender over another. But only that individual will be able to make that determination for them selves.
Your quote; I just happened to read this and I'm wondering what people here would say to the question of my sexual preference if I dated an IS man who was, for good measure, notably ambiguous. Would that make me somewhat lesbian?”
First off does this really mater what it would make you? I would hope not.
I tried to give you a point my point of view on this topic but failed miserably. Then I realized the question is, pardon my expression “bull shit” for this reason: why do we need to apply labels to everything. If you loved this person why don’t you take the label “person in love” that would be much nicer. I’m glad we don’t need to apply all these labels to our names like doctors and layers do.
Prince….ss? DRC.KUG.WPTA.NRS.NVP.SRA.PB&J
I hope you get my point
The thing about the polarity or about any opposites is that I think neutrality is hard to find in many cases as you pointed out with the earths magnetism. That was my point.
You say you are centered between genders and I take your word for it...it's just that I have never met anyone that was and it's difficult for me to imagine because of that fine line there and never treading on one side just a little bit more than the other and the reason I am speculating on this is because most people do identify with one gender or the other even if somewhere along the line they have changed. My point is that if I dated an intersexual man that I would not be a lesbian but some could easily argue otherwise...and you're right....there's no point in putting labels on everything. I brought this question to the forum because of personal experiences......being....I have never had sex with another female and honestly can't see myself doing so......just my personal feelings. To some, that may make me narrowminded concerning gender and thus give the impression that I may be narrowminded about alot of other things concerning gender....like dating an ambiguous man which I don't think I would have any problems with whatsoever if I cared about and was attracted to that person....I just don't think that would happen with a female.
Now let me get dead on my point here.
Do you think if you knew a notably androgenous man who wanted to date a female who seemed to some to be pretty narrowminded concerning gender because she never accepted any chance to have sex with another female despite having female friends and thinking females are attractive but still being pretty rigid in her desire to pursue men and only men.....that it would be methodical to try to expose her primarily to, let's say, a broader veiw of gender and perhaps lesbianism would fall into this catagory....to condition her to not being oh.....faint hearted about having a relationship with an androgenous man before his androgyny is ever brought to her attention in full detail.
Sounds abit complicated doesn't it?
It is....and although you may never catch yourself trying to project any methods such as this, I know for a fact that some would.
I call it damage control.
melonaide
06-12-05, 05:52 PM
Depends, you've already described the things you didn't enjoy about the
"normal" guys you've dated; maybe ... :-) what would be your cut-off point?
what is the boundary for whether you'd consider someone a {man} in the
first place?
I suppose it's entirely possible :-) Whilst I was growing up, I was surrounded
by males whom I couldn't identify with. And I was never allowed to socially
develop along those lines because I did not embody the qualities they held
true.
But along the way, I found a small bit of wisdom; that I have mutable soul
and while it may take the shape/form of my body which contains it, that
the taste/flavour of everything I am is a separate quality.
The container is taken on a different form. But it's too late for me to
truely identify as any sex in the essence of my self. While in the realm of
the physical world around me; of course I am what I've become, maybe
it was my destiny (at most). But all of that is survival and practicality
and mundane points of livings. It's at a different level.
But I don't think I'd be your type :-) Have a mellow sunday. May I ask a
question, if it isn't too personal? Your screen name is melonaide :-) does
that mean you're also some variety of "Mel"? :-)
Yes....Melonaide was a nickname that one of my past boyfriends gave me. My name is Melanie. Melonaide doesn't have any real meaning...it's just something he liked to say and it caught on to a few other people.
About a cut off point....That would be where a person physically considers themselves female. I'm not talking about pretending to be female sometimes as the case would be with crossdressers which I must admitt I find interesting.....but someone who clearly identifies with being female and you here it straight from them. I guess I have this thing where I want to feel protected and I want a male type figure to excuse all of my opposite qualities that he may not understand. Does that make sense? I don't think I could ever be in love with someone who was as much like myself as a female would be. I know I could get along with them and connect on many levels and even share comfort but it's not what I'm looking for. I fall for men....Puking, migrain, anxiety, shortness of breath....physically sick with infatuation when I fall for a man....but by experience, most men are way too dominant for me to get along with and feel comfortable being at their submission. So I guess that makes me really choosey or something because I like men but most are just too much. It's intimidating at best.
prince....ss?
06-12-05, 06:58 PM
Do you think if you knew a notably androgenous man who wanted to date a female who seemed to some to be pretty narrowminded concerning gender because she never accepted any chance to have sex with another female despite having female friends and thinking females are attractive but still being pretty rigid in her desire to pursue men and only men.....that it would be methodical to try to expose her primarily to, let's say, a broader veiw of gender and perhaps lesbianism would fall into this catagory....to condition her to not being oh.....faint hearted about having a relationship with an androgenous man before his androgyny is ever brought to her attention in full detail.
I really tried to understand this. I have reread and attempted to restructure this one sentence of 114 words, 2 commas, 3 ellipses, and one period. And I still do not have a clue as to what you are saying. But I am happy you did get dead on point if I were only able to find it.
Respectfully, Prince….ss?
Sorry to all others for the topic hop!!!
MelissP
06-12-05, 06:59 PM
Yes....Melonaide was a nickname that one of my past boyfriends gave me. My name is Melanie. Melonaide doesn't have any real meaning...it's just something he liked to say and it caught on to a few other people.
Yes :-)
Ok :-) I thought melonaide sounded like a cool and refreshing summer
beverage :-) As nicknames go, not bad at all. I'll have to remember it
for someday :-)
I guess I have this thing where I want to feel protected and I want a male type figure to excuse all of my opposite qualities that he may not understand. Does that make sense? I don't think I could ever be in love with someone who was as much like myself as a female would be.
That makes sense by it's own logic. All that matters. Not to surround
yourself with yourself (move on back to squares .. :-)
I know I could get along with them and connect on many levels and even share comfort but it's not what I'm looking for. I fall for men....Puking, migrain, anxiety, shortness of breath....physically sick with infatuation when I fall for a man....
Also understandable, to me anyways. But I was never str8. Or maybe I
was and didn't know it, time will tell. Excessive estrogen has caused me
a migraine or two. Animal passion seldom seems to happen with friends.
but by experience, most men are way too dominant for me to get along with and feel comfortable being at their submission. So I guess that makes me really choosey or something because I like men but most are just too much. It's intimidating at best.
I used to know a guy named Ryan who would have been perfect for you.
He was really good looking, bi, mellow and had a charming sense of humor.
Wish I'd kept in touch :-) But there must be more guys out there like him.
Umm, I am getting the impression that this is straying from the original
topic of the thread, though :-)
Sending an instant comment to you, initialed with loving care ... :-)
MelissP
06-12-05, 07:21 PM
Do you think if you knew a notably androgenous man who wanted to date a female who seemed to some to be pretty narrowminded concerning gender because she never accepted any chance to have sex with another female despite having female friends and thinking females are attractive but still being pretty rigid in her desire to pursue men and only men.....that it would be methodical to try to expose her primarily to, let's say, a broader veiw of gender and perhaps lesbianism would fall into this catagory....to condition her to not being oh.....faint hearted about having a relationship with an androgenous man before his androgyny is ever brought to her attention in full detail.
Might work, if her reluctance really was just narrow-mindedness and not
simply an accurate reflection of her str8 nature. Only exploring would tell
which. Either way, adventure is good for the soul.
If it's narrowmindedness, then it wouldn't be "conditioning" it would be
seeing through preconceptions. If it's true desire, then conditioning won't
work anyways.
(verbally complex, but not incomprehensible :-)
Hi Melonaide,
I think that your concerns are very reasonable. I might have said something in the past, but you said that any suggestion of your possibly being gay annoyed you. I think that what is most important is to follow your feelings, and be open to new experiences without too much worry about how other people may label you. Let's be honest, the vast majority of times when people "label" other people, it is to put them down and feel their own sense of superiority. I would not worry too much about labels like "gay" and "straight", and go with what feels comfortable to you. Your answers to life's big questions might be different ten years from now. Many people change over their lifetime and often find happiness. I too am a master of relationships that don't work out. Most of my relationships have been with bi-sexual women, or women traveling in a gay direction. I have heard over and over again that these women feel that traditionally minded men, are "too much" for them, or other sentiments close to yours. (Many straight women feel the same way, so it is not a topic with limited appeal :-) It's something on a deeper level. When I was in my early thirties, I attended a local gay support group on a weekly basis for about a year. What I really needed was an intersex support group, but they did not exist at the time. (And are still rare.) But I am lucky, and for me, life really did begin at fifty, when I found intersex educational resources on the Internet. Good luck.
Peter
melonaide
06-12-05, 10:56 PM
Might work, if her reluctance really was just narrow-mindedness and not
simply an accurate reflection of her str8 nature. Only exploring would tell
which. Either way, adventure is good for the soul.
If it's narrowmindedness, then it wouldn't be "conditioning" it would be
seeing through preconceptions. If it's true desire, then conditioning won't
work anyways.
(verbally complex, but not incomprehensible :-)
I understand what you are saying but if a person is adult and is pretty set in their ways then bombarding them with things that are not of their nature may very likely infuriate them. If you single out a person and try to force things upon them because they need to have their mind open abit...then exactly....it's not going to work. Sure....things can happen to open a persons mind to all types of things but, imo, you should never try to force someones mind open if they are not bothering anyone. It's things like this that caused me to feel the need to reflect on the issue of being acquainted with someone IS but being straight and that not really seeming to go hand in hand......to some.
A side note.....not trying too deeply to question you here as we should be nothing more than internet acquaintences but I find it amusingly coincidental that you mention someone named Ryan.
melonaide
06-12-05, 11:12 PM
Hi Melonaide,
I think that your concerns are very reasonable. I might have said something in the past, but you said that any suggestion of your possibly being gay annoyed you. I think that what is most important is to follow your feelings, and be open to new experiences without too much worry about how other people may label you. Let's be honest, the vast majority of times when people "label" other people, it is to put them down and feel their own sense of superiority. I would not worry too much about labels like "gay" and "straight", and go with what feels comfortable to you. Your answers to life's big questions might be different ten years from now. Many people change over their lifetime and often find happiness. I too am a master of relationships that don't work out. Most of my relationships have been with bi-sexual women, or women traveling in a gay direction. I have heard over and over again that these women feel that traditionally minded men, are "too much" for them, or other sentiments close to yours. (Many straight women feel the same way, so it is not a topic with limited appeal :-) It's something on a deeper level. When I was in my early thirties, I attended a local gay support group on a weekly basis for about a year. What I really needed was an intersex support group, but they did not exist at the time. (And are still rare.) But I am lucky, and for me, life really did begin at fifty, when I found intersex educational resources on the Internet. Good luck.
Peter
Well Thank You.....and for the most part I do try to ignore what others say but must admitt when rumors start flying I do tend to get concerned about labels, but aside from people just talking and trying to project opinions onto others....I have felt as though that much time and energy was wasted on faulty methodical things and I can't help it but it makes me very angry. I tend to preffer straightforwardness and leave implications for those who want to manipulate. I am not homophobic but I am deathly afraid of being manipulated and I don't want people trying to condition my thoughts....even if they think they are doing good and may feel there is nothing wrong with it at all. It does something to me I can't quite explain. Anyone who sees people as beings so easily steered might as well have just set me on fire.
If I thought to myself....I think I'm gay.....I certainly don't think it would have the same reaction but honestly....I have had people try to pry my mind open because of their failure to understand my opinions on things. It's maddening I tell ya! :happy45:
MelissP
06-12-05, 11:34 PM
I understand what you are saying but if a person is adult and is pretty set in their ways then bombarding them with things that are not of their nature may very likely infuriate them. If you single out a person and try to force things upon them because they need to have their mind open abit...then exactly....it's not going to work. Sure....things can happen to open a persons mind to all types of things but, imo, you should never try to force someones mind open if they are not bothering anyone. It's things like this that caused me to feel the need to reflect on the issue of being acquainted with someone IS but being straight and that not really seeming to go hand in hand......to some.
Ok :-) It just appeared that the (she) of the question might have meant
you, which would have implied by your asking that maybe you thought
it wasn't out of the question. You're the best authority on yourself. I
really only replied to that part because princess said she couldn't figure
out what you were saying :-)
A side note.....not trying too deeply to question you here as we should be nothing more than internet acquaintences but I find it amusingly coincidental that you mention someone named Ryan.
Yeah, what are the chances of two strangers on the net knowing the
same some guy? :-) You're allowed to question me though, if you want
to ... :-)
melonaide
06-13-05, 12:59 AM
Ok :-) It just appeared that the (she) of the question might have meant
you, which would have implied by your asking that maybe you thought
it wasn't out of the question. You're the best authority on yourself. I
really only replied to that part because princess said she couldn't figure
out what you were saying :-)
Yeah, what are the chances of two strangers on the net knowing the
same some guy? :-) You're allowed to question me though, if you want
to ... :-)
Ha! yeah, that would be strange.
And I was reffering to me cause I have had things like this happen and when people try to push issues onto me or try to teach me personal things that don't involve them directly I get quite mule headed and it results in the opposite outcome rather than the intended one...but this topic made me think of it because one could look as intersex and LGBT as having things in common but they are also different and it's important, I think, to look at that because if I have a crush on a guy but it is thought that there are things I'm never going to understand because of their past experiences maybe combined with better acceptance from open minded people including the gay community...then although some may think it's a good idea to lump them into the same catagory of thought...it may be a different story to someone who is afraid of being opened up to things like multiple sex partners or accepting that the one your with has the intentions of having two females in bed at the same time if you are uncertain of underlying intentions. It can get quite confusing and can be very detrimental to the chances of anything happening at all for someone like myself.
It's just something I wanted to point out...not to argue against anyone elses speculations, just to say that when one has an issue that is surrounded by secrecy...it's good to be careful how one projects their intentions because confusion can go a long way. Some may very well want to engage in sex with multiple partners of both genders and that is a straightforward intention...just not one I can say I'm comfortable with and therefore would avoid, but being made to feel more open to things by others is a direct questioning of my own prefferences and understanding of things and I think the older a person gets and the more they know themselves, the more aggravating it can be for someone to try to push off ideas onto them...and what I've mentioned is just scratching the surface of how people try to push things off onto others. It's no huge catastrophe but I wanted to point it out because it can ruin some perfectly good intentions and its a shame if it's not the right issue because with their liknesses, they are different.
and concerning the thread topic...I was thinking about what Peter was saying about gender binary. If I am female....then I am one of a gender binary. If I were gay, would I not be still female and one part of a gender binary? If I were born a true hermaphrodite.....then I would have signifiance in both parts of the gender binary.....so although outside the gender binary is used to describe something, I don't see how being IS or gay or transgendered could fall outside the gender binary in the first place....technically speaking. I know a point was trying to be made by this statement but I agree that it is poor terminology and I'm wondering exactly what it is that was meant to begin with by gender binary.
Ok....I'll stop rambling.
melonaide
06-13-05, 01:19 AM
ok...let me rephrase that. I can see how intersex could fall outside a gender binary "paradigm" but not outside gender binary, but I don't see what that has to do with homosexuals either way.
nimo6211
06-13-05, 02:27 AM
Hello everybody:
As a christian, I believe that we were originally created as man and woman. I grew up not knowing any different. I was always attracted to men and never felt any sexual tendencies whatsoever towards women. I was brought up to believe in the "natural" procreation process where man meets woman, attraction begets chemistry and chemistry begets sexual intercourse and hey presto man and woman beget child and the cycle continues and I was comfortable and am still comfortable with that process.
My problem is that I do not physically fit into the profile of any of those two categories "man" or "woman" simply because I may look and act like a woman but do not function as either a man or woman to be able to fit into that "natural" procreation process I very much would like to fit into. I did not choose to be that way, I just happen to be born so.
Now, as far as I am aware, LGBT was formed to address issues and concerns that affected "men" or "women" that have the physical form and capabilities to "procreate", but choose not to because of their "sexual" attraction to people of the same physical form as themselves. Some men and women physically, with the help of advanced medical technology alter their physical appearance to look and function like a person of the opposite sex. In other words they are not happy with the gender they were assigned from birth by virtue of their procreation capabilities. I do not fit into this category as an intersexed person, nor do some of you who were born with ambigous genitalia, regardless if surgery was performed at birth or not.
However, I appreciate that there are some of us like Betsy (sorry Betsy, forgive me for using you as an example) fit into both the "intersex" and the "gay" categories and may feel comfortable being a part of LGBT, thus would have no problems with the addition of the "I" but what of the rest of us (or is it just me?). Betsy, in fact is a classic example of the reason I said you do not choose your "physical form" but you have a choice when it comes to sexual orientation. You see what I mean? I am definitely not homophobic and I am sorry if I implied that I was.
Let us face it, we all live in a society where as an intersex or gay, you are a minority along with blacks, hispanic etc. who get discriminated against and which is why the law of "civil rights" is very relevant. In essence, what I am trying to say is that regardless of our sexual orientation, we all fall into the category of human beings, only through no fault of ours, with different physical, mental, and emotional desires that should not be held against us.
In light of all of the above, I continue to maintain the stance that as someone who does not fit into the category of the "norm", nor the LGBT, but would still like to be treated as a "norm" that being part of LGBT would help our cause but would only complicate matters, especially when it comes to the sensitive issue of irreversible "surgical conformity" as a child, which is another gross violation of the right of a person to choose which gender he/or she would like to be or not to be. Furthermore, the traumatic and psychological consequences that relate to our intersexedness needs much more specialized attention in a totally separate forum from the LGBT. It is like trying to find a knowledgeable and sympathetic endocrinologist or medical personnel.
Meadow wrote:
> Now, how they differ:
> LGBT - mental
> I - physical
I just checked the dictionary for a definition of "rose." It said, "a prickly shrub or bush with compound leaves that is cultivated in many varieties and hybrids for its flowers." Now, that definition is technically accurate, but it doesn't begin to describe its beauty or smell or any other aspects that we find important about a rose. (Okay, it does tell you that it's prickly, and sometimes that's the important part about a rose...)
Your description of the "difference" between LGBT and I is like that: it's technically accurate in the dictionary sense, but does not even begin to describe what each of these categories mean in individual people's lives.
***
nimo6211 wrote:
<< appreciate that there are some of us like Betsy (sorry Betsy, forgive me for using you as an example) fit into both the "intersex" and the "gay" categories and may feel comfortable being a part of LGBT, thus would have no problems with the addition of the "I"... >>
Just because one is both intersex and LGBT doesn't mean that he or she has no problem with adding the "I" to "LGBT." They are two separate things.
***
And by the way, I second the idea that Melonaide should be a refreshing summer drink.
melonaide
06-13-05, 04:14 AM
Might not be too appealing after I went through the juicer.
No, actually I got into juicing at one point and I found that melons produce alot of juice and that is extremely refreshing as a drink and requires no sugar...so perhaps that could be a form of melonaide and maybe I should call myself something less beverage-like if it sounds funny. :idea2:
nimo6211
06-13-05, 04:22 AM
Just because one is both intersex and LGBT doesn't mean that he or she has no problem with adding the "I" to "LGBT." They are two separate things.
I think I used the words "may feel comfortable......". Perhaps, you may also like to look up the word "may" in the dictionary.
nimo,
Even then, you seem to be suggesting that one's sexual orientation is linked to her or his opinion about whether or not intersex should be part of "LGBT." My point is that these are entirely different issues.
I, for one, feel comfortable being part of LGBT, but NOT comfortable with the idea of adding the "I" to "LGBT." That is because the former is about sexual orientation and/or identity, while the latter is a matter of opinion.
However, I appreciate that there are some of us like Betsy (sorry Betsy, forgive me for using you as an example) fit into both the "intersex" and the "gay" categories and may feel comfortable being a part of LGBT, thus would have no problems with the addition of the "I" but what of the rest of us (or is it just me?).
Errm, I think I came out pretty strongly against it for the most part.
but you have a choice when it comes to sexual orientation.
It's a faulty example as my choices would be to be myself and be happy or deny myself and lie to both me and the world around and be and sad.
This is going a bit off topic but, when I hear people using their Christianaity to claim that being gay is a choice I am wont to remind you that being a Christian is a choice as well. If basic civil rights were denied across the board as they are to lesbians and gays and others to Christians as well, we could use the same excuses---you can choose another religion.
Betsy
Emi,
Thank you for reading my post. Yes, it certainly lacked colour and texture, but I only wanted to try to break it down to the minimum which perhaps could give a framework for argument and discussion. (I may be related somewhere to Seargent Friday (714) . . . "Just the facts, ma'm!")
Another way to look at this is what I learned a number of years ago which was were the three components of sexuality: What you are (physically), how you identify, and who do you like. And so, breaking this out in a mannor that I did before using our alphabet soup in describing persons who live outside of the norm, it is:
A) What you are physically - "I"
B) How you identify - "T"
C) Who do you like - "LGB"
Each represents a totally different aspect, yet each makes up a part of the whole picture. Now, if someone were to think that I'm making the argument to include I in LGBT, that would not be correct. I'm just looking at this from various angles. Yet, and I can state this emphatically, there is as much difference between being T and LGB as there is between I and the other two. And ultimately, we all can sit at the same table and discuss those issues that are in common, and recognize those persons who would just sooner see us ALL evaporate because we are not like them.
Other than those with whom I have spoken in person, and reading the stories here on BLO, I don't know what its like to be IS. Likewise, its hard for me to describe what its like to have what appears to be a perfectly normal body, yet have it be all wrong. But I can tell you of the years of torment.
I hope this represents a positive contribution to the topic at hand.
nimo6211
06-13-05, 12:21 PM
First of all, I do not say that Betsy agrees with the inclusion of the "I" but used her as an example of someone who is both intersex and gay being more comfortable in such a forum such as LGBT(I) as opposed to someone like myself who is intersexed but heterosexual.
Secondly, I was brought up a christian and remain so. The reason I used it to make my point is because as a child, even up to my teen years, I believed everything I was taught as "gospel" but have since learnt to be more informed and make informed choices based on what I believe to be the actual interpretation of the Bible. I am not ashamed of the fact that I am and will never deny being a christian. Just because the christian fundamentalists take an extreme, legalistic, and sometimes prejudiced view of what the basic principles of christianity is, does not mean all christians do. I have discovered that it is never about the religion itself, but rather the interpretation of it which tends to deceive people. My views though usually influenced by my beliefs, I am never homophobic or intolerant. Christianity teaches the concept of "free will" or the freedom of an individual to make choices and be accountable for the result or consequences of such choices.
Emi, whilst I respect your opinion, I do not believe that being part of an organisation that do not share too many commonalities on issues is a trivial matter and therefore should not be based on "opinion" alone and deserves much more attention that just "a matter of opinion".
In a way, I guess you are right. Correct me if I am wrong but I understood that LGBT was exclusively formed to address the needs of Lesbians, Gays, Bisexuals and Transvestites as the name implies. So, would it therefore not be reasonable to assume that you would have to fit into one of those caregories to feel comfortable in the group/organisation.
As an intersexed person, who is heterosexual like myself, I would feel terribly out of place. The danger in that situation is that the issues of a heterosexual would seem insignificant compared to the issues of the majority in the group and would therefore not get the attention it deserves. As I have said before, our issues are totally different and therefore should not be lumped together.
I certainly hope that I have managed to clarify my position in the matter.
Dear Nimo,
While the "T" in LGBT can be Transgendered or Transsexual, it is NOT specifically Transvestite. Here, and I really respect Betsy for this, its usually just called "Trans", which makes it very broad. The world of Trans is about as large and varied as the world of intersex, and both vastly different than gay (LGB). And thus I feel the heat of misunderstanding just as I know others here feel that same heat when lumped into LGBT, and it all burns just the same.
Don't mean to get on you, just making a gentle clarification.
Plus, before anyone feels that they absolutely have to distance themselves from something else, it is important to understand just what that "something else" is and why they feel that the distance is necessary. I am not gay, yet, I will stand with my gay sisters and brothers, because we have the common enemies consisting of societal ignorance and right wing oppression.
Thanks! Meadow
Sunshine1
06-13-05, 06:59 PM
I have an metabolic adrenal gland condition.
nimo6211
06-13-05, 09:58 PM
Hi Meadow. I do apologize and stand corrected. I also agree that we should indeed support other minority groups whenever called to do so. I do however feel that we do not need to be identified with the group to effectively do that.
I do however feel that we do not need to be identified with the group to effectively do that.
I often make this point when speaking about allies---and I agree with it. To say otherwise would mean you would need to be a person of color to be against racism which is absurd.
It's just like I consider myself to be a trans* ally yet am not trans and can't speak for the experience, yet I know in my heart that their concerns are things I need to be aware of and supportive of and I see things our trans allies subjected to that drives me nuts because it is so simply wrong. Does that mean that BLO will be including trans within our mission statement? No, not at all because the organization doesn't need a T to be supportive and inclusive to the best of our ability.
However, going back to my original point about making sure we look outside of our immediate box (the me box) and also looking at the big picture---if any citizenry wants to work at doing meaningful things towards ending some of the issues the majority of people with intersex---LGBT or not---are concerned about, then no, I'm not totally against an I being added but I want to see actual inclusion of our concerns and I want to see intersex people helping to lead it.
However, I fear that it often is some type of panacea and that troubles me. I personally consider myself part of LGBT because I am a lesbian, not as part of LGBTI because I am intersex. I don't like tokens nor do I like being a token and it's often what happens.
Here in NJ, the queer leadership has ordered every single queer organization to include an I and frankly, it drives me nuts because it's so meaningless. In fact, in the "order" (it's NJ---thus everything becomes political as it is part of our state heritage or something) said to include and I even if you don't know what it means! I went ballistic and have been waging a campaign against it. Ironically, a non-intersex person who thinks it is a good idea confronted me rather rudely one day last month after I did a plenary session at a trans conference and spoke out against adding an I and spoke out even more forcefully against conflation of trans and intersex issues. The message was that we all need eachother as allies, particularly in these critical times of crazy administrations yet we don't need to confuse issues, and we need to recognize the allie building that is independent, yet supportive and simply adding to the acronym is a horrible way to achieve that. Her gripe was that at least they are acknowledging us and my response was to ask to what end?
The session was just early enough in the day that I really managed to piss some people off I guess.
MelissP
06-14-05, 02:16 AM
In a way, I guess you are right. Correct me if I am wrong but I understood that LGBT was exclusively formed to address the needs of Lesbians, Gays, Bisexuals and Transvestites as the name implies. So, would it therefore not be reasonable to assume that you would have to fit into one of those caregories to feel comfortable in the group/organisation.
As an intersexed person, who is heterosexual like myself, I would feel terribly out of place.
I think you said you've got ais. So; consider how in the eyes of certain
regressive researchers, you are not a woman, because they won't call
you female. In fact, narrow-minded people might be happy to call you
a man. A gay man. And they wouldn't care about your history as woman,
or how you'd identify yourself. Maybe they wouldn't think you were much
different from a trans gay man. You live in a socially accepting area
now- suppose you found true love, married a man, and somehow moved
to the deep south. They wouldn't let you stay married, they'd call it
same-sex; if they ever found out. Maybe they'd make you put an "M" on
your driver's license, and arrest you for being in "drag".
I think the point I'm trying to make is that which word you use to
describe your orientation depends on what you are as much as who
you're attraced to, and a lot of IS conditions can make that a hard
decision. And that being one sex or another depends on you having
the basic human freedom to be what you've decided you are, instead
of what some politically motivated PHD maybe has to say about you.
If you don't care much what happens to those others, then so be it.
But to uphold their human rights provides you with an extra layer of
protection for your own. So call it deferred self-interest ...
melonaide
06-14-05, 05:47 AM
I have a question arising from both Betsy and MelissP's posts.
Betsy mentioned "I" being added even where people might not know what it means.
My question is, and I'm curious about everyones opinion...How many people do you feel really know what intersex means?
I recall talking to someone on a site, probably in 2001...making me 26 at the time. It was a music site where many things could be discussed by the vast array of people who might be members but a discussion arose which pertained to intersex...only the word intersex was not used. It went more along the lines of a vague discription of people who were born with some kind of abnormalities concerning gender and one particular person in the conversation mentioned a song which contained lyrics like 46 and 2 and how they thought it had something to do with chromosomes and implied a deeper meaning that they were trying to speculate on. Not real sure about that but it was just one of those pondering types of conversations and it was somewhat involving intersex and chimerism and mosaic dna....although these words were not used and I would not have known what they were talking about if they had used them. I mention this because I recall contrbuting to the conversation by saying something along the lines of 'I don't know much about it or anyone like that but I kinda doubt they would look like the people you see in certain porn magazines'
I don't consider myself to be a complete doofus but that is honestly all I knew about the subject...and I was 26.
Any smidgin...if thats how you spell smidgin....of information that I may know about the subject has come from the internet.....and the stranger part is...I believe I have known more than one intersex person in life offline and began to realize this by various figuring and there is no telling how many people I really know or have known that are and I still haven't a clue seeing as how I would figure it not the average persons business unless there is a reason one would need to know.
Maybe I am a doofus...or perhaps it's not common knowledge and moreover an avoided issue.
I'm not IS so it's not for me to say how common the knowledge needs to be because no matter what happens in society, there will always be people who simply don't understand things no matter how much about something one knows, but I think furthering my own knowledge over a few years of curiousity on things I have picked up on has been a good thing for me, personally....just maybe not for people on this forum who get tired of reading my posts.
HA!
HA!
ha.
My point in this is wondering if it is widely thought that furthering general knowledge into society about intersex would be a very positive thing...would that be an upside despite any concievable downside to the "I" being included in more places?
And to MelissP
I'm a little confused about an issue in your post but after what I just typed, I think I'll read up on AIS before I ask my question....it will cut down on clarification and then I will come back to my question.
Betsy mentioned "I" being added even where people might not know what it means.
My question is, and I'm curious about everyones opinion...How many people do you feel really know what intersex means?
That's a valid point and for a long time, I believed that would do the trick and help with awareness, but I no longer feel that way.
It's not that I think the secret lives of the intersexed are a good thing, but in my experience, people still don't learn or they learn something that is totally incorrect. It's like learning the word for orange and associating it with an apple. Sure, they are both fruits but vastly different ones.
in doing public education, it's the orgs that have the I who sometimes feel they have nothing to learn but if you try to find out if they know what the acronym means, they don't. I've hit it time and time again and base this on life experience.
You know I sometimes post theory or hypothetical questions in trying to figure stuff out? I do that in the real life too and have called up organizations and without telling them who I am, start asking questions about intersex because afterall, they should know if they are using the word. Not many do.
Friends,
This thread has really been on my mind for days, and it may constitute one of the most important issues that you face, aside from each persons own individual circumstances. Let me first mention that I was not asked when LGB was expanded to LGBT. Do I feel that T should be associated with LGB? I don't know, as it has its good points and bad. The bad is that we are all painted with a similar brush. The good is that at least there are opportunities for education where before there was none. Should this be expanded to include "I"? I don't know, as that also has the good and bad. But the situation exists that, whether anyone on this board has feelings one way or another, other groups are going to add the I anyway, even if they don't know what it means!! Time to get proactive and provide education in some format or another!!
I was really pleased to see the Dumbarton United Methodist Church print two pamphets, both written by Ann Thompson Cook, one "Made in God's Image" (http://www.madeinimage.org/) on persons who were Trans, and "And God Loves Each One" (http://www.godloveseachone.org/) on persons who were gay. They both go a long way for education, understanding, and acceptance. Plus, they are of reasonable cost and easy to understand vs a medical textbook costing $200.
Is something like that listed above what you want, telling YOUR OWN stories? Or, would you simply prefer to be taken along for a ride, whether that was your choice or not. I think you all are probably pretty tired of being left without choices. I know Betsy, Peter, and a couple of others do the best they can, but it will take more than just a couple of persons to make what you want happen.
I am going to sit down now . . . and try to behave.
I was really pleased to see the Dumbarton United Methodist Church print two pamphets, both written by Ann Thompson Cook, one "Made in God's Image" (http://www.madeinimage.org/)
It also includes some nice info on intersex as a way of differentiating the two. Additionally, one of our members from this forum is profiled in it. The author came to us for guidance on the intersex part.
Betsy
Hi Meadow,
Thanks for your thoughtful comments. I have spent a fair amount of time thinking about your recent posts concerning the "I" issue. I think that it should be added with care. For instance, Betsy mentioned that New Jersey gay organizations have "mandated" that gay groups include the "I". This may be very counterproductive. What if an organization does not have an intersex member to help do community education? I agree that educational materials are great, but they are no substitute for having intersex people as part of an organization. We have to be honest about our visible numbers. Although there are millions of intersex people in the world, we are still largely invisible. If thousands of groups add the "I", and there are not thousands of intersex people joining these groups, we could loose big time. What if an intersex person joins a group, and then after adding the "I" drops out of it, leaving no other intersex members?
I had lunch with a trans activist the other day, and he (ftm) mentioned that when the "T" was added about 10 years ago, that the trans community faced many of the same issues that the intersex community is now facing about adding the "I". He said that despite initial concerns, that over the long run adding the "T" helped trans people emerge as a community, and that it led to many more financial and educational resources being available.
I guess that in the end, when I cannot figure things out on an abstract level, I try to bring them back to a practical level, and look at what are the possible benefits of adding the "I", and can the same thing be achieved through other means. (Now, there is an idea - a "cost/benefit analysis" of adding the "I". Oh, the possibilities of humor are so sweet. :-)
Peter
<< Correct me if I am wrong but I understood that LGBT was exclusively formed to address the needs of Lesbians, Gays, Bisexuals and Transvestites as the name implies. >>
If that were the case, then I have no interest in being part of any LGBT groups. LGBT groups that I take part in are the ones that believe in achieving equality and justice for everyone, which must mean that they are interested in fighting not just homo/bi/trans-phobia, but also racism, classism, sexism, etc.
"T" is transgender, or trans. "Transvestite" is just part of transgender, and a better term for that part is "cross dresser."
<< So, would it therefore not be reasonable to assume that you would have to fit into one of those caregories to feel comfortable in the group/organisation. >>
No. Civil rights movement always had whites who were supporters, and feminism always had men who were supporters. Why shouldn't LGBT movements and groups have non-LGBT supporters?
<< As an intersexed person, who is heterosexual like myself, I would feel terribly out of place. >>
Only if the idea of equality and justice for all makes you feel uncomfortable. You see, some people feel uncomfortable with Black kids going to the same school with their kids, women becoming doctors and engineers, or queers marrying and having families. But if you are not bigoted like them, you shouldn't feel out of place.
And besides, queer people are made to feel out of place all the time, so perhaps it's about time that straight people be put through situations where they feel out of place for being straight for once...
That said, remember, my position is that adding the "I" to "LGBT" has no merit. I'm just disputing the alleged connection between one's sexual orientation to whether or not s/he feels comfortable with adding the "I."
nimo6211
06-15-05, 12:32 AM
I respect your opinion Emi, but may not necessarily agree, let's just leave it at that shall we.
vBulletin, Copyright ©2000-2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.