Wednesday, December 8, 2010

Much Better

Alice added a comment late yesterday.

She wrote, in part,

I believe that the best definition of a transsexual that I've come across is a person whose brain gender does not match their birth sex.

Well, I just came across the best definition of a transsexual.  Thank you, Alice!

Much better than what I wrote yesterday.  Much much better.

Also, I received an e-mail making a point I glossed over.  I paraphrase:

I started dressing at a very young age.  Why did I dress that first time?  Why did I keep coming back?

Well, I started pretty young too.  Way before puberty.  I also liked girls, way before puberty.  Sexuality is wired in at an early age.

But I'm sure most TVs and TSs crossdressed at an early age.  I rarely hear of an adult who decided to dress for the first time and, hey, this is cool, isn't it!

Give some young children blocks.  Some will build a tower and knock it down.  Some will build a house.  They're both playing with blocks, but with different goals.

Some young boys will put on a dress because it gives them pleasure ~ something about it does.  Maybe it's the comfort of being more like mommy.  Maybe it's the feel of the fabric.  Maybe he likes the way he looks.

Some young boys will put on a dress because it's right.  He should be wearing a dress.  After all, the other girls are wearing dresses!

I just spent about twenty minutes staring at what I wrote, trying to decide if I should stop here or go on. 

I write a lot about me, because I'm familiar with the topic.  Sometimes I go a bit deeper than I'm comfortable with.

I am now reaching new heights.  Or depths.  I'm not sure which.

While I was growing up, my father worked long hours.  He usually worked Saturday, and a half-day on Sunday, as well as weekdays.  I also have a brother, four years older than me, and a sister 18 months younger.  I remember little of my youth.  I remember clearly resenting the fact that there were some things my younger sister would do with my mother that I could not ~ I had to wait for my father.  An easy example is making the transition from tub to shower.  My mother wanted to make sure we wouldn't fall and break the tub so our first few showers were shared.  She forged ahead; I had to wait.

I don't know if this influenced my "want to be a girl thinking."  I do know you all now know something I've never shared before.

1 comment:

  1. Meg
    I am glad to see your attempts at dealing with the dressing label issue. Many have tried and some have come close but it is sort of like wrestling with a greased pig. Nothing is adequately static to be properly labeled at all times and under all circumstances.

    It is a natural human condition to sort things out through labels. One of the first and foremost that comes along subconsciously is whether a person is male or female. Many of us tend to take up some of the space between these two labels. Perhaps we are both...perhaps neither...perhaps more one at one time than the other.

    Some labels are fairly are a parent, a child, an aunt or uncle, grandparent, friend, acquaintance, etc. Other labeling terms describe what we do. You are an engineer, doctor, lawyer, bricklayer, butcher, baker, candelstick maker, etc. Of course, you may not spend all of your time making candelsticks. Some of your time is spent as a driver going to a garbageman taking out the a floor blogger...etc.

    The nominal distinction is that the former catagories deal with what a person may be. The latter catagory tends to describe something that the person does.

    I dress in woman's clothes and have been doing that for almost 5 decades. For me I am comfortable deeming my dressing as an activity, something I do, like my job, golfing, gassing up the car, etc.

    There is, however, the other dimension, that my dressing is merely an outward manifestation of something that I am. I do not perceive myself as being a woman but I recognize that to opine that I am or may be would be a means of justifying what I like to do, which is dressing in woman's clothes as often as possible.

    I think that the label issue gets further mucked up because of the billing needs of the medical and psychological profession, especially the shrinks. Their billing bible is the DSM. If there is a colorable diagnosis in the DSM they have a shot at getting their bills paid by some insurance carrier. Frequently they will add a few "throw in" diagnosis such as depression or anxiety on top of a primary diagnosis of GID or AG or TS or whatever the billing codes may dictate.

    Now that I have done my best at further confusing the labeling issue I will simply say good luck.



My day is brighter when I hear from my friends!