Gendercare Gender Clinic


GID Clinic      |   GID Journal   |   GID Forum   |   GID Library   |   GIGS School

Italian Version here

GLB or GLBT? The Controversy

T : What it means???

T means Transsexual or Transgender?

Transsexual is a GID condition, MtF or FtM, recognized by WHO and HBIGDA as a F.64.0 GID classification in ICD-10.

Transgender means, in the same documents, a GIDNOS condition, classified as F64.8.

Surely they are and express different realities.
Sometimes they may have the same social fights against exclusion, but a lot of times they fight and suffer for their own specific social and existential problems.

What is important to understand here???

They are different, they have different necessities, and their differences need to be recognized and respected.

That respect is important from all society, and mainly from social minorities that feel excluded from its rights, as suffer the homosexual community. We would like the homosexual GLB community respect the Transsexual T and the Transgender T. But sometimes we feel they are insensible for other`s problems and points of view, and do not respect them, mainly the Transsexual T point of view.


Are the T`s really among GLB???

Surely not.

I showed it in Portuguese and English in some papers, as the paper published in GID Journal in the volume 1 number 2 edition from November 2003.

Gay community says, and I agree with them that homosexuality, as hetero and bisexuality are not a pathology. I agree with Gore Vidal, when he said some decades ago that sexual orientation is a question of taste; a question of desire and love, and not a question of psychiatry, medicine and therapy or surgeries.

Transgender need some silicon implants, hormones and surgeries. As a GIDNOS they need health care and mainly social recognition. Some of them loves and desires in an homosexual way. A lot of them prefer an heterosexual life, and some a bisexual one. That is a question of taste, not a question of being.



Transsexuals have a lack of harmony since gestation, having a gender discord in sexual differentiation, in the basal brain and in genital tissues, derived from genetics, hormones and sometimes the problem has its start up with emotional problems of the mothers during critical gestation periods for brain sex differentiation.
Surely it is a very important health problem. They need diagnosis, hormone therapy, surgeries and SRS-sexual reassignment surgeries, of the best quality possible, to be happy and to live in possible harmony with themselves and the society..

Almost all Transsexuals, and most part of Transgenders do not feel really as gay people. A lot of them feel heterosexual love, or bisexual.

So it is a big mistake to mix them up between themselves, mixing them up under one T, and with homosexual community.



Bailey`s book

I think there are a lot of nonsense in that book, and a lot of ignorance about real science. It is in my opinion one of the worst books about transsexuality someone ever wrote, in all languages.

Worse than that, it show an aggressive idea, not against science only, but particularly against Transsexual rights and recognition.

Those ideas do not recognize how transsexual MtF and FtM people feel and understands their own reality, and do not explain well the gender identity casuistics and scientifical results in neurobiology, genetics, molecular biology, for example. It could be a book for 20 to 30 years ago, joining John Money`s and Stoller ideas... but not for today, after John Colapinto`s "As Nature Made Him", after all Dr.Milton Diamond work, after all Dr.Gunther Dörner work in Germany, and even my own "My Real Sex"(today only in Portuguese, soon in English).

To give an honour prize to it is an aggression against Transsexual medical and neurobiological today recognized reality too.

If a gay site intend to give that prize, is worser, because it shows a lot of disrespect to the other and to diversity. If the gay community intend to be respected, it will be good if they learn first to respect others also.

Some gays, in extreme mental stress may intend to have female bodies and femnale bodies parts??? Surely, I have a lot of clients with that background. But they are not transsexuals, they may have a GIDNOS, and most part of them have nothing, only dreams. Or nightmares.

May a heterosexual man feel some crossdressing desires? Surely yes. I have a lot of clients that feel that way.

May a heterosexual man with crossdressing desires sometimes also desire to have a female appearance or sensations, even in his body? Surely, yes. I also have alot of clients with that profile.

But, surely they are not transsexuals.

They are only men with other profiles among human possible diversity.

So, situations of autogynephilia surely happen...but they are not related, most of the time, with transsexuality, but mainly with human possible diversity...and sometimes with real mental problems.

Perhaps some doctors or psychologists, feeling that way and identifying themselves as transsexuals, with transsexual GID F64.0 reality, could think that is the rule for transsexuality.

Surely it is not.

Surely it is not the rule, but perhaps "autogynephilia" could be one of the possible diversity variations on transsexual etiology. Rare, very rare, surely, but possible... why not?


I like diversity, diversity of people and diversity of ideas. I would like to invite Bailey and Bailey followers to discuss his ideas in GID Journal... GID Journal is a free and open place for GID research and discussions if necessary.



I think all ideas need to have a place...but not always they need to have a prize.

I signed the letter against the possibility that awful out of the time book could win a literature prize in a USA gay site. I am not American, nor gay, nor English speaking... but I know how those aggressions hurt GID so suffering people. So I signed it.

Why don`t you do the same???


I invite you to do the same

Do it you too! Click HERE and sign the letter against that prize!


Gay or Transgender Guardianship

All GID people do not need gay nor transgender guardianship.

Really they do not need medical nor psychological guardianship too!!!!

As all other human beings, they need help, but never guardianship

GID and GIDNOS, being wrongly mixed up with homosexuals by medical and psychological "experts" in the past, were misconsidered among that other reality, and as they are very strange for most of people, because they are a great minority, they were all the time submitted to a guardianship from others.

Submitted to a guardianship by John Money biased ideas about gender identity, they suffered alot for alot of years or decades....in the hands of psychologists that liked Money`s ideas. Now, some "experts" like Bailey`s ideas.... and with those kind of "ideas" they remain oppressed by an awful guardianship.

The "sex of rearing"of John Money was a bad idea....the "autogynephilic"idea of Bailey is so bad as the other... have not those psychologists not better to do than to try to opress innocent people????

Now is a good hour to start changing it.


A special American letter

See here the transcription of a letter, an GID expert sent to that gay site:

Dear Mr. Marks,

I am writing to you in regards to the recent nomination of J. Michael Bailey's book The Man Who Would Be Queen, as a finalist for a LAMDA literary award.

I have studied reproductive biology under Dr. Elof Carlson of SUNY Stony Brook, and have studied behavior genetics at Ohio U. and human sexuality at U. Iowa. I am also affiliated with Gendercare, the web's only on-line gender clinic, which provides mutlilingual evaluation and referrals for transsexual clients (often to economically disadvantaged clients in remote areas), publishes a journal, and has a school which is dedicated to teaching physicians, sexologists, psychologists, and other professionals, necessary information for the proper understanding of the transsexual condition.

I am writing, because I believe Bailey's book and the retaining of this book for nomination for a LAMDA literary award, to severely undermine the goal of understanding and caring for individuals who are truly transsexual. I believe keeping it as a finalist will also be detrimental to your organization.

Unfortunately, even some clinicians have wrote in favor of keeping this book as a finalist. These individuals are, unfortunately, a very misguided minority, who understand very little, if anything, about true male to female transsexualism. They find the book may explain their own unqiue situation, and if others do not believe it explains theirs also, they claim, without subsantiation, that these persons are in denial.

Unfortunately and erroneosuly, they also claim innumerable experts to be un-informed or not qualified in judging what constitutes junk science. This is blatantly false contention, arising from a total misunderstanding of transsexualism.

Bailey's book, which is obviously written in a very popular, sensationalistic style, may be the result of a breach of professional ethics. In addition, Bailey's book claims to be research, but as a sheep in wolf's clothing, omits all of what scientific investigation knows as sound research methodology. Furthermore, unconcionably, Bailey's book leaves out, perhaps the most important scientific data to date about male to female transsexualism: studies of brain sexual differences unique to transsexualism. Astonishingly, after not mentioning these studies at all in Bailey's "treatise", Bailey gives a brief "back door" treatment of these brain studies on his website:

http://www.psych.northwestern.edu/psych/people/faculty/bailey/ages.htm

Nonetheless, this disintegrates under careful examination:

http://www.gendercare.com/library/italiano_paper4.html

It is clear to most, that this attempt to offer an "alternative paradigm" for understanding transsexualism, is nothing more than an offensive, error prone exposition by Bailey, of a theory of Ray Blanchard, that transsexuals are merely a "type of gay man" (Bailey's words on page 208 of his book) or a misguided heterosexual men with a paraphilia, known as autogynephilia. Paraphilia is a "modern day, nice term" diagnostic classification, for its predecessor- perversion. Blanchard's theory is really not that unique or original, but instead, is a return to Freudian and neo-Freudian theories of those such as Margaret Mahler, Otto Kernberg, Heinz Kohut, which would view this as forms of pathological narcissism.

Do we really need to be "enlightened" in this way? Do we really need to bestow honor upon such a travesty? Of course, not.

It is clear to most experts in the field, that this "alternative paradigm" is a simple observation, in the tradition before Aristotle, that the earth is flat.

This book has received accolades from a limited few well known figures, such as Levay and Pinker, whom, while perhaps, gaining respect in their own areas, are neither well versed in, nor have experienced transsexualism.

Furthermore, a minority of people who call themselves transsexuals, wish to believe, with Bailey's book as amamentum, that his book not only explains themselves, but mirrors many transsexuals in both label and the substance with which it entails, also in the absence of substantiation. In regard to all of these points, it would do service to heed the careful direction provided by the research and clinical experiences of those many expert critics of Bailey's book, who have first hand knowledge of legitimate transsexualism, by removing it from the list as a finalist.

Respecfully,

M. Italiano

Staff member, Gendercare, Inc

SEE HERE THE ANSWER MR. iTALIANO RECEIVED FROM THE SITE:

To know more about those controversies, click HERE