Transgender Paradigm Must Evolve into Accepting Non-binary Sexuality
Mathematics and the Sciences
There are Two Ways to Group Trans People
People Cling to “Gender” for Us Because they Fear Our Sexuality
The Gender-not-sex Paradigm Enables Prejudice
The Transgender Paradigm is not “Truth”; it is a Social Movement
Common False Tenets of the Transgender”Paradig
m

Composite of transsexuals over 100 years.
TRANSSEXUALISM: 20th century examples of needing to be the other sex, left to right: Lili Elbe, Christine Jorgensen, Canary Conn, Reneé Richards, Jan Morris, Jenna Ware. (Some of us continue into the 21st century.)
Composite of Virginia Prince, Ph.D., self-identified transgenderist.
TRANSGENDERISM: 20th century example: Virginia Prince promoted the need to change gender but not sex, which is the vast majority of all trans persons.
Screen shot 2017-12-21 at 8.44.58 AM.png
Popular early 21st century transgender paradigm leaders. Left to right: Janet Mock, Caitlyn Jenner, Laverne Cox, Jenny Boylan.
Chart showing the size and relationship of transsexualism to transgenderism, and the two kinds of transgenderism.
A simplified graph of the paradigm’s conflation of transsexualism and transgenderism. Note: Some people have SRS for secondary reasons.

The transgender paradigm is the gender-not-sex social movement that says to make all trans people as about gender role and to downplay or avoid T sex issues.

As transsexual, someone who has always needed to be the other actual sex, with a needed sexual response of the other sex…the gender-not-sex social movement for trans people is personally demeaning. It says that my life needs are not okay to mention.

Transgender Paradigm Must Evolve into Accepting Non-binary Sexuality

The transgender social movement is not one social movement that blossomed as more people came out and advocated for themselves.

It was two different phenomena, each vying for acceptance as itself, and both were sexually open. Later, the larger one by far changed its message to hide sexuality, incorporating the other whether we agree or not.

This gender-not-sex focus for trans people has been a step in the process of evolution for equality and inclusion for trans people, but full integration cannot occur unless our sexualities are also accepted. There are too many areas of life affected to ignore or disregard the effect of sexuality on life.

Mathematics and the Sciences

Mathematics is used in all the sciences. But if we said that “mathematics” is an umbrella term for the sciences, don’t mention the field of focus, and if we said that even asking if I’m a biologist is phobic—bias and suppression of something significant would be clear.

This may sound like a ridiculous metaphor, but it’s not to me because I’m on the butt end of the transgender paradigm, #1 below. People do that sort of thing to me.

I will be specific.

There are Two Ways to Group Trans People

1. Grouping all trans people by social gender role asserts “transgender” as an “umbrella” term for all, does not acknowledge if someone wants to be the other sex or not, suppresses T sexualities, recommends social de-sexing of us, prevents full social integration, says it’s transphobic if someone even asks if I am transsexual (scroll down to Planned Parenthood as an example). This disrespects and is harmful to all trans persons.

2. Grouping by main issue affirms people by what they’re really trying to be. Most things in life have things in common with other things, yet are distinct by significant difference. This allows all trans persons to be recognized by their main issue, not suppressed to please prejudice. This is the way it was before the current gender-not-sex social movement. Even Virginia Prince stated she did not agree with using “gender” for everyone, and I agree with her because all persons deserve to be included with their own issues.

People Cling to “Gender” for Us Because they Fear Our Sexuality

Most people are so scared of trans person sexuality, they react to the issues by knee-jerking back to #1, a binary-ish social gender role grouping that suppresses T sexualities. People tend to insist it’s a fact that all trans people did change gender, and if you don’t agree, you must be crazy—no possibility that main issue could be a grouping, even though a transgender woman and a transsexual woman need to be the opposite sex from each other.

And if countered, the energy in the insistence on #1 can be seen as exceeding an intellectual “…this seems right…” position. It can take on the demeanor of disgust or hatred, something seen as revolting they don’t want to touch.

Most people do not share their inner feelings with people like me about this. Over decades, I’ve come to appreciate honesty, even if it’s negative. To that end, I had a neighbor who was fairly expressive and represented to me, in a mild sense, what people tend to feel yet not share. I am thankful for this exchange.

I’d asked both his wife and him to accept me as per the 2nd grouping, by main issue, as transsexual, not transgender. I explained, “It’s what I am.” Neither did. Our interactions became uncomfortable and intermittent.

A year later, I had a service tech working on a shared utility junction. I was surprised yet pleased to see the neighbor man step out to see what I was doing. After a bit, I asked him again. “It’s been a year, hon. Will you accept me as transsexual and not as transgender? Most people say It’s not okay to be me, but I need to be okay…”

The neighbor began to squirm.

After a bit of discussion, his discomfort was written in his every move. He was moving his feet, his face scrunched up, his hands tried to wipe the offending idea away, and his voice whined. “I don’t—! I don’t want to say that!

I said his name as an anchor to his heightened emotionality, then, “It would mean a lot to me.”

Finally, I think for my sake, he eeked out a strained, “You’re transsexual, not transgender.”

“Thank you,” I said to him most gratefully. “That means so much.”

He left, and he rarely said a word to me after that. It’s a shame. All I asked for was acceptance from him. I was kind and gentle, more than patient, but I think the subject was abhorrent to him, to both of them. He and she are otherwise nice people. I would love to have been friends. As it stands, this barrier has prevented me from getting to know them, and them getting to know me.

I could have pretended I am comfortable with part of me being offensive, known-yet-not-acknowledged, and entered in to a faux “friendship.” But I’ve been at this far too long to think that would work. That kind of stealth-ish thing only seems to work with trans people who do not yet see the pattern in our lives. In the long run, that would be me shaming myself, preventing real contact with others.

I don’t think my neighbor thought the transsexual-vs.-transgender concern was more horrible than trans personage in general. I think he was primarily offended at the idea of introducing T sex issues into his denial process. He wanted to live in the belief all he had to do was interact with a de-sexed “gender” for trans people, not have to think of the horrible sex thing that should be in a closet. I think, per the pretense of the prior paragraph, he wanted me to be sexually stealthy—not hoping something would work for friendship, as I had, but in an effort to keep me at bay, to avoid having to know me.

I continued to hold my hand out to both of them in friendship, but so much is lost with prejudice.

The Gender-not-sex Paradigm Enables Prejudice

The cure, here, is not to go along with that transphobia in society, not to agree to secret ourselves to please prejudiced people—but to assert that T sexuality is okay, to follow in the footsteps of the gay social movement.

A longer view is necessary, or else we perpetuate our own plight, as does the current paradigm.

The Transgender Paradigm is not “Truth”; it is a Social Movement

It isn’t required to group all trans people under a social gender-not-sex banner. That is a social movement that grew in this 21st century, yet which should not affect science, research, truths taught in universities.

You can tell when a social movement is wrong: Its when it limits or demeans a group of people.

In this case, the transgender social movement demeans all trans people because it says our sexuality is not okay—for any of us. it particularly demeans transsexuals because it goes even farther than that, saying it’s transphobic to even ask if that’s what we are (scroll down to Planned Parenthood as an example).

Common False Tenets of the Transgender Paradigm

1. Marginalize and minimize T sex issues. Society doesn’t like non-binary sexuality, doesn’t want to hear about it…so to maybe avoid some rejection, agree to hide it as “offensive” or “private.” Problems with this are legion: It demeans non-binary people by cutting down our sexualities; it demeans people for whom cross physical sex and sex response issues are paramount; it’s transphobic.

2. Conflation. Conflate sex and gender; as if the other gender role = the other physical sex. Socially. Even though some 90% of all trans people do not want to be the other sex.

3. Focus on gender yet hide sex. Make it about gender identity, gender expression—not physical sex identity or genitalia—because it is what you see when you look at trans people from the outside with our clothes on, is the issue of the largest open group of trans people (B), and ref #1 above. Sex issues should not be discussed.

4. Avoid or denounce transsexualism. If someone mentions transsexualism, the next question is, “What’s the difference between that and transgenderism,” which highlights what the paradigm is trying to hide: sexuality. Say or allow it to be said that “transsexual” is a slur, old fashioned, equated with prostitution or porn, or medializes trans people as sick, or without dignity. Say even asking if someone is transsexual is transphobic. Sometimes we transsexuals are also threatened or assaulted if we don’t agree. It feels like sexual harassment, a verbal/identity form of genocide; my phenomenon is being pressured to not exist, to morph into the larger group. Refer to transsexuals as “transgender with an extra surgery,” so it is about gender and surgery, not a needed physical sex or sexual response.

5. Worship transsexuals (A) who will say they are transgender (B or C), such as Cait Jenner may be or some pictured above. Buy their books, hail them, call them “trail-blazers,” give them money, a spotlight, adoration—because, by using the same word, they help imply any transgender may also have had “the surgery,” referred to as “GRS,” so they can avoid the dreaded “S” word, “sex,” as in “SRS.”

6. You are whatever you say you are—one is “woman” if declared, “female” if declared—which leaves no room for mistakes, denial, repression, fantasy, related issues, games, or even outright lying to gain favor or access to otherwise denied areas.

7. Use euphemisms or gender terms. Don’t say “I’m female,” say “I’m a woman.” Don’t say “SRS,” which is about physical sex / genital anatomy; say “GRS or GCS,” because “gender” surgery can refer to anything gender—implying SRS may be attained while not actually saying so. Misrepresentations are common. Many times I’ve known transgender ladies who asserted “GRS” when what was attained was breast augmentation or nothing.

8. Let trans radicals slam dissent—don’t decry radicals or the practice of a “dirty tricks department”—let them fly Cancel Culture flags—as you “have to stick together.” The slamming is deniable by leadership: “I didn’t do it, and I didn’t tell them to do it…” One can light a candle to dispel that darkness, as did Alice Dreger, Ph.D., in Galileo’s Middle Finger. I support all trans person inclusion, but radicals slamming sex and gender researchers to inhibit dissent, the scientific process, or people who identify otherwise (such as me) is way out of line, and I do decry both the radicals and the process. Even if some idea or research is wrong, let the scientific process continue freely. It will eventually find the truth—such as medical science or astronomy and physics over the blood-letting and Earth-centrism of religious focus during the Dark Ages. And truth is exactly what you don’t want if you’re trying to hide issues.

9. The intent of the transgender paradigm (C) is to increase social inclusion for transgenders (B) by incorporating transsexualism (A) into transgenderism (B) and then hiding them (A), making it all, in the end, just one phenomenon about gender change, implying that may or may not also mean a desired sex change—not even a political movement any more—even if we need to be opposite sex from each other. This is a conflict of interest.

10. Imply the need to change sex moves with the need to change gender. It usually doesn’t. But this is also used in vague implication and slight of word to vie for the other place in social sex-and-gender binarism—while at the same time vying for acceptance of non-binarism.

Systematic suppression is oppression and transphobic.

All of us need to be accepted as who we really are.

And it takes the courage to actually be who we are.