Previously I had commented that it was particularly rude of HBS persons to pretend that non-HBS transsexuals do not exist when non-HBS are over 99% of transsexuals. I received a couple of replies that my figures were way off, but now I see that Charlotte Goiar agrees with me. She has revamped her web site and now says that HBS is “an extremely rare condition [1:100,000]”. (She previously used the now discredited 1:30,000.)
Let us spell this out.
I am assuming that transsexuals are 1:500, a cautious ratio from the Conway-Olyslager study.
A transsexual is someone who has sexual affirmation surgery and does not regret it afterwards.
1:100,000 is 10 in a million.
1:500 is 2000 in a million.
Thus there are 200 transsexuals for every HBS if Goiar is right (although she gives no rational for her number).
HBS are only a fraction of 1% of transsexuals.
09 August 2009
10 comments:
Comments that constitute non-relevant advertisements will be declined, as will those attempting to be rude. Comments from 'unknown' and anonymous will also be declined. Repeat: Comments from "unknown" will be declined, as will anonymous comments. If you don't have a Google id, I suggest that you type in a name or a pseudonym.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
You are very mistaken. First off, Goiar is not the final work on Harry Benjamin Syndrome. Goiar represents one, rather radical and extremist view. Second, Harry Benjamin Syndrome is a synonym for what is also called "classic transsexualism" or "true transsexualism." It is not an identity, but is an objective term that is intended to become a medical diagnosis. There is nothing special about the words "Harry Benjamin Syndrome." It is simply the suggested term that those who back this concept prefer. It is intended to replace other terms that have become blurred by association with concepts that have nothing to do with the actual condition. For example, a few years ago, anyone doing a search on the MSN search engine for "transsexual" would be directed to pornography sites.
ReplyDeleteWhere the idea that "only" 1 in 200 transsexuals are HBS came from is beyond me. While I can imagine Goiar making such a statement, it is by no means universally accepted. I imagine she does not give any rationale for her number, as her concept is not rational.
If one defines "transsexual" based solely on one's having surgery, then there certainly would be "non HBS" transsexuals. While I might quibble with such a definition of transsexual, I would readily agree that there are people who have sex affirmation surgery who are not HBS. I could readily offer several examples.
No, a "transsexual" is someone who was born with the condition, regardless of if it is treated or not. I'd ask why people try to hide the truth, but the answer is obvious.
ReplyDelete"A transsexual is someone who has sexual affirmation surgery and does not regret it afterwards."
ReplyDeleteReally???
Then non-op transsexual Carla Antonelli is not a transsexual?
Hmmmm
If Jennifer were right we would already have HBS pornography. We don't because HBS are so few that the makers of pornography do not consider it worthwhile to use the label.
ReplyDeleteAriablue, as usual, is talking about something quite different, and is apparently unacquainted with the onus on writers to define how they use terms.
As for the person who will not give a name, this posting has nothing to do with Carla, either way. This person is arguing with someone else somewhere else. Who knows whom.
1 in 100,000 - yet there are a measured 1,000 genital reconstruction surgeries on US residents per year. Not "estimated", but actually counted.
ReplyDeleteSo in 10 years, 3 times the number of HBS people in the US have had genital reconstruction.
I was treated by Dr. Benjamin and had him write my surgery recommendation letters.
ReplyDeleteHe called what I was give sex reassignment surgery for transsexualism.
If transsexualism was a good enough name for it then as far as I am concerned it is a good enough name now.
Playing word games does not end prejudice and many proposing HBS are just doing so because they think that somehow makes them superior to those who do not embrace this new term. Many of them are the least suited to be throwing stones at anyone since many have the reputation of being internet trolls.
Zagria said...
ReplyDelete"If Jennifer were right we would already have HBS pornography. We don't because HBS are so few that the makers of pornography do not consider it worthwhile to use the label."
Post-op porn is pictures of women.
Emphasize the SRS action and men won't by is because the very idea makes their dicks crawl back into their bodies in fear of having it done to them.
Suzan,
ReplyDeleteIn addition to being internet trolls, most HBS women seem to be gynephilic late transitioners, some having had multiple wives before deciding to be transsexual.
On the porn issue. Pornographers care not a whit for the distinctions between she-male, transsexual, HBS. If it sells they will use the label.
There is porn aimed at transy customers rather than at men. I can't be bothered to keep up with the topic, but check out 'Sulka's Wedding' where a previous she-male, now post-op makes it very clear that she is post-op.
Sulka, Candy and a few others who did before and after porn were of an era.
ReplyDeleteThey somewhat connected to a particular producer who was a queen.
In that era it was easier for sex workers to make their surgery money and there were doctors who didn't follow the SOC.
But even then they were somewhat unique.
SRS has gotten so much better that gynecologists are often fooled etc.
Further there is a different mind set as a result of the shift of consciousness during the 1990s.
Also many who do porn post-SRS simply do straight porn. The real money in trans-porn is with the "chix with dix" just as the only people who advertise in the sex ads as trans are pre-ops or TGs.
After you become just ordinary. As in "You used to be special, now you are just another girl."
Ordinary, however, is the desire of many, though.
ReplyDeleteAfter all normal is synonymous with ordinary, everyday, run of the mill, commonplace.
I shall never be ordinary.