JoeMyGod:
You may recall the deranged “ex-gay” advocate Richard Cohen, whose ridiculous “reparative therapies” such as beating out one’s homosexual tendencies with a tennis racket and a pillow became the laughingstock of YouTube. Well, it turns out that Cohen isn’t quite the relatively harmless lunatic we all thought. His book’s completely fabricated “statistics” about gays “recruiting” and molesting children (courtesy of fellow mental patient Paul Cameron) are being used to promote Uganda’s “kill gays” bill. Last night Rachel Maddow ripped him to pieces. When Cohen attempts to deny some of his words, Rachel blasts, “I’m reading it from your book, dude.”
Part two of Rachel’s interview/confrontation/asswhupping after the jump.
@48,
But isn’t one of the recommended “treatments” for transsexualism (is that a word?) gender reassignment? It doesn’t seem like psychiatrists are trying to force transpeople into whatever gender they were assigned at birth.
Please don’t say Cohen is still gay. He fits into another category altogether, not straight, not gay, just f*****ed up.
Can we send Love child to Uganda and bomb that shitty country even more into the stone age.
Can we send Love child to Uganda and bomb that shitty country even more into the stone age.
@52
I know, and when the Hooker study was originally released, people were so shocked that the best science of the time showed gay men were as healthy as straight men that they had the blinded assessors repeat their assessments to be sure. Now that it’s 50 years later, yes most psychologists accept the truth, but it wasn’t like the APA was thrilled about the news. Scientists, in general, have a bias against rapid change of paradigm, but beyond that, potential biases are balanced out by the diversity amongst scientists.
In the APA right now, there are psychologists that believe that gay people go to hell, and there are psychologists that believe that there is no hell. What keeps them licensed is they know not to practice or promote statements that don’t have objective science backing them up. Trust me, there are psychologists and psychiatrists still doing research hoping to find pathology among gay people (esp. youth), but they can’t find anything paradigm-shifting.
I lost respect for Rachel Maddow after this interview. It seems she’s just going for the low-hanging fruit (no pun intended) in having this guy on the show.
this guy is so painfully gay. no beard can cover that.
@41 Transsexualism (as the DSM calls it) is a different case psychologically because (for lack of a better term) there actually is something “wrong” – their psychological gender doesn’t match their sex. Being transsexual isn’t pathologized the way homosexuality was and almost all therapy for it focuses on preparing patients who chose to transition and helping them in adjusting to the transition process (if they chose to transition).
fuck sorry @48
They could subtitle the book “Coming Out Straight (by going back in the closet)”. Seriously, his method “works” if you consider that anyone can live a lie. Not happy being gay? Pretend you’re not–it worked for me! Nobody can prove that you’re still gay because as long as you’re not having gay sex, they can’t tell how you feel on the inside. I’d feel sorry for him if it weren’t for the fact that his work is damaging lives.
I worked for several years with a really sweet gay man who had “come out straight” and was married to a woman who already had children. Of course, he “slipped up” every once in a while and still had gay sex, but always felt bad about it. Honestly, he probably never exposed his wife to anything, because I doubt they ever had sex. But he was “straight”, hallelujah. Geez.
@63 Well put.
I also wonder how many of people who “cure” themselves of Teh Gay weren’t actually gay to start with. Can’t be many, but they must exist. Clearly more fake starughts out there than fake gays.
I hate the whole concept of a binary choice any way. Gay or straight and nothing else.
‘…the thrust and gist of the text’ – gay words if ever I heard ’em. Anyone else notice Cohen’s hinged upper lip? Like being a little pregnant, I think Cohen’s still a little gay. His treatments sound like trying to wish away freckles.
@8
Whose lifestyle was it that allowed AIDS to get a foothold in humans and singlehandedly kept it going for a decade?….
@8
What 1.7% of the population is responsible for 59% of all new AIDS cases in America?…..
@66 and @67 You are off-topic.
Mr. Homo-No-Mo looks constipated to me, maybe he isn’t getting enough moral fiber in his diet.
Speaking of constipated, LC, some famous words to live by…
“Homophobia is like racism and anti-Semitism and other forms of bigotry in that it seeks to dehumanize a large group of people, to deny their humanity, their dignity and personhood.”
The creative power of humans really knows no bounds, we can lie to ourselves, and fool ourselves so easily, it’s one hell of a protective defense mechanism. I should be happy that he can convince himself that he’s straight, because who doesn’t want people to be happy, but it’s heartbreaking that he’s defense mechanism is being used as as justification for the promotion of human rights atrocities in Uganda. He should be ashamed, but that creative defense mechanism of his, allows him to perceive his works at minimum as benign and at maximum as heroic “salvation” from teh gay.
Damn depressing.
@27: Agreed. It wasn’t such a smackdown because she barely needed him to be there–she was too smug the entire time. There were also a lot of questions I wish she’d asked: he’s taking out the molestation “statistics” because he doesn’t want them misused–does that mean he still believes they’re true? If there’s nothing wrong with homosexuality, why did he, personally, want to change, and why should others? Her saying she resents something is understandable, but not really helpful from a journalistic standpoint–especially since she didn’t let him respond to that point.
And Dan, of course, would’ve asked him if he eats his wife’s pussy.
Loveschild says, “Most all associations that deal with psychology and mental health issues in this nation have a clear bias for the homosexual side, there’s just no denying that, so it is more believable that he was kicked out because of his views.”
Proof? Citations? Evidence?
You’re engaging in a logical fallacy. It’s called “poisoning the well.” Instead of refuting an argument, you dismiss the organizations out of hand as biased. And if they’re biased, then the things they say or do (e.g., booting Paul Cameron) don’t have to be given serious consideration. Nice.
@66- African bush meat eaters.
I thought Rachel Maddow did a huge public service to interview this guy and then kick his ass. But what if he’s a true-blue bi-guy? Not gay, not straight. But in a straight relationship? I know Dan doesn’t believe in bisexuals.
61 / 62. . .41 / 48:
ugh. + sigh.
Many, many, many, trans peeps – this one included, will guarantee you nothing is “wrong” about being trans – natural variation in life. . . like shit. . . happens. So we deal.
Yes, Being transgender is in the DSM-IV. Although I would run screaming from any therapist using it for a specific diagnosis for a specific treatment – being trans DOES NOT equal the need for gender reassignment for many many people.
Trans stripes are broad.
The revision of the DSM-IV is expected in 2012. It’s a current hot topic with trans identity and politics. The difference between dropping homosexuality and transsexualism from the DSM is the various medical treatments that some trans people receive. (we benefit greatly from hormones, and various surgical procedures.) Therefore clinicians are reluctant to drop “transgender” from the DSM altogether because it would remove a useful way to trigger treatment.
Some want transgender to remain in the DSM (or put it some where else) . . . in some fashion described as a “condition” other than a mental illness – so an insurance codes can be assigned.
Unfortunately, it seems the revision committee not only wants to keep transgender in the DSM, but expand on it to define other trans identities like “transvestic fetishism” (aka crosdressers who also happen to like sex?). . . and turn them into paraphilas as well.
Sex positive peeps beware! If you like sex and are not hetero normative / gender non-conforming – they’ll have a paraphila for you! (especially if you were born male) Just wait!
Who’s responsible for some of this? See Alice Dreger’s BFF’s:
Mr. Autogynephilia-trans-public-enemy #1 -Michael Bailey,
Mr. Anything other than “genital stimulation or preparatory fondling = Paraphila” Ray Blancard
and
Mr. Take-the-Barbie-away-from-that-boy! – Ken Zucker
Really.
For Loveschild:
Look up the word “fact” in a dictionary. It will say something like this:
1 : the quality of being actual : actuality (“a question of fact hinges on evidence”)
2 a : something that has actual existence (space exploration is now a fact) b : an actual occurrence (prove the fact of damage)
Get the picture?
I know you were already told this by others but just to make sure it sinks in…the reason “most all associations that deal with psychology and mental health issues in this nation have a clear bias for the homosexual side” is that IT ISN’T A BIAS. IT’S FACT. You morons on the right love to play this little game where you disparage any official group or body who actually makes policies BASED ON FACT, claiming “bias” or you say they don’t “give both sides a fair hearing.”
For you, there is no fact, only opinion, and any established truth, be it evolution or homosexuality or whatever, is suspect if it doesn’t fit into your world view.
How nice it must be to wander around in a world where facts can become “opinions.” Unfortunately, that world doesn’t exist. Facts aren’t bias or opinion…they are, in fact, FACTS.
@75: I make a clear distinction between transsexual and transgender.
This is no accident. Your argument addresses transgenders. I don’t really give a shit about transgenders. No, that’s not entirely true. As an individual with a transsexual life experience, transgenders just aren’t my problem. Well, I lie again: they are my problem each time they pull transsexual people into their narcissism show. I don’t appreciate this. I am not alone.
Just de-pathologize transsexuality from the APA, DSM, and ICD as a mental diagnosis, please. It’ll let transsexual people get on with their life so much sooner.
Transgenders can go build a movement for “gender liberation” for all I care so to find a more accurate diagnosis to vet their gender expression. Just keep transsexual people out of it.
@62: Thanks for that.
#74.
That’s simply not true.
Speaking only for myself, I don’t think he’s bi because he displays all the signs of a closeted, guilt-ridden, slightly unstable, self-hating, deluded gay man.
It’s incredible that these jokers refuse to condemn the atrocious law in Uganda. I mean, then Christians whine about being persecuted when people engage them in debate. If they really want to know what persecution is, they’d be wise to study what’s going on in uganda right now to queers. then shut the fuck up.
It’s painfully clear (as if it wasn’t before) that Loveschild literally ONLY hears people speak when they’re saying something they agree with. With all of the back-and-forth over the mysterious “homosexual bias” nobody pointed out that the ACTUAL reason the guy got fired was for exploiting his patients to sell products.
We can get our panties in a twist as much as we want about how stupid all the shit is that’s flying from Cohen and Loveschild’s mouths, but the fact of the matter is that the guy’s a fraud. He didn’t switch from men to women, he switched from men to money. Ugh.
@77 I think you’re making a mistake viewing “gender liberation” as an issue that doesn’t affect transsexuals. The fact of the matter is that the reason you need all that therapy and crap they put you through in order to get your surgery is that people think gender exists.
Why should changing your genitalia be any different than getting a breast enhancement? Because one conforms to your perceived gender and one doesn’t. I’m glad you’ll be happy just to get what you want and forget about the reasons why, but don’t trivialize the damage that the concept of gender has done, and continues to do to society.
Definition of irony = straight slogger being insanely attracted to gay television host after watching her dessemate individual trying to turn gay people straight.
Apropos of DSM @41: the WHO didn’t remove homosexuality from the International Classification of Diseases (ICD-9) until 1990. The code itself (302.0) didn’t go away until they switched to a new version a few years later. Until then it was classified under “neurotic, personality, and other non-psychotic mental disorders.”
http://www.pinknews.co.uk/news/articles/…
Here are some current ICD-10 codes that might interest readers of Savage Love:
F65 Disorders of sexual preference
F65.0 Fetishism
F65.1 Fetishistic transvestism
F65.5 Sadomasochism
F65.6 Multiple disorders of sexual preference
F65.8 Other disorders of sexual preference
F65.9 Disorder of sexual preference, unspecified
They’re working on a new classification, ICD-11, right now. Any chance Dan will lobby for some of these others to go? (perhaps to be replaced with a new code for homophobia?)
@81: Trust me, there’s no mistake. And I don’t need you to lecture me down on said point. Unless you know what you’re talking about — let me help here: you don’t — then it’s best not to go there. You lack the life experience.
Second, it’s clear that you don’t know me, or else you would also know that I didn’t go through a bunch of “therapy and crap” to get to where I am today (oh god. Scandalous, terrible, and unorthodox, I know. Call the cops). I didn’t have a bunch of creepy, dodgy psychiatrists look me over and sign a bunch of parental-like permission letters to let me do whatever-the-fuck to my body. You don’t know me, or you would further know that I came out and took ownership over my body over half my life ago (yeah, I’m in my thirties and still several years away from hitting my forties, so do some math). I didn’t need a “gender clinic” to facilitate or govern my life decisions.
Moreover, if you actually were speaking with an authority on this overarching topic (which you are not), you would further still know that I took ownership over my body way back when because I wanted to fuck my lovers on my terms (and, well, fuck myself, which is good for the sexual health, you know). That’s why my body is marginally different today than it was when I was, uhm, fifteen.
Third, as far as how I articulate myself — some would call this “gender,” while I don’t — it’s the same now as it was as far back as my memory serves. As far as how I perceive myself — some would also call this “gender”, while I don’t — it’s the same now as it was far back as my memory serves. Sounds like a broken record to me. If you knew me, you would also know this (but you don’t). It’s remained steadfast and immediately recognizable as, well, me throughout. I know — real shocker for you that must be.
Every person out there (even you, DonBito) alters how we communicate ourselves depending on the company before our presence. Don’t think so? Are you the same around family as you are with your pals? Or your boss? Doubt it. That, to me and others, is “gender”: a non-verbal and verbal body language to facilitate social interaction. It has jack and shit to do with identity or with sex.
And this is why I don’t support a “transgender” political movement, as it does nothing better than trivialize my transsexual life experiences. Fuck that, and fuck anyone who tries co-opting me like that. “The damage that the concept of gender has done . . . to society” is confined to transsexual people disproportionately more than any other population group, so again, don’t fucking lecture me.
The thing about my original point: strip homosexuality from the APA, and life goes on for (cissexual/non-transsexual) gay folks. That was 1973. Strip transsexuality from the APA, and it just becomes less of a barrier to look up a new family doctor when I move to a new locale.
It means not being told I’m persona non grata at places like the Cunty Doctor because I’m a non-cissexual woman (I’ve avoided problems with the Cunty, but my peers have not). It means my new doc and I don’t waste our time with a life decision I made in my teens. I eat a balanced diet, take my vitamins, break out my toys, and work out by riding a bike everywhere (I’m doing just fine doc, thanks). Beyond requesting prescriptions for lifetime maintenance meds, much like many people, it simply means that I’m just a patient among patients who worries about the usual shit — cardio-pulmonary disease, cervical cancer, breast cancer, assholes like you, etc.
Instead, with this APA/DSM crap still lingering, it’s a fucking minefield to just find medical care in a new locale because of APA stigma looming over the medical community. It’s a fucking dark cloud, and it’s doing neither me nor other transsexual people with life experiences like mine any favours.
Gay kids are still being diagnosed and subjected to reparative therapy. But the diagnosis is transgenderism. The kids aren’t (for the most part) transgender, it’s just an excuse to use to have psychiatrists beat them back into the closet. Zucker is the primary proponent of reparative therapy and he is in charge of sex related changes to the DSM. Be sue more gay kids will be abused if he gets his way.
The ONLY solution is to depathologize transsexualism. Only then will it be “discovered” that proven successful treatment did not depend on psychiatry after all.
Continuing ICD-10 codes from @83 (nice work, btw):
F64.0 Transsexualism
F64.1 Dual-role Transvestism
F64.2 Gender Identity Disorder of Childhood
F64.8 Other Gender Identity Disorders
Funny how these immediately precede the F65 group.
I’m not laughing.
@84 – I might point out that you don’t know me, either. You certainly don’t know anything about my life experience, or how I identify, though you’re very good about making erroneous assumptions of what I think about you. And as far as the concept of gender hurting transsexuals more than anybody else, I think women – cis or trans – would disagree with you on that point.
Mostly what I was pointing out was that you were being an arrogant prick. So thanks for corroborating on that point, I guess.
@87: I made no assumptions about you beyond that which you elucidated in @81 — namely, assuming I made a “mistake”. And because you were addressing my comment in @77, your comment — “The fact of the matter is that the reason you need all that therapy and crap they put you through in order to get your surgery is that people think gender exists” — was read as directed at me specifically.
(Unless you meant the “Victorian you”, but you didn’t specify that.)
So if calling me an “arrogant prick” is the best you can do, then ad hominem loses. See ya.
Oh yeah, one more thing.
The social institutionalization of sex — what social science discourse problematizes as gender — is absolutely worthy of discussion (and needed) in terms of oppression. If you want to discuss the pitfalls and oppression of that institutionalization, then great. Let’s go to town. There’s plenty of ground to cover.
Reifying “gender identity”, meanwhile, detracts from that discussion. So does “transgender”. To boot, both scare quotes here are English-language constructs that aren’t even reified in other languages where the institutionalization of gender is reified. I’ve lived in such places, and it’s an exercise in futility to import English neologisms to places where it lacks consensus of meaning — or even awareness.
So let’s keep the discussion on gender to points that are understood fairly consistently irrespective of linguistics or location, m’kay?
@84
Um… What’s the ICD-10 code for people who believe someone died and made them shit king of fuck mountain? Jeebus take a chill pill.
As 87 suggests… Um why should I or anybody care about your “arrogant prick”opinions?
If you’ve met one trans peep, you met one trans peep. Really, for fucks sake.
Attention kids. Don’t self medicate hormones. A FTM hopped up on too much T is no fun to sit next to on a bus or plane. . .
Ugh— all this yapping about Transexual and Transgender is why I never wanted the T added to LGB.
Their concerns are not my concerns as evidenced by all the previous posts that have nothing to do with the Rachel Maddow interviewee or the interview.
@91: hartlepie, it has one tiiiiny thing in common for the Maddow discussion: the institutionalization of one’s body on sexuality matters defines political policy in North America and abroad.
Even 35 years after de-institutionalization of homosexuality, it reverberates in self-loathing pricks like Richard Cohen and his ilk. It reverberates in the debate for same-sex marriage. This legacy of institutionalization is why Ugandans are about to fly into the abyss of human hell. And institutionalization is why transsexuals are criminalized in the Americas (where in some jurisdictions, the U.S. included, a transsexual citizen can’t legally marry anybody), in Algeria (where transsexuals seeking asylum from persecution is now recognized as a legitimate grounds for granting refugee status), in Jamaica (where m.o. for homosexual and transsexual murders are heavily gendered and rarely prosecuted), and plenty of places elsewhere.
This paradox of institutionalization is that it vets the criminalization of homosexuality in the Islamic Republic of Iran, just as the same Islamic Republic of Iran vets the legality of transsexuality. As a consequence, cissexual gay Iranians have categorically been known to modify their bodies in transsexual capacity to avert being branded a criminal. They harm themselves in an effort to avoid even greater harm by the state. If they really were transsexual, then the harm would be confined only in the instance that they’re a transsexual homo and want to fuck people of the same sex after they’ve assumed ownership over their bodies. But I’m hoping you get the general idea here.
In short, these are both about institutionalization slamming those for whom one wants to love and those in what capacity one wants to be loved. Institutionalization all boils down to bodies, these bags of water that keep us alive and let us do fun things with them and with other bodies. If it wasn’t about institutionalization, then two consenting partners with the same fuckparts wouldn’t be an issue to anyone. And the means to have fuckparts that will actually be used in a self-consensual capacity wouldn’t be an issue to anyone, either.
As a dyke, I actually agree with you, hartiepie. Adding “T” to LGB really just pissed off a lot of people and alienated others still. A big unified rainbow it isn’t. The decision was managed poorly, and it’s caused a lot of bad blood all around. So what happens now that this genie can’t be put back? As a dyke, my sexuality is one human rights issue. As a non-cissexual woman, owning my body on my terms and letting me fuck myself or my partners on my terms is another human rights issue. They’re separate problems whose remedies may have different ends. Then again, they might not. You might only have to deal with one, hartlepie. I have to deal with both.
@90: Whoever said anything about self-medicating?
Wow Hartiepie, you’re a cold blooded little thing ain’t ya? Just because it’s not my ox getting gored doesn’t mean I don’t object to the suffering of others. Off topic or not.
@21: Loveschild–what kind of “counseling” are they going to be getting in Uganda?
I forget… Is Rachael Maddow gay herself? I can’t remember if she said she was or not…
@93 — not cold-blooded at all. The word is terse. I feel no compunction to write a dissertation in the COMMENTS sections as some posters do.I have no problem/question/issue concerning my gender. Never had and never will that I can tell. Gay people don’t, but trans folk do — it’s in the defintion.
Please note that there are lots of social and legal rights issues that are not mutually exclusive, but are not put together as one concern. Nobody refers to the LGBTJBW group do they? Jews, Blacks and Women all have shared problems inflicted by society etc.
I’m done here.
Next……
@ 96 You ask someone who’s Gay, Trans, Jewish, Black and a Woman. Believe me, she’s out there. Just sayin.’
I’m pretty sure S/M is still in the DSM-IV too, so it needs a lot of updating. Not going to happen overnight.
@98
I agree with the initial point that you implied with your premise – that being that S/M is listed as a sexual disorder in the DSM – that point, being of course, that the DSM isn’t exactly the most progressive means of defining what is or is not a disorder. That’s a very astute observation.
I would also like to make a small detour to say something about the way abnormal psychologists assess disorders. Perhaps this might offer some insight as to what exactly is and is not considered a disorder. Now, I’m not a psychologist. This information is taken from a college introductory psychology textbook. I have a citation at the bottom of my post for anybody who’d like to verify the information themselves.
As I understand it, there are three criterium for assessing a psychological illness. It must be deviant, disturbing, and disruptive. To clarify these three terms (because often they are mis-defined), to be deviant is to act outside given social norms. A behavior is disturbing when it is considered such not only by those around the person but also by the person themselves. Finally, the behavior must be disruptive, or to use an old (and somewhat outdated) term, maladaptive; that is, the behavior must interfere in a negative way with the person’s day-to-day life.
So, should we take everything that is listed in the DSM IV at face value as being the sole diagnosis of a disorder purely by virtue of the behaviors involved? Well, unless these three requirements are satisfied, I would say “no.” So even if S/M is listed in the DSM, if it doesn’t interfere negatively with a person’s life, it’s not really a disorder. It certainly can be, but isn’t neccessarily always so.
Here is the citation.
Myers, David G. Psychology, Eighth Edition. New York, NY: Worth Publishers,
2008. Print.
Also, if anybody has more specific information regarding this topic, please correct me – it’s not as if a psych 101 book is the ultimate source of all knowledge.
I realize that I should add one additional note to what I’ve said – I completely disagree with the tenets and beliefs that Mr. Cohen is touting about here with his book and website promotions. I am a gay man, myself, and I most certainly do not think I chose to be that way.
Sorry about the double post – I just want to make sure I say that explicitly so that nobody infers the converse for want of my own mention of it.
@96: Here’s terse: your problems as a homo are my problems as a homo. Your problems as a homo are also my problems as a transsexual.
Same-sex marriage? Check. Domestic partnership registry? Uh-huh. Legal barriers? Oh yeah. Same political and moralist adversaries? Pretty much. Stigma from an APA that said you have a mental illness when you damn well know better? Bring it. Escalated risk of beat-downs in the wrong place at the wrong time or the wrong people knowing certain things about you? Word. Smugness after 35 years of being de-pathologized and after 21 years of HIV being recognized as a public health issue — not a “gay plague”? You’re on your own there. There’s no room to be smug when you know the enmity and the pathologizing remain.
Or did you forget the way doctors treated known gays during the 1980s and 1990s? At least that was an “improvement”: before 1973, homosexuals were simply committed to state hospitals. Now we get to host news talk shows and rip apart closet cases. That couldn’t have happened under the old regime.
One last thing. I have no problem/question/issue concerning my gender. Never had and never will that I can tell. (Hey, wasn’t that your quote? Here’s some attribution.) And — awww snap — I also have transsexual life experiences. Now how the fuck is that possible? Easy-peasy: transsexual is not transgender. It’s transsexual.
If you cannot tell these apart, then you need to take that up with your local Pride committee.
@101
I don’t want to seem ignorant, but rather than misusing the terms in the future, I would prefer to be educated now. Perhaps you could explain the difference to me, if you have the time, of course? I am, admittedly, not as well-read as I would like to be on the topic of trans issues and identification.
@102:
cissexual
adjective
of a person whose sex is consistent with the sex determined at birth.
ANTONYM: transsexual.
transsexual
adjective
of a person whose sex differs from the sex determined at birth.
ANTONYM: cissexual.
intersex(ed)
adjective
of a person whose sex is indeterminate at time of birth or congenitally indeterminate by no later than the onset of teenage puberty.
cisgender
adjective
(of) a person whose behavioural expressions exist within the social expectations ascribed to one’s sex.
ANTONYM: transgender.
transgender
adjective, noun
(of) a person whose behavioural expressions challenge social expectations ascribed to one’s sex. These expressions, summed together, may support a person’s self-identity as a transgender.
ANTONYM: cisgender.
* * *
Speaking from social experiences, transgenders are usually cissexual. Times when a transsexual may play the transgender card is, say, when my dyke pal with a transsexual life experience goes up on stage and performs as a drag king.
Personally, I don’t use cisgender or transgender. But if hewing to the glossary above, then I have a transsexual life experience; my behavioural expressions are determined as cisgender. In practice, my cissexual peers interpret this as my appearing cissexual (most of my lovers have been privy to this knowledge; many of my physicians have not). My transsexual peers are also interpreted by their cissexual peers as cissexual for the same basic reasons. The two intersexed peers I’ve ever known are also interpreted by cissexual peers as cissexual. Paradoxically, my intersexed peers deal with the same institutional barriers that I do.
Try making a regular checkup appointment at the Country Doctor, and if you ever out yourself to them as transsexual or intersexed (women in particular, as some transsexual men have sidestepped this), the Country Doctor slam the door in your face. Once they do that, there’s nowhere reputable to go in the Puget Sound. You literally have to travel to another state or province. Country’s response? You’re an untouchable, so go talk to a discredited, unethical, state-investigated quack who practises out of “her” home (after being kicked out and shunned everywhere else — not that that person is even in general family medicine). That’s what you get to look forward to if you ever out yourself as non-cissexual in Seattle. It might as well be 1962.