"Sex change soldier" - Sky Living, in 25 minutes

It must be a couple of years since I watched it....
Didn't she get a really rough letter from her parents, along the lines of "our son is dead and we want nothing to do with you" that was heartbreaking.

I don't wish it on anyone to be born in the wrong body and it must be a horrible thing to go through. I just think that these 'corrective' surgeries as Links put it, are just that. It no doubt makes the life of the person much more easier, and they will be happier of course. However, I think it's a little unfair to call it 'lifesaving surgery'...I know people who have gone through truly lifesaving surgery - people who literally would have died if they didn't have it and they had no control over life or death. It's not fair on these people to equate their experience to corrective cosmetic surgery.

I of course accept that many transgendered individuals would contemplate suicide if they didn't get the surgery (which is an awfully sad thing but I'm sure it happens), but in my opinion it is just different.

deirdre_dub wrote: »

She. Her. Not "him". And certainly not "him/her".

Since when is it selfish to do what you need to do to save your life?

And, did you not feel the selfishness of those around her towards the fact that she has a medical condition that she went through a horrendously difficult time to fix? I mean, what kind of person isn't there for their friend / daughter / comrade when they are in hospital about to have life-saving surgery?
Her surgeries, her face.

Deirdre with all due respect, i resisted from being drawn into a debate with you when i read your post detailing your reaction to the program, simply because having previously tried to debate a topic with you before, your flair for the dramatic and exaggerated became so obvious to the point where i chose to withdraw from the debate.

i saw red this morning after reading your post, but an internet forum is just that, you will have your opinion. but i find it hard to respect your inflated opinion. perhaps its just a personality clash, but your posts do come across as disrespectful, sensationalist, and condescending to those trying to gain a better understanding of what goes through the mind of a transgendered/transexual/<insert your own corrective terminology here>.

for a start-

deirdre_dub wrote: »

It is about portraying Jan's gender as "artifically constructed", rather than a real thing that exists within her.

Jan herself admitted that she would always be "only a very good facsimile of a woman", the word facsilime suggesting that Jan still feels herself that she is artificially constructed, not mentally, but certainly physically.

deirdre_dub wrote: »

At one stage, did you notice the camera zooming in on Jan's crotch? Disgusting.

what? seriously? out of an hour long programme and that's the main thing you picked up on? incidentally- no, i must have missed this, but i did notice how she proudly cupped her breasts for the two lads in the cafe, perhaps YOU missed that. given the subject nature and the format of the programme, were you really that surprised that the camera panned down to her crotch, when a good 15 minutes of the programme was about the fact that she was going to have her penis physically altered to create a vagina?

deirdre_dub wrote: »

I swear to God, if I ever find myself in the media as a trans person, and someone asks me about surgery, I'm gonna tell them that it's none of their damn business.

if you ever find yourself in the media as a representative of the trans community, i can guarantee you that drawing attention to the fact that you are a trans person, WILL draw questions about your surgery! otherwise you just created a big white elephant in the room and it'll be a very short interview, either that, or the media will have no interest in talking to you. imagine how that interview would go-

Deirdre: "i represent the trans community..."
Interviewer: "so may i ask you about your surgery?"
Deirdre: "no you cant, what's between my legs isn't relevant, mind your own business, ask someone else in your audience whats between their legs!"
Interviewer: "ok then, lets get rid of you and talk to someone else who isn't so taken up with what's between our legs, we had hoped to give you a forum to educate others who seek to understand your condition and what life is like for you living with this condition and what is involved in it's treatment and what life is like for you now."
Deirdre: "you still want to know what's between my legs though, don't you?"
Interviewer: *facepalm*, "no Deirdre, we don't...".

deirdre_dub wrote: »

tell them that my gender isn't something that is created on an operating table - it is something that was created in my mother's womb.

certainly your gender wasn't created on an operating table, but again, with the greatest of respect- most people would have looked at you rather skeptically if physically as a man you identified yourself as female. it is only because you chose to alter your physical appearance that to OTHER PEOPLE, you are identifiable as a female.

deirdre_dub wrote: »

And, did you not feel the selfishness of those around her towards the fact that she has a medical condition that she went through a horrendously difficult time to fix? I mean, what kind of person isn't there for their friend / daughter / comrade when they are in hospital about to have life-saving surgery?

i don't believe it was selfishness those around her felt, i think it was a sense of betrayal and confusion and frustration. Jan left her first wife remember, just walked out. her parents for 46 years had identified her as their son, Jan herself had years to come to terms with her decision, her parents, ex-wife, girlfriend, comrades in the armed forces, were suddenly supposed to turn around and say "oh that's ok, we understand and support your decision", i think not! they are just as human as Jan, they suffer emotional distress like she does, they develop their own coping mechanisms to deal with her decision. they were unable to handle the fact that the person they thought they had known, was now no longer the person they had known, but they were supposed to still treat her as the same person? if Deirdre one of my friends told me something that changed my perception of them, then i too would have to find a coping mechanism. it's what makes me human, none of us are infallible.

i also feel it's important to draw a distinction between "life saving", and "life threatening" surgery. if someone chooses to take their own life, and if a surgical procedure will prevent that, then it is life threatening surgery.

life saving surgery is when your father who you never saw eye to eye with, is about to go into an operating theater to have a quadruple bypass heart procedure done to save his life, he has no choice in the matter if he wants to live, and i was there for him. so i can understand why none of Jan's relatives/ friends/ comrades were not there by her bedside for a surgical procedure that not alone did they not understand, but they did not approve of either. the risk of her dying on the operating table was quite minimal.

xsiborg wrote: »

they were unable to handle the fact that the person they thought they had known, was now no longer the person they had known, but they were supposed to still treat her as the same person? if Deirdre one of my friends told me something that changed my perception of them, then i too would have to find a coping mechanism. it's what makes me human, none of us are infallible.

sorry, but I have to take issue with this point...

there are many parents that have a life envisioned for their children, who have plans of marriage and kids for them, and for example if those children come out as gay they cut all contact with them, throw them out of their own homes. for them, they can't handle the fact that their child has a different sexuality than one they had envisioned, but when did "never speak to us again" become an acceptable coping mechanism? we wouldn't accept it for a parent that would disown their gay child, or a friend who would cut off a gay friend, why on earth would we excuse it for the parents and friends of someone who is trans? why is the abandonment and ostracization of a human being over who they are acceptable when they are trans? let alone saying that the trans person is the selfish one!

and I think that's the guts of this argument... put aside if it's life-saving or not, pursuing transition is not a selfish act, and it's the implication that it is that was the point of contention here.

Links234 wrote: »

sorry, but I have to take issue with this point...

there are many parents that have a life envisioned for their children, who have plans of marriage and kids for them, and for example if those children come out as gay they cut all contact with them, throw them out of their own homes. for them, they can't handle the fact that their child has a different sexuality than one they had envisioned, but when did "never speak to us again" become an acceptable coping mechanism? we wouldn't accept it for a parent that would disown their gay child, or a friend who would cut off a gay friend, why on earth would we excuse it for the parents and friends of someone who is trans? why is the abandonment and ostracization of a human being over who they are acceptable when they are trans? let alone saying that the trans person is the selfish one!

But Links nobody said it was acceptable, and not just based on someones sexuality, I wouldn't find it acceptable, you wouldn't find it acceptable, but that's not to say it doesn't happen.

i simply meant that i understood it to be their coping mechanism, and the reason i understand it is because my own parents disowned me because they disapproved of my choice of girlfriend at the time. yes there were other issues, but for them this was the straw that broke the camel's back. i then in turn had to develop my own coping mechanism to adapt to this. i understood WHY they disapproved and accepted their decision. i may not have approved of it, but i had to learn to accept it. it just so happens that i did accept it.

Jan's parents found it incredibly difficult to cope with the fact that the person who they had known as their son for 46 years, was now their daughter, who they were supposed to try to get to know again. they just felt they couldn't do it. i don't think their motives were borne out of selfishness, i think they were borne out of misunderstanding, trying to adapt to a concept that was completely foreign to them. of course too there was an element of "what will the neighbours say?", but that too is understandable given the generation they themselves were brought up in.