My issues with the issues of family

Following the news articles popping up on various sites about the Lobel family have really got me thinking about my whole belief stances with respect to the one part of LGBT that I haven't managed to sort into a for or against box yet.

I think this will mark the first actually serious article on this blog.  Good thing it's got limited readership.

For the record, I fully and completely support LGBT rights and protections in the work place, on the street, and at home.  I support rights to spousal privileges, such as spousal benefit with life/disability/workers comp, and pretty much anything else going.  Except same-sex adoption/families.  I understand it, and I believe in the concept.  I just have never been sure it could work, and because of this, I have not been able to include it in my list of "fully and completely."

Also for the record, I don't know the Lobel family, will probably never know the Lobel family, and I am sticking strictly with my own thoughts and feelings on their particular issue at hand.  I am presenting my own viewpoints, and I sincerely hope that nobody reading this thinks that I am criticizing them.  I'm not.  I do not, nor will ever, tell another parent how to raise their children.  I'm not going to pretend to be an expert in child psychology, gender dysphoria, or anything else.

I will eventually discuss the story below after giving my beliefs.  I don't mean to sound without compassion or empathy, but I also don't want to be specific to this family - they deserve better than to be singled out.  I apologise in advance for any offense you may take for my lack of names, pronouns, and use of third-person common nouns.

I think that handles introduction and disclaimer.

I'm sure I sound old fashioned, outdated, and quite possibly out of touch with modern society when I say that I believe in the balance of the stereotypical traditional family.  I believe that for any family to function, there needs to be a solid balance in everything.  A balance between nurture and discipline, guidance and self-discovery, give and take, the list goes on.  In short, everything that the arch-typical mom and dad respectively provide.  I have spent a great deal of time in the last two years being concerned about my own children because I'm not the stereotypical dad.

That'll work for my premise.

My own observances of single parent families have told me that a single mom will tend to have children that are wild, undiciplined, believing that things are owed to them.  A single dad is showing me that their children tend to be apathetic, non-empathetic, believing they can take what they want.  I admit my sample is very limited, but I work with what I have, and what I have supports my premise.

I understand that every person is different, and many if not most of the people out there don't fit the stereotype mold perfectly.  But the stereotype exists because enough evidence has existed throughout human kind to allow such rash and general conclusions.  I did some Myers-Briggs type indicators in high school.  Every boy in class save one was Introverted.  Every girl was Extroverted.  My class certainly wasn't unique, so some of these stereotypes do have some kind of basis in fact.

So here comes my issues with same sex child raising.  How can two women or two men provide that balance?  Certainly if one of the partners was behaviorally more of the opposite sex, it's the same as the "traditional" male/female family head.  But if not?  From everything I understand, a smallish percentage of the population is gay.  A smallish percentage of the population is transgender.  I would think then that it would be a smallish-smallish percentage of the population that was both gay and transgender, which makes me think that the same sex parents are probably not able to provide the balance of the stereotypically traditional family.  Without that balance, it's almost inevitable that the child will have some parental influence in development.

I'm afraid I don't know enough long term gay/lesbian couples to come close to drawing any kind of conclusion on this, and in full consideration that same-sex marriage is a relative new thing, I don't think anyone can offer the right answers yet.  I do look forward to the time when my concern on this is completely invalid.

To be specific with the news story that prompted this diatribe of mine, I have some thoughts in my head that perhaps the child is not necessarily gender dysphoric, but simply wanting very badly to be like the parents.  I can really see a male toddler of two female parents not being happy having boy parts when neither of the two most important people in said child's life does.  Kids compare things as soon as they can find them.  The pessimistic paranoid in me has a little voice asking how much exposure has there been to "people penises are bad" talk.  On the other hand, pictures show a very happy looking child, which indicates a great deal of the right stuff in the home.  Could the child be gender dysphoric?  Of course!  I wonder how much hoopla there would be over the issue if the child was F2M, and thereby vastly reducing the entire "nurture" potential argument.

I could very well be completely out to lunch, and frankly, wouldn't mind one little bit having it shown to me.

The news article goes on to say that the parents have had the child in to see therapists and psychologists to see which path is right for the child.  I'm willing to put real money that the subject of "penis' are bad" talk came up in the sessions - to cross the T if nothing else. The parents have chosen to take a middle path.  Wait and see.  Hold off on genetic puberty until the child is certain.  It sounds like balance.  It's not my place to say if its the right or wrong thing to do.  I'm sure some archivist 10 years down the road will be happy to revive the story and we can all see how it ends.  I pray it ends well.

The CD Rules

Nope, nothing about going to the grocery store in an evening gown.  Much more fundamental.    Here's my list of CD  "rules":

1. You have to come out to her somewhere between "Can I buy you a drink?" and "Will you marry me?".  Give her the choice before she's pregnant with your 4th kid.
2. You have an SO, presumably a job, and a place to live.  That means that you have some disposable income.  Buy your own clothes and leave hers alone.  If you don't have any of these things, or other disposable income, leave hers alone anyway.  It's bad enough that you probably broke rule 1 before getting to this point.
3. If you're clean by this point, then number 3 is to consider your SO's feelings.  She's a person too.  You may find that listening to her and paying attention to her needs as well as your own may actually end up with both of you getting what you want.  And without cost either!

Easy enough, only 3 rules to follow.  I'll add more as they come, but I think that's about all there is for must do's.

It is GOOD to be back!

The last 4 years have been thrilling, exciting, adventurous, and a missing just a little something.

I spent the last 4 years or so living in the Middle East.  A completely different culture, base religion, attitude, just everytyhing was different from my Canada homeland.  It was pretty cool.

I've written about this before.  The first two years were just awesome wiht all the new things and new experiences.  The next year was pretty good.  The fourth was time to come home.  We're not sure that we've made the right choice overall - but for me, being home here as opened up a door that has been closed for so very long.  Me, and outside.

One just doesn't dress up in that part of the world.  It's a little on the illegal side.  Fairly dangerous.  Good deporation material.  Just don't do it!

But here... on at least a weekly basis, I'm dressed and out an about living my life.  I think I skipped quite a few years of "out".  I remember my first outing maybe 10 years ago.  11 pm, dark of night, got into the car, got gas and grabbed a pop at the 24h drive-through.  My second outing was a year or so after that to a Halloween party.  Sounds pretty stereotypical CD, doesn't it?

My third and fourth were on the times I had vacation and came back home for a couple of weeks.  Number 3 was just a couple of years ago, to hit the mall in broad daylight for a makeup lesson.  I did cheat a little:  it was first thing in the morning - the teens were either at work or still in bed.   Number 4 was a shopping trip to the same mall... after noon.  full population.  I was ecstatic.

Fast forward to today where I've been out a dozen times in the last couple months.  Tossing trash, getting groceries, picking up home fix-it things.  Everyday stuff.  I think I'm the only CD that went to Home Depot to get a new WC valve before I hit a TG friendly club!

Life is good for Blaire; now all that has to happen is for her other side to catch up to that!

Visiting the Familia

I'm out of the Middle East now, moving back to Canada with the family, the pets, the stuff, everything.

What a pain in the hiney getting out.  But once out, everything sounds good... sort of.

I decided that since we're without our stuff for 8 weeks or so, we may as well do a little visiting here and there for a couple weeks here and there to try and minimise our time without our things at home.  An empty home can be a little depressing...  but I find myself wondering what I was thinking.

There's the family that you're pretty close to, and the family that you're not close to, and then there's family that's pretty distant and like it that way.  I'm with the third group right now.  Tough to relate.  It's been ok, but not great; not like you'd want it to be.  Perhaps that's a part of me, and a part of my brother...  we're both heavily introverted, so time together isn't really together.

I spend a great deal of time looking forward to all the things I can do now that I'm not encumbered by an ultra-traditionalist culture.  It's what's getting me through most days here.  Unfortunately, I can't start right away... but that's another story.

MAC Attack!

There's no question whatsoever that my favourite makeup brand is MAC.  It's good stuff, and quite proudly displays the country of creation, mine, on the bottom of every package.

Really though, not only is the makeup good, but you can also get a good set of other supplies.  They have some almost-ran's too.  Let's not forget to mention the MA's who are virtually always top notch.  And how about the very public company policy that specifically includes anyone and everyone??  A well regarded recycling program?

There's really nothing to be said about the place that's bad... except that it's kind of pricy.  Seriously though, it's not that expensive for what you get.  Consider that I have a set of shadows from MAC and almost the same palette from Rimmel.  Both have been used to provide the same coverage the same number of times, plus or minus 5 or 10 times.  Yet the Rimmel palette is almost gone, and the MAC palette, at twice the price, is less than half used.  So which is more expensive?

Don't think of it as an expense... it's an investment!  It will pay out if you use it up before it goes bad - and when you're talking makeup, who doesn't use it??

Life and Times Across the Pond, Part 3

It's time to go home.  I'm not really into how this place has turned out, and I don't think I ever liked how it worked even when it did work.  This brings on all kinds or problems of its own.

For a country that wants you to not be here - this shows in all kinds of ways - they sure make it hard to leave.  Even closing a bank account can take a week.  Utilities?  A week.  Want to change your phone over to pre-paid?  Cancelled instead.  The real problem is that you just don't have all the time in the world to get this done.  Your employer is supposed to give you 30 days to get out of town - but by the time all the loose ends are tied up, you could be 45 or more... and since you aren't supposed to be there, you can get some neat fines.

You have to have all this done before you leave - and you have to cancel your visa too.  This all needs to be done sequentially, and nobody knows the order.  It's a pretty stressful time for me and the family.  We're muddling.

It will certainly be nice to get to a place where you don't need blood and passport copies to get a phone!

And we wonder why we got a problem...

I'm a member of a CD forum, which one you'll have to guess for now, as I want to try to maintain a certain anonymity for some folks.  Yes, that's laugh.  I know it would take all of 5 seconds to figure it out.

There's often a bunch of things said on that forum that grate me and make me wonder just who the heck these people are.  In the interest of peace, I usually just hold my tongue.  This last week all of them all at once, so I have to say something... and that's not the place.

Yes, it's a rant post... take it as it is.  Here goes..

"Back when I was just a CD"

Wow.  There's nothing like one part of a group slamming another part of that same group to instil a sense of unity, isn't there?  Comments like these do nothing more than create a nice atmosphere of in-fighting amongst the people outside looking in.  There's no way that anyone is going to want to blanket support a group that hasn't even figured out how to get along inside itself.  What exactly are you trying to accomplish with comments like that?  You can say exactly the same phrase without the "just", and it means the exact same thing - but without the obvious "I'm better than you" division.  Get over yourself, and join the team.

"Unless they're in cowardly denial"

This is the one that really set me off.  It's true that a person that's TS has to be ready to lose everything in order to make the transition.  Everything, family, friends, kids, job, cash, the lot.  It's not easy, and I'm not making light of the struggles that your average TS goes through.  However, to call a person that may or may not be TS, but won't go through transition because of family, friends, kids, and the like cowardly?  Denial I can go with, but certainly not cowardly.  Let's compare:  a person that gives up everything to be themselves vs a person that denies themselves to maintain outside ties with others.  Let's simplify that:  A person that does for themselves vs a person that does for others.  Need it even shorter?  How about selfish vs selfless.  Cowardice is a trait that is much in common with selfish.  It's a bit like suicide really... it's easy to find something worth dying for, but can you find something worth living for?  Again, the point can be readily made without the personal attack on a core value.

"I am not a ________"

The whole label debate can be quite irksome.  Everyone wants to belong somewhere, and those that don't like this box or that one will make up a box just for themselves.  That's great for you.   The problem is when you try to work together.  I thought we were all trying to gain mainstream acceptance, protection under the law, and a myriad of other benefits that we feel that we're missing out on.  The problem is, we can't get that without a united front or voice.  We can't accomplish anything with a thousand different voices.  What banner are you supporting?  Decide it, join up, and belong.

I used to have a tagline making fun of labels.  Something about labels being for jars.  The point of it was about not getting your panties twisted when someone uses a label for you.

We spend a lot of time complaining that the LGB part of LGBT has mainstream acceptance, and that the T got left behind.  Wonder why?  It's simple really... focus.  No matter how many different kinds of "gay" there is (top, bottom, leathermen, sissies, bois, blah blah blah), they're all, each and everyone - let's hear it now - gay.  The same thing goes for the gals.  This focus brings media support, and suddenly being gay's not so bad.  But the "T"?  Where are they?  Scattered and dispersed.  I've said before that you don't have the responsibility to show your self and be counted.  I believe that.  But i also believe that you have the responsibility to not prevent that happening.

"Its not fair women can wear pants"

Women usually wear women's pants.  Start a line of men's skirts, and get the marketing program going.  If you want to fix it, all you have to do is arrange for 3 or 5 million of your friends to all go to work wearing a skirt at the same time.  That's how the women did it.  Now women's jeans are a multibillion industry.  Get in on the ground floor so you can rake it in!  Of course, as soon as it's a man's skirt, the fact is you won't want to wear it.  Besides, it's life, and it's not meant to be fair.  You should have figured that out long before adulthood.

"I'm a non-op TS"

Usually, I can "get" where the poster is coming from, but this one... I just don't.  How can you be TS, and choose not to have any surgery options?  Isn't a passing hatred of the dangly bits part of the TS makeup?  The usual excuses for being "non-op" - money and kids - can eventually go away.  Are you going to sign up then?  If so, then you're not "non" you're "pre", albeit on a very long waiting list.  If not... you might want to re-look that TS thing, and start thinking in terms of another acronym, perhaps one with "A" in it.

That's it... I'm all vented now!